Posts by John Baker

The concept sounds pretty intriguing to me, but then again, judging by the trailer, the execution feels like something aggressively primitive.

Finally watched it. It was alright. I’d say all three films hold up reasonably well, which is honestly a win considering how often sequels fall flat...

I've seen both, and honestly, I can't say the second one was any worse than the first. Maybe by a hair🤔, but that might just be because I saw the first one in a theater.
I'm just hoping the third isn't a massive step down. That trailer didn't exactly grab me, though.😁

From everything I’ve seen, truly happy people usually have a pretty simple mental setup. They don't overthink things, they don't demand too much from life, and as long as they've got food and someone to sleep with, they're good.

Their existence doesn't bother me. It’s not even annoying. What actually gets under my skin is their total inability to understand why I'm not that upbeat. They’re just incredibly one-dimensional.

On the flip side, the people I hang out with are the complete opposite of simple-minded. And without exception, they're all melancholic or borderline depressed. One writes books and poetry—we're talking about people who actually possess the capacity for deep thought and an artistic edge.
I have yet to meet a happy person walking down a street in New York City.🤷

This movie immediately made me think of Panov's Maze, which is easily one of my all-time favorites, so this one just felt a bit overshadowed by it...

To be honest, I was expecting something with a lot more imagination.

Look, I don't get how you guys aren't following me.😬
The connection between a donor and a recipient is deeply personal to me. In a way, that person keeps living on through someone else.
That's why it matters so much to me who I give an organ to, or who I receive one from.

I don't know... I can't just take a technical approach to this. It's not like one person is missing a kidney and another has a spare we can just swap out like car parts.🤷

Anyway, that's my take on it. I'm done talking about it.

Doesn't the idea of having someone else's organ "installed" inside you strike you as absolutely horrifying?
It’s just a piece of another human being.

As for that desperate craving to endure yet another agonizing day of pure suffering, I'm certain it's driven by nothing more than a paralyzing fear of death.
Everyone has that right, but I never find myself admiring people who act on it. It’s just pathetic.

I even have a specific dress I want them to put me in.🙂 I’m not leaving my death up to chance.😁

As for shadownomad43, given those circumstances and all those surgeries, she’s definitely faced the reality of death—unlike a lot of people who just toss around careless comments like "just take everything out."🙄
Our bodies aren't public property for everyone to use however they please. This should be a personal decision, and everyone's stance deserves respect.

I’m really not a fan of this idea...🤷 If I could leave it to someone specific, like my family or a close friend, maybe.
But just handing it out to anyone? No way.

I honestly believe we're all unique individuals, and we should go out the same way we came into this world.

silverranger14 said:Now I'm wondering what kind of dad I'll be if I miss something in my own upbringing... no matter how I look at it, I'll probably mess up. But hey, at least I'll enjoy life with my daughter if I treat her like a princess. I'll be the bad guy regardless.🙂

I don't even know how to respond to that. Personally, I'm just glad I had a father like mine.😬

Paul Thompson3 said:"The men she grew up with—like her father—tend to show up in her partners too. It’s like by trying to fix a partner on some subconscious level, she’s actually trying to heal her dad—trying to grab that happy ending to her childhood story that she never got."

It’s a fascinating angle—honestly, it makes perfect sense when you factor in daddy issues. Especially that part about chasing a better conclusion to her early years.

It’s true. My father treated me like royalty. He absolutely adored me, and that hasn't changed.
Because of that, I notice women all the time who settle for partners they clearly don't respect or love; you can see it from a mile away.

There is a downside, though. I'm pretty egocentric. It’s rare for someone to actually be good enough for me, though I will say my exes were all high-quality people. We stayed on great terms because they were solid individuals.
To answer the prompt: I have zero interest in "problematic" characters who need saving. There is no future in that.

Simply put: you attract what you radiate. I was raised to believe I deserve nothing but the best, and honestly, I've never had a single issue attracting idiots.

briskranger5 said:I am not (perhaps unfortunately😁) a teenager, nor am I naive enough to pretend we are on the same wavelength.
See my response below.

That is all well and good, and I agree it isn't necessary, but that brings me back to my original point.

This whole concept of "going through the motions"—take having a massive list of people on Facebook, for instance. We chat with them, like their posts, or interact out of some vague sense of utility or necessity, even if we barely know them. There is absolutely zero emotional weight behind it.

To put it bluntly, I won't overexplain myself here.😁

Simply put, we are becoming people with multiple faces. We are one person with our families, another version of ourselves with close friends, and a completely different third person with everyone else.

And when you engage in conversation? If you aren't incredibly green—or if you haven't been worn down by life—you will say plenty of things without actually saying anything at all.

It's all surface-level: "How's work?" "Oh, it's fine, keeping busy." That's it. You're never going to actually relax and talk about how the job really feels or what your actual impressions are.

True, but I don't see anything weird about that. Life requires us to play different roles, and we behave according to what's expected in each one. You can't act the same at the office as you do at home.🤷

The society you're dreaming of would require everyone to be good, everyone to understand each other, everyone to get along, and nobody to stab anyone in the back...
And that bit about "saying plenty without saying anything"... Yeah, I do that all the time. And it makes sense. If someone asks questions that don't concern them, I protect my privacy. I don't share data I don't want certain people knowing. Nobody has the right to know everything about everything.

I don't really get what your goal is here.🤣

briskranger5 said:I’ve spent plenty of time posting and reading threads here that touch on the breakdown of trust, betrayal, and pure emptiness...

What fascinates me more and more every single day—even if I realize people have to play by these shallow rules just to survive—is how effortlessly people toss words and sentences around. There is this terrifying ease with which people respond without a shred of empathy.

Let me break it down for you in two points:

1.) So many people—and let's be honest, maybe all of us—talk about others with such reckless abandon, yet they lack the self-awareness to talk about themselves.

2.) There is a profound hollowness in modern communication. Everything has become a performance of nodding and smiling. People offer responses without having any clue what you’re actually saying, what you’re talking about, or how you even feel. They just want to say *something* back, even if they haven't given a single thought to the substance.

Does this entire culture teach us to stop fighting an uphill battle? Does it tell the small minority who actually care to just give up and become soulless shells ourselves, perhaps limiting our humanity strictly to our immediate families?

You can't walk into every single interaction with your whole soul laid bare, and frankly, you shouldn't.
Sure, there are deep, genuine connections worth having. But it’s only logical that when you have to deal with people forced upon you by your job or your neighborhood—people you didn't choose—you just go through the motions.

I don't have any desire to build deep bonds with everyone I meet. My goal is to be polite and professional when I interact with them, but I don't believe in sharing everything with every person I cross paths with...

I think this "choice paralysis" mostly hits people who don't actually know what they want. If you haven't figured out your own identity, you're just sitting there wide open to every random influence that comes your way—stuff you wouldn't even notice if you had a clear sense of self.
It also comes down to character. Some people are just more open to testing new things than others.
You’ve got people who buy the exact same candy bar and wear the exact same hairstyle for twenty years straight...
Clearly, having too many options doesn't affect them because they don't bother using them.
That's basically how I operate. I don't remember ever getting a headache from having too many choices because I go into things knowing exactly what I'm looking for.
I head out with a specific item in mind. If I find it, I buy it. If I don't, I usually just walk away instead of settling for something else.
I'm not the type of woman who spends hours browsing aisles or overthinking every little trial. I have an idea of what I want in my head before I even start, and I don't budge from it. Once I find a product that works, I stick with it. I'm not interested in being lured away by some shiny new alternative. So, all these endless choices? They don't touch me at all.

"San Diego" is a movie that seemingly checks all the boxes for what makes a film great, yet for some reason, it just didn't land for me.
Even the title sounds enticing—it captures that fairy-tale vibe I usually love. But something is missing. I can't quite put my finger on it.

In my opinion, the excessive brutality is a huge drawback. I've always been turned off by scenes involving bloodletting, axes, or swords, and the explicit violence here was hard to stomach. It’s enough to completely ruin what could have been a solid film.
I can't pinpoint exactly what went wrong, but
it feels like the heavy focus on special effects ended up swallowing the story whole. Or maybe the plot just wasn't engaging enough on its own. I liked the atmosphere, but the story failed me.

ambergull said:You’re going to have to undergo the slow process of learning how to trust people again.
If you spend your entire life overanalyzing everyone and maintaining a constant state of suspicion, you’ll end up living a miserable existence, devoid of friends, partners, or any meaningful connection.
The truth is, we are social creatures by nature; without community and genuine communication with others, we inevitably descend into loneliness and depression.

Therefore, it is essential to engage with those around you—whether it's family, old friends, or colleagues at work... it really doesn't matter where.
Look, let's be realistic: eventually, people will let you down. Not everyone, certainly not all, but most people will at some point. The real question isn't whether they will fail you, but rather what kind of character they possess in general.
If someone has been a true friend to you, one mistake or one instance of betrayal doesn't mean you should immediately cut them out of your life.
Instead, try sitting them down, having an honest conversation about the issue, and attempting to resolve it.

However, if you notice a pattern where someone is constantly undermining you, trying to smear your reputation, or actively plotting against you, then it is far better to distance yourself from such individuals.

Simply put, reach out to old friends or make an effort to meet new ones. Over time, you will begin to see their true colors, and only then can you decide whether or not they are worthy of your trust.

What a joke. This whole argument assumes that you actually need to trust people to hang out with them. If we accept that most people lie—and they lie precisely because they don't trust anyone else—then we reach a different conclusion: most people have friends, partners, and a social life despite not trusting a single soul among them.🤷
People push this "imperative" to trust others simply because it’s easier to function that way. It isn't about truth or necessity; it's about convenience. It's easier not to be on guard, not to analyze, and not to think. It's easy, sure. But it isn't smart.

rapidbear65 said:People always credit God or divine grace for all these healings—both the real ones and the ones that might just be luck. Believers see these rare, unexplainable moments as a sign from above, a way to show we aren't alone... Even though I call myself a believer, I don't really go looking for miracles or buy into the hype, but hey, unexplained things happen, and eventually science catches up to what we can't wrap our heads around today. It makes you wonder, though—if someone hits the jackpot on a Powerball ticket, shouldn't we call that a miracle too? And if we did, would everyone just start betting their lives away thinking it's the cure for poverty? How long is it going to take us to actually figure out where we fit in this universe? Is it more important to push scientific boundaries, or focus on spiritual growth, or maybe find a way to do both at the exact same time...

I'd say as long as people exist, this debate will too.
The issue with understanding our place in the cosmos lies with how we choose to view it. Those stuck in a purely rational, scientific mindset struggle, while those leaning into spirituality simply accept the explanations their faith provides. 🤷

If science and spirituality ever truly merged—if we reached a point where every spiritual phenomenon could be explained by a lab report—I think God would effectively cease to exist. But I doubt that’ll ever happen. No matter how much intellectual enlightenment we achieve, the belief in God remains constant.

mistygull16 said:Not trying to make excuses for her, but she does put out free videos and stuff. Still, I guess we Americans tend to measure everything by the price tag...

But look, I didn't get any clarification from the OP on why they're even heading to this seminar. Is it curiosity? A spiritual calling? Some health thing? Or something else entirely?

I listened to a bit of one of her videos where she talks about living on this super clean, organic, vegan diet, but then she ended up getting cancer anyway—she claimed it was all because she was doing it out of fear, like the fear itself was what messed her up.

A doctor once told me it's better to live an unhealthy life without being obsessed, rather than trying to live healthy while being completely consumed by the obsession of it all.

Bottom line, the price is steep for most people. If that money lets her keep working with folks, fine, I can wrap my head around that. But if it’s just about lining her pockets? Yeah, that doesn't sit right with me...

When it comes to pricing, she's more the rule than the exception. It depends on the service, sure, but selling "healing" and profiting off sick people isn't spiritual. I don't care about someone's business, but I have a problem when they claim their business is spiritual.
It isn't even about the price itself. The real question is whether she makes exceptions—is there any group of people she helps for free?
Clearly not. For them, there's just a discount.🤣

How far greed can go is perfectly illustrated by one "therapist" who charged me for two or three burned CDs $17, knowing damn well I'd leave him at least $1,000. Disgraceful.🤷 It’s the classic mindset of squeezing cash out of absolutely anything you can.

mistygull16 said:What's the actual hook for you here? Is it meeting her, the specific techniques, the lectures...?

Maybe—and I'm just rambling here—maybe she wants those two days to feel more "substantial" because people actually value things they pay for. You know how it is; when stuff is free, we take it for granted, even if it works via the placebo effect (which, hey, if it heals you, who cares?).

We Americans tend to measure value by the price tag and 🤔

It just feels a little tacky to exploit illness just to stack cash. But if she’s using that money to spend more time being out there inspiring people, I guess that's fair enough.

Personally, I think if someone has a knack for helping people—even if it's just placebo magic—they should charge for it. Better to get paid than to be too broke to ever have the time to do the work.

Still, $250 seems like a massive stretch, especially for places like the US or similar economies.

Speaking of money, I heard that over in India they have these medical mantras, but the person performing them isn't allowed to take even a single cent. They have to follow these super strict rules for the mantra to actually work. Seems like the complete opposite end of the spectrum to me.

Not exactly a genius, am I?

And honestly, I’d prefer that extreme over the one where spirituality is just a business. Which is pretty much what it is today. And a damn good business at that.
I know plenty of these "spiritual entrepreneurs" whose actual lives are a total wreck once you look past the polished image.
In my opinion, these kinds of services should only be charged symbolically. Mixing materialism with spirituality is disgusting. I could never believe in the spiritual depth of someone charging inflated prices for their "guidance."🙂
Besides, I've seen enough to know it's true.

Ashley Johnson6 said:People just love to complain, really. There's this pervasive culture of negativity here in the States—if things are going great, people find a reason to whine, and if things are going south, they definitely don't shut up.

That whole habit of judging parenting in front of others is deeply ingrained in our culture, but honestly, it’s just pure nonsense.

Yeah, being a parent is hard—it’s incredibly tough being a mom during those first couple of years—but ask any (mentally stable) woman if she’d want to hit a reset button and go back to her old life... nobody would take that deal.

The beautiful moments far outweigh the "bad" ones, and even those rough patches? In a few decades—actually, in a few weeks for me—we'll be looking back on them with nothing but nostalgia...

Basically, people are just talking trash.

Even if she realized she made a mistake, she wouldn't admit it publicly because of attitudes like this.
Imagine calling someone mentally unstable just because they made different choices in their life. Even with parenthood.

Ashley Johnson6 said:I'm guessing the 88 in your handle is your birth year...

Just wait a few more years until those hormones and brain chemistry start kicking in and flip your whole perspective upside down. I know you feel like it's impossible right now, but we'll talk in 5-6-7 years...😉

And then you'll realize that everything you mentioned with such disgust is actually a huge joy, not a chore.

As for having kids... man, I don't know... I'm not a woman, I haven't lived it myself, I've just watched from the sidelines—and it sounds incredibly cliché, I know—but there isn't any experience in life that even comes close to it. None.

I have to address this post.🤣
Generally speaking, decisions made based on hormones aren't exactly known for being smart.🤷
When you're making a decision that alters your entire life, you consult your brain, not some other organ. You need to be rational, not driven by impulses.