CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › restlessviper5 › Posts

Posts by restlessviper5

12 posts shown.

The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
Rebecca Chase5 said:So, it comes down to having balls... or lacking them entirely.

Actually, I think being female should be celebrated constantly—by women themselves and by men, for that matter. A man with true backbone wouldn't see femininity as anything less than nature's greatest gift. 😉 Anyone who's intimidated by a woman's success, or thinks a woman isn't fit to lead the world, clearly lacks confidence in their own masculinity. To put it plainly, they lack grit. Personally? If there were a truly capable Queen, I’d be honored to serve as her top soldier. But if I had the talent to wear the crown myself, I’d take it. If not, I’d gladly bow to her visost. 🙇 I really don't care who sits on the throne, as long as they know what they're doing.🤷
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
silentnomad23 said:And I personally despise it when those "free agents" decide to take aim at me.
You truly have no idea what kind of conflict it is to carry such heavy artillery while trying to maintain a pacifist stance. Imagine having ten howitzers, six cannons, twenty machine guns, and three mortars all leveled directly at you. 🤣If my finger happens to twitch even slightly...😳

Oh, how difficult it is to be concave
how hard it is to be weak
while being convex

Oh Lord, oh Lord, remember
all those brilliant promises
that You made to me.

And so I journey all alone
beneath a closed blue sky,
before a darkened sea,

for I need a powerful word
for I need an answer,
and love, or a holy death.

For it is quiet to be concave
for it is quiet to be weak
while being convex

😬

Come on, don't worry. You know this concave-convex archer loves you. 😁just lower the howitzers, lift your feet up 😬everything is going to be just fine. 😛
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
Rebecca Chase5 said:Precisely from a Taoist perspective. The beginning of convex violence over concave justification... the idea that the concave is inherently greedy and always taking...

Honestly? It just comes down to a lack of... well, let's call it masculine presence. Both literally and metaphorically. In the bedroom and out of it. Women end up suffering because of this perceived deficit, which then turns into resentment toward men. And if we're being real about why women feel so physically and socially sidelined, it traces back to a long history of male chauvinism—men degrading women simply to compensate for their own insecurities. So, what do we get? A massive pile of frustrated women and a bunch of idiots for men. Real gentlemen wouldn't cause any of this trouble. Just something to keep in mind. 😁
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
silentnomad23 said:Good grief, you can't even enjoy a little bit of fun without someone accusing you of stepping on their toes.

Honestly, there are so many people out there walking around with that kind of attitude. I lost my patience with that mindset a long time ago, and frankly, I don't regret it one bit. It’s not something I feel bad about, nor am I celebrating it—I've just moved past it.

The problem is, how is anyone supposed to tell the difference between a joke and reality through a screen? You mentioned it yourself—you can't really tell who’s being sincere and who’s just playing a part online. As for how seriously I take your jokes... well, under stress we regress. And frankly, I'm feeling the pressure today because someone really managed to get under my skin. I have zero patience for people trying to control others—it seems like most people have this desperate, almost pathological need to be possessive or pushy. It's a hard no from me. Period. I've always been more of a lone wolf.
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
silentnomad23 said:And why on earth would that satisfy me? It's not like I'm Miranda Bailey.

Look, I’m not exactly expecting you to be a second Miranda Bailey, either. I was just venting about what's been weighing on me. Honestly, you can barely even voice a grievance without someone immediately trying to pin it on you. 🤷
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
silentnomad23 said:The thing is, you can't actually claim to know what your subconscious is telling you; that’s precisely why it’s called the subconscious. If you were in control of it, you wouldn't be in the position you find yourself in today.
Furthermore, because of its nature, there is no way to predict where you will end up—you simply aren't larger than the forces driving you.

All these apocalyptic sermons and moralizing lectures tend to ripple outward; people observe one another's behavior and then amplify those views within their own circles.

Ultimately, what does it truly matter to you whether we face an apocalypse or if social norms shift entirely in the next few centuries?

1. You won't be around to see it.
2. There is absolutely no way to know how human relationships will evolve or how society will function in the long run.

Look, I'll admit it. I'm fixated on this stuff. It's exhausting. I'm frustrated with the state of the world, and frankly, I'm frustrated with myself. I feel like a total wreck. Maybe I really do need to go talk to a professional. Happy now?!
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
silentnomad23 said:Look, why don't you give me the version of things that ought to be true, while I tell you how things actually are? And the reality is, everything is in a constant state of flux—driven by cycles of conquest, dominance, and eventual resignation. My subconscious is my ultimate authority.
Perhaps you’re trying to offer me something that I have no interest in receiving, yet I might find myself taking something else entirely—something you didn't even realize you were offering. Or perhaps you want me to give you something that I simply won't (since I'm apparently being "selfish"), though it's clear you're gaining something from the exchange anyway (only you know exactly what that is).
As for that thing someone supposedly "imposed" on you, you chose to take it yourself. Why do you assume "Western capitalism" is the primary culprit here? Besides, what does Western capitalism even mean to a being like you? There has always been a West and an East.

Think of it this way: convexity defines any given goal; without that drive, you wouldn't even be moving forward. Concavity, however, is what allows for interaction. It acts as the immune system, the shock absorber, and the stabilizer.
In this entire equation, your consciousness is just as vital as a third leg.

Naturally, when you talk about "how things are," it sounds to me like nothing more than a glorified zoo. If your subconscious is perfectly content living in such a cage, fine—good for you and your subconscious. For me, mine speaks of transcendence. And if you haven't noticed, the world is already pivoting toward transhumanism and post-humanity. The shifts will be massive, and we really ought to adapt to these new conditions. Modification is inevitable if we intend to survive; struggling against it within our little zoo will only lead us straight to the gates of the apocalypse. And frankly, apocalypse is certain if we fail to transcend ourselves. Though, considering the current meager potential of human nature, the most likely sequence is apocalypse followed by transcendence, simply because we are absolute idiots. Something similar was noted by Stephen Hawking: "Humanity will experience a great technological transformation and progress, provided we do not destroy ourselves." Personally, though, I see it differently—apocalypse first, then perhaps a New Beginning, if even a single living creature remains on Earth. I have little faith in human idiocy and fanaticism. Sometimes a fool needs a slap to sober up. God, let us simply move past our differences and focus on our own progress. If we can't manage that, we probably don't deserve to, given how disappointingly we've failed as a species. 🤷
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
Rebecca Scott3 said:....so yeah, it's that whole "eat or be eaten" system.....
...but honestly, we really should just be collaborators.........
...though my take on men and women is a bit different from the norm.....
....it's the woman who enters the relationship to find pleasure and receive the seed that will fertilize her....she takes hold of that spark, and then she carries and gives birth to it....the child belongs to her; it's a part of her....a child is the absolute peak of everything....they are an extension, a mirror, our ultimate masterpiece....which means they represent the highest aim of any living organism (and that doesn't diminish those who don't have kids or choose not to, since they have their own vital roles in society, raising and supporting the next generation)...so, a woman having a child isn't just a vessel for new life....she is the architect of the species' continuity.....and because of that, she deserves a special kind of respect....(we could go on forever about parenting and caretaking, though)....
...in nature, a man doesn't actually know if he's the father....he can only choose to believe or doubt it.....that's why I say fatherhood is a title earned through respect.....sure, we have DNA tests today.....but.....what if the woman leaves? The man might never even realize the child carries his genes.....
....just a few ounces of muscle mass historically enslaved and crushed female power. Instead of finding balance through survival-based cooperation, women were subjugated by brute strength and religious or cultural manipulation. Women became property. Under patriarchal culture, the child becomes the father's asset in every sense: the surname, the reward/punishment systems regarding the kid, inheritance, and how sex, leisure, and education are interpreted....and so on....
....there's been a massive shift in how women, children, and even men are treated since Ancient Greece, but we are still such a long way from truly breaking free from that violent patriarchal mindset....

...

So, Maria Callas just pulled off a total Robin Hood move—hitting that bullseye right above the head without ever trying to forcefully assimilate anyone or play some power game of conquest. Honestly, we could all stand to take a page out of her book. There’s a certain rhythm to it, isn't there? A man leads, a woman receives. When things flow like that, the whole system just works. It’s seamless. It makes me wonder why we even bother with all this heavy terminology—words like 'devouring,' 'subjugation,' 'submission,' 'dominance,' or 'sexual antagonism.' It feels forced. To me, it seems like this entire obsession was shoved down our throats by the damn capitalist West and its relentless philosophy of ownership. We’ve been conditioned to view our partners like territories in the Far East that need to be conquered—or perhaps assimilated, just so capital can burst under its own tension and expand the Empire through self-multiplying wealth. It’s exhausting. "To have or to be," as Fromm put it. I think about that often when things get chaotic. Personally, I’ll choose Fromm’s "Being" every single time. By leaning into this little thought experiment, I find I can sidestep the whole messy cycle of dominance and submission entirely.
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
silentnomad23 said:postercicu, I think you might have missed my point regarding vaginal assimilation. In this dynamic, the vagina ultimately holds the upper hand because it possesses the capacity to swallow, process, and then release, whereas the penis can only reach out toward it.
Even if we imagine a scenario where both anatomy types had teeth, the vagina would still prevail simply because its "mouth" is larger.
That old Freudian theory about the female castration complex was clearly penned by someone lacking the capacity for hyperperception—someone unable to truly imagine themselves inhabiting a body other than their own, or even stepping outside the constraints of body and time altogether.
If energy is fluid and constantly shifting, then it stands to reason that I am intimately familiar with what it feels like to "be" masculine. This explains why some women experience the sensation of a penis, just as some men possess the essence of a vagina. Personally, I find people with a blend of concave and convex traits far more compelling—those who aren't strictly confined to "typical" male or female archetypes and instead embrace a balance of both sides. On the other hand, I find those who cling to the extremes quite unappealing. For instance, looking at a user like yivanmukta, who presents himself as purely "convex," I find that approach somewhat off-putting, if not entirely repulsive from a sexual standpoint.

It is much easier to be passive and gluttonous than to be active and generous. Generosity drains a person because it is a form of self-sacrifice for the sake of the whole, whereas gluttony—much like peristalsis cleaning a vagina—serves only itself. It’s pure selfishness.
Freud is, summa summarum, the repository of all the deepest secrets of human psychology. To disparage him is essentially to disagree with one's own self. A person can simultaneously be "hyperperceptive," androgynous, feeling the essence of a vagina while remaining male, and vice versa. Therefore, the ideal state is whatever extracts the maximum from your being. There is no need to force oneself into rigid patterns just to satisfy some imagined notion of "universal sexuality."

The experience of certain women feeling as though they have a penis, or men feeling they have a vagina, is linked to brain androgyny and the harmony of energies—the anima and the animus. Perhaps that represents the most balanced personality in the realm of sexuality. However, I personally prefer a grain of true masculinity within my own world of hormonal cocktails, where I exist on the threshold of various sexualities. Physically, I am entirely male, yet my brain is somewhat androgynous, allowing me to fully identify with the act of having, of assimilating a vagina, without ever ceasing to be purely male for even a single moment. 😉
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
So, here’s my take: women harbor this deep-seated jealousy toward men. It stems from their envy of male potency. They see it as the ultimate tool for climbing to the top of any social hierarchy. Now, look, nature didn't exactly design women to be inherently aggressive or assertive in that specific way—though, let’s be clear, that has zero bearing on actual success. A woman can reach the summit through pure intellect and sheer capability; she just needs the space and the permission to actually exert herself. So, embrace it. Just accept what being a woman means. It’s a beautiful thing, really. The real issue lies with those chauvinists who try to belittle you. You have to learn to distinguish a true gentleman from a common chauvinist. 😉 A gentleman will celebrate a woman and her femininity, whereas a chauvinist will spend every waking moment trying to tear her down. He views her as a threat to his own fragile masculinity, obstructing her path to success simply because he feels small and threatened by her presence. Ladies, please, learn to tell the difference between a chauvinist and a gentleman, and hold your femininity high.

Yours, restlessviper5! 😉
The psychology of convex vs. concave shapes in Psychology ·
silentnomad23 said:So, I was sitting there after lunch today, letting my mind wander through a rather curious thought: why does it always seem easier to be the one initiating action rather than the one receiving it?
It’s a phenomenon that goes far beyond physical intimacy; it’s deeply rooted in our psychological makeup. If I were to imagine myself navigating the world from a masculine perspective, honestly, taking charge and being the active force with one, two, or even ten people wouldn't feel like much of a struggle at all. However, looking at this through a feminine lens changes the equation entirely. When you are the one penetrating, you are essentially asserting your integrity; when you are the one being penetrated, that sense of self-integrity feels like it retreats. This is where those classic archetypes of male "dominance" and female "submissiveness" seemingly originate.
For instance, if someone wanders into my personal space—say, coming within half a meter of me—my instinctual reaction is often to push back with both hands. People usually look for an explanation because they can't quite wrap their heads around why I reacted that way (essentially, my "penetrating" stance). It got me reflecting on my own behavior and thinking about the times I have been the one in the active role—and just how many different ways people have tried to defend themselves against that.
Still, these convex and concave dynamics in life and behavior are inevitable; ultimately, they play a role in the very mechanics of reproduction. But as society evolves, we are seeing more fluid identities, which will likely lead to a generation of "moral relativists" regarding these convex-concave mental statuses.
To get straight to the point: could you envision yourselves as the opposite gender, and if so, how would you describe that experience?

(A quick note to the feminists and the chauvinists out there: please leave the moralizing at the door. We're keeping the ethics strictly to the philosophy section below.) 🙂

Ah, so you’re one of those caught in the grip of that lingering Freudian stage—penis envy. You're sweet, really, and occasionally quite brilliant, but I just can't wrap my head around why women carry such intense anxiety about their own skin that they have to constantly badger us men over the biological reality of being "penetrated." 🤷 People talk about female empowerment, say women are totally independent—yet there's this incredible undercurrent of jealousy toward the male anatomy. Personally, I don't mind. I simply appreciate you all for who you are; it never once crossed my mind to be envious of you or wish I had a vagina between my legs. 🤷 Listen, freckles, you're charming, and I've told you that before, but I didn't realize you were struggling with this masculine envy complex too 😉 Where does it all come from? 🤔
cosmiclynx57 said:,
. A project centered on a giant like Tesla has never been done before. It’s essentially an attempt to brand America in the best possible light globally, because at the end of the day, he was an American who fundamentally altered the course of civilization. To that end, the working title for the film is "Tesla ruler of the world"" — according to Vladimir Rajčić.

Tesli.html"]Source[/URL] (10/13/2010)

It’s stuff like this that makes me lose interest in a movie before it even hits theaters. Only people with massive inferiority complexes would make statements like that. Using Tesla as some sort of national brand—as a tool for national PR—is just the absolute bottom of the barrel when it comes to sentimentality. And not even noble sentimentality, just small-minded, provincial nonsense. Tesla had nothing to do with Vladimir Rajčić, nor did he belong to any specific political agenda. If the US hadn't provided him with everything he needed—the living standards, the workspace, the resources—and if, heaven forbid, he had stayed behind in some underdeveloped region, he probably would have withered away. The world would have been poorer for it, missing out on several pivotal civilizational leaps. The point is, Tesla didn't belong to anyone; he belonged to himself. And if he did belong to someone, it was humanity first, because his genius was a gift to the entire world, and then, by extension, America, simply because that's where he could actually function. It’s honestly pathetic to see Tesla being exploited for such banal purposes.