Posts by Joseph Bailey41

Thanks. I just started watching the video—the guy is making some pretty heavy comparisons to Manson. 😬

E: It’s a great film, though I haven't quite made it to the part about eating carrion yet. He’s drinking out of a skull and smearing himself with ash (which actually seems useful for keeping mosquitoes away... I've honestly thought about trying that) and eating food left for the deceased (I'll pass on that one, since I don't eat flowers). So far, the only thing that really grossed me out was him scooping water from an Indian river. That’s just nasty to me. Honestly, it would probably kill me. Probably kill most Americans, too.

neonmarlin39 said:Hooking up and chasing thrills 😁
In its actual, raw sense, Vamacara tantra is both dangerous and extreme. There’s even a shloka that points this out—generally speaking, people say the path of Tantra is as risky as walking on the edge of a razor blade. Honestly, it's way too intense for most folks, whether they're from the West or the East. That's why there have always been so few practitioners throughout history. The practices are extreme by design; that's the whole point. I mean, how many people actually want to spend all day meditating in a graveyard, eating carrion, smearing themselves in ash, and drinking out of a skull? Most people would just die—or at the very least, get incredibly sick—from eating rotten human flesh, which can be a pretty standard thing for a (crazy) Vamacara tantrika. For the vast majority, those risks are just way too high or totally unappealing, and honestly, that’s fine. But then again, you find all kinds of people, though most drop out long before they get anywhere. The reason most people view Left Hand Path practitioners the way they do is simply because they don't fit into "normal" human standards or society, to put it mildly. In the West, they practically don't exist, and even in the East, they're extremely rare nowadays. This whole "LHP tantra" thing popular in the West is mostly just some weird blend of Neo-Tantra and LHP, and these popularized Western ideas about LHP or Tantra really don't have anything to do with the original tantric perspectives.

I have to admit, I haven't heard much about the actual scavenging part. I do know about meditating (or even having sex) in graveyards (like an open-air crematorium) and smearing oneself with the ashes of the deceased, but not because those spots hold some special energy. It seems more like it's because those places are taboo, and Left Hand Path tantra can basically be boiled down to the intentional breaking of taboos. If I've got that wrong, please set me straight. Ideally, send over some links regarding this necro-cannibalism stuff, otherwise we might just be talking in circles.

Yeah, my bad. Honestly, though, seeing hiddenpuma75 bring up Crowley is pretty hilarious to me for several reasons—just like most people in the Telemit circle. Even if they only make up 90% of the group. If I stick to my rule of judging a teacher by the quality of their students, Ace wouldn't exactly be getting a glowing review. To be fair, I should look at him within the context of his era, and from that perspective, his stance on abortion doesn't even surprise me. You can't just build a new "religion" out of thin air; you're always working from what already exists. Some things get flipped upside down, some stay the same, and others just get a slight tweak. Trying to completely overhaul every single value is basically impossible in practice. Staying traditional about things that don't actually benefit you seems to be the smartest strategy... which, funny enough, always ends up conveniently aligning with "True Will" or whatever other buzzword is being used that day. And if your stated goal is simply to acquire some kind of power, well, that isn't even hypocritical.

Kevin Ruiz36 said:As far as I can tell, people see left and right paths as a split between black and white magic. Personally, I’d argue there's a gray path that acts as the center. You see this kind of symbolism in the Bible when the sheep are divided into white, black, and speckled—and Jacob makes sure he keeps the speckled ones for himself, since they outnumber the rest.

Gandalf, is that you? 😲

Gerald Jackson48 said:Quote : Weekend Warrior

So, about stroking a tomcat...

Quote : Weekend Warrior

Man, looking at this clip, he’s definitely throwing some shade at Gargamel.

Yeah, I agree. 🤣

And you can see how much people are getting caught up in .... It's world-class trolling, if you ask me. 🧐

Gerald Jackson48 said:Quote : Weekend Warrior

So, about stroking a tomcat...

Quote : Weekend Warrior

Man, looking at this clip, he’s definitely throwing some shade at Gargamel.

I was actually just thinking about how he really needs a sophisticated, sharp-witted woman for his next debate. Katie Couric would be a perfect fit. 😈

So... did Peterson join LHP? 🤔

Just a quick correction regarding a misquoted point here:

When Crowley was talking about ritual infertility, he was actually referring to basic old-fashioned masturbation. You know, just wasting seed through solo play. For ritualistic reasons, obviously. A practitioner of LHP takes that energy that would normally go toward creating a new life and redirects it toward their own personal evolution. in Your faca god / Evolution. 🙂

Besides, women are already shedding unfertilized eggs and bits of nesting material on a monthly basis. Meanwhile, they’re out there wearing white pants, going skydiving, shaking it at nightclubs, and sipping tequila with their partners in crime. Whether they realize it or not, they are mass killers. They're basically Peterson's dragons.
🙂

mistyscout2 said:Joseph Bailey41, you’re basically the American female version of Jordan Peterson. 😁

Even the Facebook algorithm seems to think so (bless its soul 🙏). I actually tried one of those filters where you upload a photo to see what you'd look like as a man, and the screen just stared back at me with his face. Honestly, though, he looked a lot better than I do—and had way fewer wrinkles. 😒

hiddenpuma75 said:1. To really drive home just how murky the whole LHP vs. RHP theory is, I’m going to have to shock you a little bit
with a practical example rather than just empty words.

2. As you all know—even if you don't quite remember it—we all arrived in this world via our mother's biological rocket ship, landing on a slippery airfield known as the vagina.

3. It’s also common knowledge that, theoretically speaking, the Catholic Church represents the RHP, while old man Aleister Crowley represents the LHP.

4. Or, to put it in the words of our friend Alistair—the Catholic Church is the one true religion on Earth, while Crowley is a Satanist.

5. But honestly, it is absolutely staggering how the extreme right and the extreme left constantly collide in an infinite loop, finding themselves thinking exactly the same thing about certain life issues. 🙏

6. For instance, the Catholic Church is quite vocal in stating that a forced termination of pregnancy is a vile and shameful murder...

7. And yet, Crowley says the exact same thing in his writings! 😲

8. You would naturally expect a "Satanist" like Crowley to champion "individual rights," but nope!! He was just as clear-cut as the Pope.

9. Forced termination of pregnancy is a low, despicable murder! 😲

10. Or, to put it in aviation terms: anyone who prevents passengers from completing their landing through the vagina is a terrorist. 😲

(P.S. I am intentionally avoiding the popular term "abortion," which feels like it doesn't actually mean anything anymore. Using the phrase "forced termination of pregnancy" actually carries some weight. 😉

In this era of post-postmodern "end of history," even the birds on the roof seem to be singing that the distinction between a "terrorist" and a "freedom fighter" really just comes down to which side of the barricade you happen to be standing on. It’s also become painfully obvious that the moment you step out of the airport terminal, you're entering a zone where violence has become normalized. I’m hoping I don't have to go into too much detail here, but if you're truly craving my long-winded essays, just say the word.

Take one example: back when the Mongols were sweeping across the plains, they’d raid and slaughter pretty much anything that didn't serve their immediate interests. Looking back from where we stand today, it seems absolutely horrific. But if you look at it through the eyes of a warrior back then—or even a farmer who happened to be in their path—there was actually a certain grim humanity in killing someone quickly rather than leaving them to slowly starve to death after you've already stolen their food supplies and taken their only cow. We like to act all high and mighty with our modern sensibilities, but let's be honest: we are all descendants of the most successful killers, the craftiest farmers, and the most submissive members of society. It’s baked right into our DNA, and it really just comes down to how each of us chooses to deal with that reality.

Speaking from the perspective of someone very close to her, this wasn't just some impulsive decision—it was about survival. She made a heartbreakingly rational choice because she knew, deep down, that her child would have faced a different kind of starvation: emotional neglect. She actually lived through this herself. The first thing she heard when she landed at the airport after being born was, "I didn't want a girl, just take her away." Even though her mother eventually accepted her physically once postpartum depression subsided, that emotional connection never truly healed. It left a permanent scar. To her, bringing a child into that kind of suffering didn't feel like an option. Fast forward to today, and she’s a mother to a first-grader living in a different state. Shortly after giving birth, I remember asking her how she felt about motherhood, and her response was just devastating: "I never wanted this, but here we are." I can't even begin to tell you how much that broke my heart to hear. I don't know how the laws or the culture work these days, but whenever I see her on Facebook, she’s still the same person. I just wish her nothing but the best.

Did someone mention glitter? 🙂

fadedsurfer2 said:Just checking in to breathe some life back into this interesting thread.

Here is the thing: many of you don't actually grasp what the Democratic Party philosophy entails. There is this prevailing assumption that we are just narcissists obsessed with ourselves, partying, sex, smoking weed, and rebelling against "moral" society at any cost. People look at us like animals, assuming this inward focus lacks any deeper purpose beyond mere self-indulgence.
From my own experience and that of everyone on this Path—I am certain that view is wrong. I stand by it firmly.

The Democratic Party is absolutely a spiritual path. It is an incredibly difficult and grueling one. It is a road where certain practitioners lose their minds very quickly due to total mental chaos, only to blame "demons" for the mess and kneel before an altar, pleading with > for help.

Why is it so hard? Why is dedicating oneself to personal growth such a struggle? Because once you peer into the dark depths of your own subconscious and encounter the repressed "shadow" that has tainted your entire life—and likely the lives of others—you can become paralyzed. You fall into depression, anxiety, panic, and are overwhelmed by guilt, hatred, and self-condemnation. It is a massive burden to descend into those depths and face who you truly are. It is a monumental challenge to embrace those "darker sides of the psyche," integrate them so they serve your goals, and then find the strength to forgive yourself. To accept yourself as you are and grow through it. One must be relentless on this path of progress through endless waves of pain and relief.

Furthermore, the Democratic Party does not define, nor will it ever define, what a person "must" be. If someone tells you, "You belong to the other side because you don't smoke, don't drink, and don't have sex—get out of this house of the liberated!" they are not practicing the Democratic Party.
To follow this path means acknowledging your own Shadows and discovering your true essence, living in alignment with that truth regardless of what you might be. Someone may be highly sexual, someone else completely asexual, someone transgender, someone might party constantly, while another might never touch a drop in their entire life... In this framework, everything is permitted, provided it isn't directed against another person.

One more thing: a defining characteristic is recognizing oneself as the ultimate authority over one's own life—which is how it should be, given we were created as beings with free will—as opposed to submitting to some deity or supreme authority whose views we don't necessarily agree with.

My personal opinion (I am emphasizing this because it is highly controversial in our circles, and I don't want to present it as a universal tenet of the Democratic Party) is that there are external authorities that align so closely with your own being that following them is essentially just following yourself. Thus, even a Catholic could technically fit the definition.
However, in those cases, it is a very rare occurrence. Most people choose to serve > for no other reason than pure fear; they are running from facing themselves and their own "darkness," looking for a transcendental "crutch" to lean on whenever they need help so they don't have to stand alone.

I know the devout Catholics and believers here will be incensed... But please realize I am not generalizing (as I mentioned, there are exceptions where teachings like Christ's align perfectly with one's deepest value systems). This fear of one's own "darkness" is widespread. It is almost biologically ingrained in humans to protect themselves from discomfort, often repressing it deep within the subconscious. Consequently, an individual who surrenders to a supreme authority truly believes they are doing so because it is "good" or "right."

That is all from me. 😉

By saying that, you're really broadening the scope of what LHP means. At this rate, the definition could easily swallow up a huge chunk of the unaffiliated crowd (who usually just gravitate toward whatever deity feels most like them), followers of Wicca, New Agers chasing their "higher selves," or even Christians who sincerely follow Jesus since they agree with all His teachings. And since you also define LHP through the pursuit of self-knowledge, you’re basically including a fair percentage of atheists too. I highly doubt most of those people would actually want to jump under this umbrella, though, especially since LHP is usually associated with a certain dark aesthetic and sometimes a slightly "sketchy" ethical reputation. Since you've been in this for decades—as you mentioned in another thread—you know exactly what I mean. I'm not just talking about recreational drugs or sex and all that nonsense; I'm talking about the darker side, like causing harm to others through psychological manipulation, for example.

darksurfer4 said:Once I finally pull off this coup d'état and implement a command economy here in the States, you can count on being my Secretary of Commerce and Vice President.🎉

Perfect. That way we'll all know exactly when someone's taking a dump. 👍

crimsonhound422 said:Even if we're looking at OCD, you could suggest that someone used to scheduling every single minute of their day try adding just five unplanned minutes to their routine. Once they get used to that discomfort, maybe bump it up to ten. Who knows? They might actually build some new habits...
They say it takes about two months of consistent effort to bake new routines into your life.

That’s overkill; all they need to do is disable the antivirus.

Yeah. I actually did that once by mistake while trying to fire up my addblocker to dodge Jehovah's Witnesses, cell phone salesmen, people handing out flyers, and those folks collecting signatures for local petitions. At one point, my entire screen just turned blue. After that mess, I had to relearn my PIN and request a new password for the forum.🙂

Douglas Gray8 said:The truth is, I don't really grasp the concept of spontaneity or surprises. My life is strictly scheduled. Every night before bed, I map out the next day down to the minute, and I live it exactly that way. If something happens that isn't in the plan, it's basically non-existent to me. Even my fitness routine is regimented; my body runs like a Swiss watch, hitting its peak performance at the exact same time every single day.

Have you tried booting into DOS and typing FORMAT C:?

Susan Kim5 said:18

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy A32 using Reddit

That sounds great. It looks like you've got college or work ahead of you, which means plenty of chances to meet new people. Do you get out much on a regular basis, or just every once in a while?

Just make sure you bury it deep enough. 🧐

Jamie Adams6 said:well, she mentioned she listens to the Ramones—so probably 17 or 18.

Okay, I'm clearly a bit slow. 😳

How old are you?

Robert Reyes4 said:But it happens easy. As much as it sounds ridiculous, I was genuinely blindsided when it hit me. And honestly? I don't think it's just biology. It feels more like raw emotion—like some deep-seated childhood stuff just suddenly switches on.

It happened to me too when I was sixteen and experienced my first real heartbreak. It actually took me decades to realize that my entire breakdown was essentially a regression to early childhood... and that being "in love" is really just a massive hormonal cascade. It was incredibly awkward at the time, mostly because I couldn't wrap my head around his perspective... like, why? Looking back, that whole mess was actually helpful for learning how to read people—seeing how much the chaos they cause is tied to their own childhood baggage, and realizing that once it starts, there’s nothing you can do to stop it. Honestly, romantic love isn't some magic wand that fixes everything; if anything, it makes things way more complicated by dragging you into all sorts of transfers, projections, and general nonsense.

I mean, I get that this happens, and I know how much people tend to romanticize those moments of total instability. But on this subforum, where we usually look down on anything considered mainstream, I didn't really expect all these seekers of the transcendental to be so preoccupied with relationship drama. 🕺

Thomas Nelson25 said:It shows up as loss or just the fear of losing something.
Depends on how you look at the role, but man, this stuff literally ruins people's lives.
They just listen to sad country songs and keep drinking and drinking.
And then you try to lecture them about the ego. 🙄

That second part though...
I'm assuming Eros is being used in the context of the original post.
So, if I'm reading this right, the whole dilemma is actually about infidelity...

Which feels like a pretty basic, almost cliché dilemma. Of course, everyone has their own reasons for why they do or don't do certain things. It isn't actually that hard to grasp. That is, unless you let emotions take over and start screaming, "Your reasons have to be identical to mine because we slept together once (or ten times), which means we are ONE, so your Eros, if it isn't directed exclusively at ME, is causing me pain."

It's not that I'm actively pushing for any kind of polygamous setup—that just adds more layers of complication, and most people can barely handle the emotional rollercoaster of a standard relationship as it is. I'm advocating for simplicity. People either enjoy being together, or they don't. If they don't, then what's the point? If they do, then surely they should be able to reach an agreement on the fundamental stuff just to maintain a baseline level of comfort, not to mention peace of mind. Honestly, everyone knows (or at least should know) how much attention, sex, intellectual stimulation, or emotional drama they need, and whether they want to get that from one person or several. Likewise, everyone knows how much they are capable of giving. Infidelity is a clear sign that there's been some sort of incompatibility, an imbalance, a failure to communicate desires and needs, or a reluctance to meet someone else's needs... basically, it means the relationship is exhausted, or perhaps it was never truly healthy to begin with, usually due to the immaturity of one or both partners.

In other words, it's a perfect sign—a transcendental revelation that it's time for everyone to go their separate ways. And what could be better than that? Two people cannot be ONE... they are always two distinct, separate individuals, not Siamese twins sharing a single heart or set of lungs. To let hormones blind you so much that you think another being is an integral part of yourself, or that their expression of Eros somehow directly hits YOU... it's just silly. An infant can't survive without its mother, so anyone would feel for its crying. A teenager experiencing their first heartbreak will feel it deeply because their still-developing brain perceives that rejection as being the same as being denied nourishment. But an adult... man.😁