38 posts shown.
Hercegovac.
I didn't realize you could spot genetics from a distance—must be an American thing, since I was born here in the States. Besides, they aren't even "true Herzegovinians"—they're more like the fringe crowd—neither here nor there 😬
Hm—well, sure: I voted for Washington, D.C. as the capital, and picked Martha's Vineyard for my island (lots of rocky coastlines and just pure, clean air)
What else could have swayed things? Hard to say. And hey, the gospa hasn't personally paid me a visit yet. 😕
There are a few funny little details to consider. 🙂
[I used to get shut down constantly because my girlfriend would say I was being too self-deprecating—and honestly, I hate talking about myself. I’ve been trying to find some middle ground lately—it’s a work in progress, for sure—but I feel like I’m making some headway. It’s a total catch-22, though. If I talk about my wins, I come off as an arrogant jerk who won't stop bragging. If I’m honest about where I’m struggling, I end up sounding like a total depressive or just plain unstable. So, I tried adding some humor into the mix—since I can be pretty quick-witted—but then people think I never take anything seriously and that I'm impossible to have a real conversation with. It's just one thing after another.
QUOTE]
You want a single, universal standard? — Sorry to break it to you, but there isn't one. 😍
Finding someone who actually shares your vision and needs—it’s a tough nut to crack. And let’s be real—you need that spark, too. Without the chemistry, you haven't found a partner; you've just found a great friend.
Look, this isn't even about you—it’s just about how the projections stack up against the actual goal. You can't really compare that to a marketing strategy used to push a new product out the door. At least, not after the first two or three dates. And that's exactly what you're doing.
When you're really going all-in—like when you decide to make a move—you aren't thinking, "I just want a girlfriend." It’s more like, "I want to be with *you* specifically." Simple as that.
P.S. I noticed that classic "it's all about me" mindset—talking about oneself this way, then that way. Why worry so much about what *you* need? It’s on you to ask her about her—to actually listen—and to let her know what your own needs are, too. You should also expect her to be upfront about what she likes, dislikes, or requires from you. It’s all about the interaction. Think of it like this: if the core attraction in a relationship is how two people recognize and meet each other's needs, then the "glue" that holds everything together is *how* those needs are actually met. If you figure out that the needs exist, and if the way you exchange them—meeting each other's requirements—is right (and yeah, that applies to everything from intimacy to spiritual connection, not just sex)—then BINGO. You've hit the jackpot.
Looking at this from a "strategic" standpoint—you’re constantly playing defense. That’s usually a tell for low self-esteem. Why on earth should everything you do have to cater to her? You’ve gotta show some backbone—I mean, surely you have your own standards and deal-breakers too. Anyone with actual criteria actually carries some weight—they have a sense of self—it’s pretty basic psychology, really. Taking that stance right out of the gate—without making a huge production of it—shows her she’s sitting across from a real person with an identity, not just some sponge that shifts shape whenever she applies pressure. Even if you end up being wrong sometimes, she’ll accept it—because healthy relationships are all about that back-and-forth exchange, the good and the bad. And hey, if she’s looking for some Prince Charming on a white horse? Let her look. She isn't going to find him here. Eventually, she'll have to adjust her expectations—but by then, that won't be your problem anymore.
Girls will probably pick up on that insecurity—it’s like this hovering, undecided energy that makes your character seem totally undefined. It isn't just what you say, either—it's your gaze, how you move, even your facial expressions. Everything gets recorded—both consciously and subconsciously.
Honestly, you might want to hold off on overanalyzing this one—specifically how you even got started. If you dive too deep into that, you’re just going to end up spinning your wheels and getting tangled up like a kid lost in a corn maze.
A lack of "self" really messes with your sex life, too. Think about it—you might be attracted to someone just because they have a great body. But once you actually get intimate, you start craving that extra spark—the kind that comes from who they are as a person, their actual "self." For a real connection to happen, you need two distinct individuals—two separate "selves"—in the room. It’s like physics—it's only when those two units collide that you get actual force and interaction.
If your sense of self is weak—if you don't really stand for anything—then interpersonal connections just sort of drift right past you. It’s like trying to catch smoke with your bare hands. But if that "self" is too volatile or poorly defined? That’s a whole different mess. You end up with these erratic energy bursts that snap in every direction at once—lots of noise, but zero impact. It’s all scattered and aimless because you're constantly flipping between extremes—and honestly, who could actually make sense of that?
It could also work the other way around—you end up with this rigid, unyielding sense of self. It’s like being stuck in a permanent defensive crouch—you're just too stiff to actually connect with anyone or have a real, meaningful interaction.
Let’s be clear here—there is no magic bullet. There's no single "golden rule" that fixes everything. The answer is always going to be somewhere in the middle—it’s all about finding that sweet spot where different influences balance out. Right now, you’re probably just swinging between two extremes—which, honestly, is totally normal when you're growing up—especially during those teenage years and early adulthood. It's just part of the process.
Honestly? It’s nothing tragic—just one of those things everyone goes through at some point.
urbannomad12 said:I used to get shut down constantly because my girlfriend would say I was killing the mood—and I honestly hate talking about myself. I’ve tried to find a middle ground, and while I’m not exactly an expert yet, I feel like I’m making progress. It's a catch-22, really. If I talk about my wins, I come off as some arrogant jerk who won't stop bragging. If I admit where I struggle, people treat me like I'm spiraling or being too dark. So, I tried adding some humor to lighten things up—which is my go-to move—but then suddenly I'm seen as someone who can't take anything seriously. It's just one cycle after another.
So, for those of you in long-term relationships—do you actually believe you were made for each other, or is it just a case of staying with someone because everyone else is doing it?
No way. Why even bother? You need enough self-love to actually feel like you deserve affection in the first place... if that's missing, the relationship dies. Honestly, without that foundation, there isn't even a relationship to speak of—so why stay together at all? 😕
I’ve never been interested in a "relationship" that doesn't actually feel like one. That’s just absurd. It’s either a real connection or it isn’t. Sure, it can be high-quality one day and totally chaotic the next—but there has to be a real bond and that "spark." Staying together just for the sake of it? That’s nothing. 👎
In my book, it's better to just have casual flings, or even stay single, until you actually find something that fulfills you.
urbannomad12 said:mellowjackal33, seriously—that’s easily the best advice I’ve heard in a long time. It really made me stop and think. Thanks.
Since we're talking about keeping things real—let me clarify: not dumping every single thought in your head onto a girl doesn't mean you're being fake. It just means you're letting things develop at a natural pace. If you smother her with "all your baggage" right out of the gate? You've got a near 100% chance of getting ghosted immediately. She won't be able to catch her breath—even if you're the nicest guy on the planet. It’s just too much, too fast.
😍
Take it slow—there's no rush. And always go in expecting a few bumps in the road. Honestly, the odds of things hitting a snag are way higher than everything going perfectly smooth. We're all different. It’s great when those sparks eventually win out—that’s when you find a partner for the long haul, or maybe even for life. Your best bet for making it last is realizing you aren't entitled to anything. That mindset helps you wake up every morning actually appreciating both your life and what she brings to it.
Because she doesn't owe you a thing—she gives because she wants to. And it works both ways.
Then you'll actually be happy and able to say a genuine "thank you"—day in and day out. For the rest of your life, really—to her, to yourself, and to life itself—since life doesn't owe us anything either.
Robert Stewart28 said:Spot on, mellowjackal33. 👍
That’s just coming from an old hand at this—yep, me. When you get tired enough, you start sensing when something isn't quite right—and that's when you change, grow, and evolve. It’s wild how life works on us. 🙂
I'm glad if any of that resonated.
I remember reading through things the same way I do now: just going post by post. Then suddenly—bam—it all feels too complicated! How did I even do that to myself? I was making things difficult for no reason—just complicating my own life. That was until I ran into a few smart people who basically told me, "Hey, you're just tripping over yourself." What? How? So then you think again, get exhausted, and just... live. Piece by piece—some dilemmas just resolve themselves once you view them from a different angle.
One catch, though: you really have to experience it firsthand. It sucks, but it's true. You can talk about things all day, but to truly "know" them—to feel it in your bones without overthinking it—that's something only life can teach you.
urbannomad12 said:That’s basically the gist of it. Honestly, I think most guys think this way—we just play pretend because we don't have the guts to admit it. (off-forum thought)
I took over a month off from the forums to actually test some of this stuff out in the real world—you know, field research. Not to brag, but I had a few "successful" encounters while testing out some theories on dating dynamics.
And here’s what I’ve gathered. Women seem to categorize men into two buckets: the short-term guys and the long-term prospects. My issue? I meet a girl who I totally click with—someone I could listen to all day—and she’s clearly a long-term prospect for me. But unfortunately, for those types of women, I end up being just a short-term guy.
On the flip side, there are women just getting out of relationships with complete jerks who are looking for someone "normal." For them, I’d be a solid long-term prospect.
The struggle is finding that sweet spot—meeting someone I actually like who *also* sees me as long-term. Usually, our perspectives just clash, so I end up walking away. From here on out, I’m embracing the single life and just going for short-term flings—whatever happens, happens. If I run into a long-term match where we actually see eye-to-eye? Well, then I'll marry her. 🙏
You know what? You’re just overthinking it. That’s the problem—if there even is much to think about. You can't get something that isn't there. You're constantly trying to engineer different scenarios. Some people just click instantly, while others spend years searching for a soulmate. Don't sweat it. Stop overanalyzing. Why do you even care if you "click"? That's already a tactical error right there!
Just show up, talk about whatever comes to mind, and let things flow. Will she reject you? Will it be a one-night thing before she disappears? Or will it last forever? Honestly, worrying about it is pointless. Just stay ready for any outcome—because you don't get to decide for other people. You only control yourself. Be yourself, show your intentions, listen to what they want—and maybe it’ll turn out like your wildest dreams, or maybe it won't.
I say "maybe" on purpose, because that’s the whole point, Siddhartha—it's the prerequisite for having a clear mind and heart. You can paint all the pictures you want in your head, but when you're with a real person in a real situation—don't calculate, don't assume. Just be present. All you really have is that interaction in the moment—whether it's conversation, physical, or whatever else.
Kyle Nelson2 said:😕 🤔
Regarding the signatures:
I'm voting for Euros (way more sophisticated!)—though maybe I should just stick to my Chase checking account? 🙂
Bryan Jones82 said:Man, why make this so complicated?
High intelligence doesn't mean you're some weirdo or a loner—that's just a tired stereotype with zero basis in reality. You can't judge an entire group based on a single outlier like, say, Tesla.
.............. those kids (who grew up to be adults, obviously) actually turned out to be healthier, wealthier, more successful in their careers, and even happier than most people. Interestingly enough, when they hit 60, they were asked what brought them the most joy—and most pointed to their families rather than money, status, or career wins.
I don't know—I never really saw Tesla as a "weirdo." He was just who he was. Why should we force him to fit into some narrow, socially accepted box of what "success" looks like?
Intelligence just presents bigger hurdles, but it also gives you better tools to jump over them. So, personally, I find the idea that being smart automatically means a higher risk of mental health issues to be a bit of a stretch.
Walter Myers4 said:Yeah. And honestly, those sudden, deep realizations about how connections and systems actually work—it can lead to this painful, depressing sort of resignation where you just kind of "give up" on trying to be proactive about the world.
It’s the same deal with realizing you can knock things out faster and better than most people with way less effort—it opens the door to some seriously unhealthy laziness and boredom. And we all know that boredom is a dangerous game. 😁
Don't get me wrong: I'm no genius, and I totally reject any implication that I am—gross!!! 😍 (Though, I have had my fair share of moments where I felt "misunderstood" by everyone around me—which probably stems from those IQ tests I took a few times that came back pretty high.).
Laziness and boredom: I've actually learned to embrace them. 🙂 😎 🙏 Woohoo! But if I can be 😈—that's the honest truth.
All this "proactive" stuff feels a bit much to me. Why should I care, and why would I play judge? All I can really say is that I don't like something, or that I would do it differently. But what's my criteria? So—people can do whatever they want. As for suggestions or advice—I'll give them if someone actually asks for help, or if they realize on their own they're "out of their league" and reach out. Or, if our interests clash and we run into a conflict... then we'll go from there.
Kyle Nelson2 said:Look... intelligence isn't just some random concept pulled out of thin air—there are tons of different cognitive abilities, and you can actually measure each one quite precisely.
In professional circles (as far as I know), people rarely talk about "intelligence" as a single thing; they usually focus on specific types of cognitive skills.
Nowadays, we have psychological testing procedures where you can measure any of these traits. Modern IQ tests are designed to capture the full spectrum—from the absolute highest levels to the lowest—so the examiner doesn't need to be some super-genius themselves. They just administer the test and compare the results against the standard scoring sheets. 😉
The only area where you really need the other person to be at a certain level is psychoanalysis... a psychiatrist (specifically a psychoanalyst) actually has to undergo long-term analysis themselves—on top of their formal training—just to be able to do the job effectively.
It’s easy to write off highly intelligent people we don't understand as having personality disorders, narcissism, or whatever else... but to me, that feels like a limitation on our part—the observer's part. It's basically refusing to accept that there are ways of thinking, patterns of behavior, and motivations that are simply different from our own.
Just as a reminder, it was this exact kind of narrow-mindedness regarding "differences" that led us to wipe out Native Americans, the Aztecs, Aboriginal Australians, and all sorts of cultures we deemed... less valuable.
Personally, I think we need to foster a culture of respecting diversity—and after that, respecting those individuals who have made our society better, more advanced, and more beautiful through their intellect and talent. We should ask ourselves why these people have so often lived on the fringes of society.
We could say that Michelangelo had Asperger's, or that Tesla was an eccentric, but despite their quirks, they possessed a brilliance—and often a nobility or empathy—that makes them, at least in my eyes, truly exceptional human beings.
Wow, look at all these experts in the room.
I'd agree with the idea that intelligence generally leads to greater sensitivity and sharper perception—but it also provides the tools to manage that, essentially creating mechanisms to keep everything in balance.
- A wide range of interests.
- Noticing connections, patterns, and details that everyone else misses.
- That sense of bewilderment or frustration when others "just don't see" things... blah, blah.
Basically, intelligence can trigger deep existential crises—searching for answers to "who am I?" or "what is the world?"—while trying to define how we fit into our environment.
That doesn't mean an intelligent person has to follow every social norm, nor does it mean they'll handle intimate or personal challenges in a "standard" way. But it does mean that alongside those unique challenges, there is a STRONGER POTENTIAL for successfully navigating them—and for meaningful interaction.
To the OP: sorry if this isn't exactly a peer-reviewed academic paper. 😍
Judah — you’re overthinking this. What does some guy like Isaac fooling around on an Atlantic beach have to do with an entire nation—or the fact that they stayed in refugee housing near the coast?
Just let it go and move on. 🙄
Harold Turner2 said:It’s a standard reaction. She decided to throw everything away—she felt guilty, she lied before acting—and now she starts acting hysterical whenever you’re around because you’re a walking reminder of what she's trying to bury.🙂
That’s how I saw it too—just a hysterical defense mechanism to cover up her own mess. Either way, it's totally irrational and, honestly, borders on psychopathology.
Dealing with the kid situation is brutal if that's how you're feeling. But hey, time heals most things.
And look, if there's some shady stuff you did that you haven't mentioned here—making you feel guilty about her behavior—well, conscience is a heavy weight to carry. If you need to, talk it out with friends, a therapist, or even a priest... just do whatever helps lighten the load.
I’m with the image on this one—stay happy and keep that energy up.
It’s probably for the best that things came to light now. I mean, did you honestly think you guys were getting married or something?!
I could sit here and break it all down—but there’s really no point. A psychiatrist would give you a formal diagnosis, but honestly, Imago’s way of putting it sums it up perfectly enough for anyone to understand.
Sorry—I might be oversimplifying things here. But honestly, I think it’s pretty silly to view FOX's evening entertainment as some kind of serious tool for measuring intelligence.
Walter Chavez2 said:Oh, so you think there isn't some little Peter out there watching sheep who might actually READ because he's curious about things. 🙄 People like that really get under my skin. 🙄
No—it's just the fact that those little Peters guarding flocks can be incredibly smart people who, for the most part, simply don't bother with celebrity gossip or keeping up with the tabloids.
A big intelligence test needs to account for its "general" (un)culture by adjusting for the local environment and the specific group being tested. This quiz on FOX was clearly tailored to the folks sitting in the studio or perhaps just the broad American public at large.
One Peter, if he’s a bright guy, might know an absolute ton about sheep, their behavior, nature, animals, grazing patterns, or even how to make cheese...
Generally speaking—I'd much rather watch a show about a hardworking Peter than some fluff piece about what soccer player is dribbling where, his name, his cleat size, or how some pop star smiles on stages all over America.
On that note—I couldn't care less about when some "bread and circuses" type festival is happening. And then someone tries to sell that as "general culture" and claims it's a metric for measuring intelligence.
If that bugs you—hey, go for it. Buy yourself a Gloria and enjoy yourself. 😁
crimsonmoose3 said:They didn't bother with a legitimate big intelligence test—they just don't want to embarrass celebrities who are probably way less bright than they let on. Take Ariana Grande, for example. 😁
Exactly. You're reading my mind. The whole test is just fun and games—nothing more than that.
Mad Scientist said:Intelligence tends to correlate positively with general knowledge. It’s not necessarily a direct line, but it's a fact—smarter people usually have a much deeper interest in the world around them. That’s actually why vocabulary tests are such a staple in most big intelligence tests.
Ultimately, Openness—one of those traits from the Big Five model—is also linked to intelligence.
****.
As for that veggie debate, from what I know, there are two main ways to look at it (the botanical vs. the agricultural). One definition says fruit comes from perennial plants while veggies come from annuals; the other says you eat the reproductive part in fruit and everything else in vegetables.
That makes sense. But looking at that FOX test? They went way overboard—way too many questions dedicated to that specific area compared to the rest of the exam.
Plus, "openness" is pretty subjective. If you design a test that focuses heavily on just one niche, you end up labeling someone a fool—like if someone is totally clueless about football, they might seem completely "closed" off, even though they've just shut the door on that specific topic.
It’s the same deal with sports.
Look, I love catching a good football game or a downhill ski race. But I couldn't care less about memorizing the names of the players—I want to watch the action, and then move on with my life.
And don't even get me started on the sports section of the paper, or those gossip rags filled with celebrity news. I can't bring myself to read any of it, let alone remember it. It all feels so shallow to me.
On the flip side, I’ll happily spend time studying wind currents or trying to figure out exactly when and why it's going to rain. I want to know how winds behave in a cyclone, where a hurricane's eye is located, what the temperature difference might be between a mountain peak and a city like Chicago or the Rocky Mountains, or whether I should head out for a hike in Jacksonville if it's raining in town and I've got a thermometer sitting on my windowsill...
So—it really comes down to both the quantity and the variety of general knowledge questions. Otherwise, you just hit a dead end.
Generally speaking, a general knowledge test has to be HEAVILY TAILORED TO THE SPECIFIC SOCIETY, ITS EDUCATION SYSTEM, THE STATE AND FOCUS OF THE MEDIA, THE LOCAL MINDSET AND CULTURE, AND EVEN THE AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND THE INTERNET... There are so many variables involved that creating a truly objective set of questions is incredibly difficult.
That thing on FOX was just some evening entertainment. It’s definitely not a real big intelligence test, regardless of whether it includes bits of actual testing—and I’m not saying that just because I had a rough time with 😁.
Some kid like Peter tending sheep out in the Rocky Mountains would look like a total fool if he took this, given the general knowledge and vocabulary requirements... Basically, it’s just a bit of fun, nothing more.