Thomas Davis6 said:I mean, this whole thing smells rigged to me too, but let's move past that for a second. I want to circle back to the question from the original post: what kind of fallout comes from experiencing extreme terror? If we assume—just for the sake of argument—that this wasn't staged and she wasn't just acting, I guess things could go a couple of different ways. 1. Sure, you could deal with massive stress and shock, maybe even lose your mental footing for good. That’s a real possibility if someone has a particularly sensitive nervous system. 2. Then there’s the other side of it. Extreme fear can actually be liberating. Once you face it, you might realize it wasn't even that big of a deal. As a result, you could end up losing all those little phobias and fears you've carried around forever. People say that when you go through an intense brush with death or pure terror, you either hit a total emotional shutdown or find this crazy sense of freedom. It probably just depends on how your brain is wired.
So, I guess sometimes these extreme situations act as a trigger to break through internal blocks...
As for the guys who totally overlooked her, honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing something even worse happen to them.😁
Maybe then they could actually get into making horror movies instead.
I wouldn't necessarily recommend seeking out fear, but I agree that the outcome can be positive. Surviving something you thought was impossible builds immense self-confidence. A person discovers they possess more inner strength than they ever imagined, which helps dissolve their insecurities. In reality, successfully navigating a crisis is a powerful tool for character building.
It isn't for nothing that people say our greatest fears aren't always as dark as we imagine them to be.
Additionally, there is a third possibility: if a person possesses a very stable personality, they might simply let the experience pass through them without letting it take root.
Honesty isn't inherently a virtue or a flaw; it all depends on the context. Think of it like seasoning. In the right dish and used sparingly, it enhances everything. In the wrong dish or overused, it becomes toxic. You have to be careful with honesty—there’s such a thing as too much of a good thing. Brutal honesty is nothing more than a flaw and a selfish act.
In my view, lying is definitely a flaw, but sometimes a well-intentioned lie can yield positive results. In that sense, honesty and lying are two sides of the same coin. When controlled by a wise and thoughtful person, both can serve as virtues. More often than not, however, they manifest as ugly flaws that reveal the selfishness and lack of empathy in the person speaking.
There are certain advantages to this option as well, dear Jane. In fact, you wouldn't even need to step down from your position. You wouldn't have to leave your home, your office at News Corp, or your seat at The Washington Post—you don't have to go anywhere at all. Stay right here with us. We’ll welcome you as one of our own, and things will feel much more relaxed. I’ll brew some coffee, we can grab a bite, and just reminisce about the old days—like how Stacy used to lock herself in her room to write those wild comedies, or how you used to be constantly pursued by admirers. There was a genuine sense of humanity back then; we actually respected and valued one another. And whenever you get tired of the nostalgia, if you'll permit me, dear Jane, I’ll be the one to drive you home this time—just like you used to do for me. I actually bought a car in the meantime; it was a bargain, an Eastern European model, and believe me, you'll be surprised. It's a solid ride—maybe even better than a Ford.
Sincerely, Aleksandar Stanković "
If someone doesn't know what they're doing, they should quit whatever it is they're attempting—whether it's prime ministerial work, moderating, or medical practice, it doesn't matter.!!!
And if they do know? Then they're just an expert, which isn't exactly a divine gift.😉
So, my conclusion is this: there’s no point analyzing the psychology behind someone like Josef Mengele. These individuals essentially view themselves as little gods. Fine, whatever. I disagree, of course, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion—even when it's completely baseless.
So, what’s the deal? Just because our country is facing a crisis doesn't mean we can't sit down and analyze why it's happening or pinpoint which specific sector is hitting the bottom hardest. The discussion was actually about our relationship with nature and God.😉
Essentially, the question was: which profession acts with the most "audacity" when it comes to challenging the laws of nature and God? Which field possesses the most inflated ego? That's the gist of it.
😲 The thread has vanished. It doesn't look like it was just moved, so I can only assume it was deleted entirely. The discussion should have focused on how certain specialists act like they're playing God in the name of a cause. I haven't received a PM explaining anything, nor did I get a warning or any penalty points since the mods apparently decided the topic was "inappropriate." I’d like to know what happened to the thread and, if it was indeed deleted, what the reasoning was. Thanks.
Hannah White2 said:Your description is spot on. But honestly, the whole thing about not being allowed to talk about course details? Total nonsense. 😵 Probably just some leftover habit from his days with TM.
🤣
Nobody is keeping secrets here; I simply haven't felt like getting into the technicalities yet. Instead, I've focused on expressing how I feel, which is what matters most to me. Besides, I mentioned I would write about my impressions;😉 I am definitely a kinesthetic learner.
I’m curious about this specific Sri Sri approach, especially since a course like that is starting up right here in my neighborhood. Basically, I stumbled upon the Yoga thread on the alternative lifestyle forum—it took me a bit of digging to find it—so I looked through the whole discussion, but I didn't see any mention of the Sri Sri method specifically. What should I expect? At the very least, an improvement in my overall physical and mental well-being. Potentially some spiritual growth as well. Anyway, I’ve made up my mind: if enough people join to form a group, I’ll go and see for myself. It seems like the folks on this forum haven't really practiced this particular style, which is why I was looking for firsthand experiences. Since there isn't an active debate here about whether different styles exist or which one is superior, I'm not trying to study for a theoretical exam on Yoga; I was simply weighing whether or not to sign up for the class, and now I've decided.
Alright, what should one realistically expect from Yoga, regardless of any specific modifiers attached to the name? Please share your experiences, or perhaps I should check the sports and recreation forums, though I am specifically interested in the connection between the mind and the body. 🤔
I’ve done some preliminary research on Yoga Journal online, but I’m really looking for firsthand accounts from people here. Has anyone actually practiced or even tried out Yoga Journal, and if so, what was your experience like? What kind of benefits can I expect to see? What should my expectations be going in?
Steven Johnson3 said:I have a question. If women are ruthless when competing at work, does that automatically mean men are honest? Does it imply men aren't using dirty tactics or low blows, since those are typically labeled as "feminine" traits? And what about the bosses who sleep with their secretaries? I suppose that’s considered fine because even the old nobility used to exploit their maids. Look at the witch hunts. Those women were branded as witches simply because they refused to submit. It's obvious. So, are we saying men have improved over the centuries while women have regressed? Regarding the guy complaining that men aren't admitted to the Women's Studio—that program is run by women. I don't see why a man would focus on women's issues unless he was a lawyer.
Men tend to advance more easily based on innate abilities; people are naturally inclined to take them seriously in business, so they don't necessarily need to be jerks to succeed. Sure, some are jerks, but a woman often feels forced to act like one just to climb the ladder. To stay at the top, she has to become a complete shark. It isn't that she wants to be that way; she has ambition, and her environment dictates the rules of the game. Unfortunately, it is difficult for a woman to reach a high position. No one is eager to help her, so she has to be a fighter to achieve success and maintain it.
And regarding the bosses sleeping with secretaries? If it is coerced through the threat of losing a job, then it isn't sex—it is abuse, or even rape. However, if it is consensual, then it doesn't matter if it's a boss and a secretary or a director and a dockworker. It is simply two people from the same workplace having sex. As far as I am concerned, if a man is dealing with women's issues, he shouldn't be there; in fact, he certainly shouldn't.😍
Raymond Nguyen3 said:Look, even though I’m a guy who occasionally enjoys pointing out certain female flaws, I just can't help but agree with your post. I really can't. It’s got absolutely nothing to do with feminism, and honestly, it’s pretty depressing how right you are. The way women are represented in politics and sitting in those high-level director chairs... honestly, I guess it’s just the ultimate proof of how little this male-dominated society actually values women. It's pretty glaring when you really look at it.
Men struggle with having women in high-ranking positions; they would much rather have a male boss. Unfortunately, this principle applies to women as well.
I have discussed this several times with a male colleague. He constantly steered the conversation toward the idea of unrefined infighting among women. During one such discussion, his opening was roughly: "Now, I don't want it to seem like I am... [he left it blank], but you can see that I love women, it's just you women among yourselves..." blah, blah, blah—the conclusion was simply that it’s better for everyone if the boss is a man.
Well, that guy has nothing to fear from being called out because he is a sexist. Yes, I know he claims to love women, but the way he loves them is problematic. He doesn't view them as equals, he doesn't respect them, and he sees them primarily as sexual objects. He might "love" women, but in a way where he’d gladly sleep with them just to assert his dominance through conquest. The women he works with don't need his "love"; they need respect.
Ryan Wood98 said:Unfortunately, I suppose that only holds true in theory.
Look, sometimes women just get fed up and act out aggressively, claiming they're feminists when they really aren't. They are actually female sexists, regardless of how many times they swear they belong to the movement.
The only viable path forward is cooperation between both genders based on mutual respect for our differences. Anything else is just getting caught up in another "-ism."
Ryan Wood98 said:So, I suppose this is an instance of a woman who does NOT actually want gender equality.
Perhaps she wants all the same rights and opportunities that men have, but she also wants to retain all those extra advantages that come from the current "unequal" status quo.
It is something a previous commenter touched upon—it seems to be part of human nature to crave as much power as possible. Not necessarily equal power, but just... more.
A completely different question regarding feminism could be raised here: do feminists even have a legitimate right to represent the interests of the entire female population?
Can feminists advocate for equality on behalf of women (assuming for a moment that they truly are advocating for equality) if most women DO NOT want equality? What if they prefer a "Prince Charming" type who opens doors for them, provides for them, and comes home saying, "Honey, I'm home," while they live out the life of a housewife from an American TV sitcom?
Do we actually have any data that would allow us to claim we know what the female population wants, and are feminists truly representing those desires?
Exactly. She doesn't want equality, and most tragically, she isn't even aware of it. By acting this way, she actively sustains the fraternal patriarchy, which is precisely what I told her at the time. She envies men while simultaneously demanding that they respect certain "female" privileges. There is a massive amount of cognitive dissonance at play here. It likely stems from a deep-seated desire for power. She wants both "female" and "male" advantages. She wants everything.
Feminists advocate for the right to free choice, and that is why they don't need external legitimacy. You only need legitimacy when you are standing against something.
Casey Vaughn7 said:That is exactly how feminism is perceived; women have started being defiant at every turn, and the media just blows every little thing out of proportion.
Any concept of discrimination can be weaponized. Racism and nationalism can easily be used as covers for phenomena that have nothing to do with actual discrimination. However, one must recognize that true discrimination doesn't even exist; if it did, no one could exploit that fact.
Feminism is simply a fight against discrimination, plain and simple.👍
It wasn't until I entered the workforce that I truly realized we are still living under a fraternity-style patriarchy. I have to point out that certain women contribute significantly to this dynamic, and frankly, it infuriates me. Most of the discrimination I’ve faced has actually come from other women; they judged me far more harshly than they ever would a man, working perversely to keep me in a subordinate position. It is clear that many women are actively undermining the push for true equality. Men use crude, sexualized remarks to maintain their status through sheer tribalism, but I highly doubt any man has ever actually stepped down from his throne voluntarily. At the same time, women can be toxic toward one another—especially when you see older women undermining younger ones, or high school girls tearing down college students.
Here’s an example regarding Christmas Eve: My colleague mentioned she would call that coworker just to wish him a Merry Christmas, but personally, I think he should be the one calling me since I'm a woman. I mean, seriously? Is he a coworker or are you two just flirting? It doesn't matter who is male or female in the professional world—it’s about showing respect. You should be wishing people a Merry Christmas regardless of gender. I tried being a bit more tactful with her, but she just ended up calling me names. This is simply idiotic behavior. It’s as if women are treated like passive dolls, supposedly incapable of wishing someone a Merry Christmas just because they have a vagina.
Men aren't saints, and they certainly work to maintain their privileged status as a gender. However, women are just as much to blame for enabling this system. In principle, they facilitate the very hierarchy they complain about, and the moment a woman dares to claim the same rights as a man, she is instantly branded a lazy slut by the collective.
I cannot access or watch YouTube videos directly. Please provide a transcript or a summary of the video's content, and I will rewrite it for you following your specific instructions and persona requirements.
The current socio-psychological climate is driving a specific trend: women who possess conventional attractiveness often leverage their looks and sexuality to climb the corporate ladder. Personally, I’d much rather play a bit coy and give them a few fluttering eyelashes whenever the opportunity arises than deal with the grind of competing against some bitter, resentful woman. Then, a man steps in to challenge that woman, and she immediately backs down because she can't handle the confrontation once a man intervenes. Suddenly, her arguments carry weight simply because a man is the one presenting them. It’s "he," not "she." Anyone who takes advantage of the current situation is technically justified. It might not be particularly honorable, but that’s just how it goes. Everyone fights with the tools they have available. I used to condemn this, but after seeing the lengths people will go to and the dirty tactics they employ, I realize my previous stance was completely naive.
It’s all the same thing. It’s truly a tragedy.It applies to both women and men.
amberdriver85 said:Even Wellbutrin didn't hit the mark for me right away. Honestly, nothing happened at the 300 mg dose until I started mixing in half a dose of Cipralex. It worked like a charm. Give that a shot; after a few days, I felt better and was able to drop the Cipralex entirely, sticking first to the 300 mg of Wellbutrin before eventually tapering down to 150 mg. That combo saved me twice. You should definitely mention that combination to your doctor! It was a total game-changer for both me and my psychiatrist! She's actually started trying it out with other patients since then, and it works!👍👍
I believe it will help; I can already feel the effects. And I've only taken two doses so far. 🙂 🙂