Posts by dustyskipper3

Even though we talk about post-feminism today, patting ourselves on the back because we supposedly live in a society where genders are equal, I guess many vital questions remain unresolved. For instance, introducing a female substitute for the male God—some kind of goddess, a Diana who hunts alone and such—it feels like it just deepens the existing dualism. These newer pagan movements or similar faiths that promote matriarchy and a dominant image of women are often perceived as "the other" compared to the religious mainstream, which, well, remains patriarchal. There is also the issue inherent in language itself; as Master John once noted, language is necessarily dualistic because, I suppose, "no one has invented a non-dualistic language yet," so even within our speech, the feminine is understood as the "other." Perhaps a new feminist spirituality should move away from symbolic language entirely as a means of communication and instead utilize other mediums to convey spiritual truth, like music, for example. It is interesting to note that even Chinese and Japanese Zen seemed somewhat averse to women, which is why we have so few female Zen masters or nuns. Even though Zen, in principle, should transcend the male-female dualism, it seems that sexual instinct is often too much of an issue in Zen monastery settings to allow them to be co-ed. There is that famous story about a Zen master who was only accepted into a monastery after she intentionally disfigured her beautiful face—not just to prove the sincerity of her devotion, but perhaps to ensure she wouldn't trigger desire in the other monks. And so we arrive at the fundamental dilemma of feminism, and indeed spirituality—can a beautiful woman truly be a feminist or a nun? Does it even make sense, given that, from birth, the earthly gates of admiration from the entire male population are essentially open to her? Does it make sense, despite everything?

Lately, we see Angelina Jolie stepping into the role of a human rights advocate fighting for abused children, and I suppose Nives Celsius has started following somewhat in those footsteps. But, in my view, it all stays at the level of attracting attention through a beautiful face and body, without much in the way of spiritual substance. On the other hand, it would be difficult to take them seriously in the role of Mother Teresa, who, God rest her soul, was a physically very unattractive woman, a real Yaga, though they might be more easily perceived as a Diana or a goddess of fertility. I wonder, does a woman's physical appearance dictate the type of spirituality she can realize? I suspect feminists would be quite incensed if that were actually true—but maybe it is. 😍

Some people really convinced themselves they were indispensable, thinking in terms like "after JFK, it's just JFK" or "after Reagan, everything falls apart." It all turned out to be pretty foolish in the end, I suppose. The world just keeps spinning on its own path, completely indifferent to these departed "giants," let alone to little guys like us. If you can't change much while you're actually alive, how much more could you possibly do once you're dead? 🙂 🤣

But no, you still insist on knowing what happens afterward. For instance, wondering if your wife will start seeing someone else right after you pass away. 😂 There is a very good reason why you don't know that, I think; if we did, murder rates would probably be much higher. 🤣

Honestly, my favorite type of person is the one who desperately wants to be recorded in various encyclopedias, the ones who write their own biographies on Wikipedia or some other nonsense site, hoping to see their name in a "Who's Who in America" directory. To them, I promise that I will personally make sure everyone finds out what kind of idiots they truly were, and maybe I'll even volunteer to edit their profile and biography myself. 😬

jademarlin26 said:I agree. It seemed to me that the religious crowd on this forum has convinced themselves they’ve reached some peak level of spirituality. Now, acting like spiritual salesmen, they've spent the last six months peddling their specific doctrine everywhere they go. 🤷

I mean, Jesus did say He came for the sinners, not the righteous, right? 😁

wearyowl29 said:It’s like, his very existence alone carries weight... and you know how older folks say

just pray to St. Anthony if you can't find your lost keys.

He’s a pretty good patron saint for the disorganized. Though, I suppose it might be helpful to actually tidy up the apartment once in a while.☕

That’s just how it is, I suppose.
Anyone can pull a rabbit out of a hat, but let’s see if they can pull Jesus out of a hat—or maybe a hood—when things actually get serious. 😁

wearyowl29 said:And just like that, it inherits a sense of legitimacy that it protects through sheer organization.

If people start treating a rabbit's foot like gospel, it won't be seen as a mere folk superstition anymore—it'll become a pillar of faith worthy of absolute devotion.🙏

It could even turn into more than just a superstition; it might become a national holiday!



But, I guess, why is it that during Easter or Ramadan, people celebrate rabbits? 🤔

I suppose a poll would have been more practical here. But, well, if we just want to recap what we're actually looking at:

Exhibit A:



Exhibit B:



Who would you trust with your safety first?☕

wearyowl29 said:So, I’m leaning toward the rabbit here. Honestly, he’s the one in the right! He was just living his life, owning his own little paws, being all cute and sweet until they came along and ended it with a shotgun. As for the priest? Man, I don't know what kind of guy he really was. Word on the street is he was a total degenerate before he suddenly decided to go all holy on us. It feels a bit sudden, you know? That’s why I’m siding with the bunny—it just feels more natural to me.

That's true. A physical paw is something tangible, whereas a picture is just an image, almost like a placebo. There used to be times when people carried around actual relics—actual bones and fragments of saints—but I suppose carrying stuff like that around isn't really socially acceptable anymore... people might start thinking you're Captain Dragan.😂

wearyowl29 said:I have zero interest in messing with anyone!🙏😉😲😂
I’m dying to know—who’s actually more effective at providing protection... the rabbit or the saint???

Durex.
Oh, so you mean protection in a general sense? 😁

Well, I guess it really depends on what you're trying to protect against. Maybe we should look at the accident statistics for people who keep a horseshoe or a rabbit's foot in their car versus those who carry a saint medal or a crucifix. Although, it’s possible that the folks with the religious icons drive more recklessly, so I suppose you can't ever truly know for sure. I suspect the rabbit's foot might be more effective for prevention, maybe because it subconsciously keeps a person mindful of their reflexes and reaction times during danger. On the other hand, a saint might just act as a sort of palliative after things have already gone south—perhaps offering a little comfort so you don't feel entirely alone while you're paying off all that damage to your car. 😍

wearyowl29 said:I’ve got a rabbit's foot and a medallion featuring a Catholic saint.

Now, I don't personally view them as mere fashion accessories—though I know some people might disagree with me there😲—but I truly believe they have a deeper purpose. So, I wanted to ask you all: which one should I carry when I head out the door?

Who or what will provide the best protection and keep any kind of evil from touching me while I'm on my journey?🤷

What is the actual difference in how they work—you know, having a rabbit's foot tucked in your pocket versus wearing a saint's medallion around your neck?

So... thoughts?

Look, it’s like this. For you, a medallion with a saint's image doesn't really have any special active power. It's pretty much like a keychain or a raincoat (compared to holy water). But it won't hurt anything, either. 😍 A rabbit's foot might actually work, say, if you were trying to confuse someone, though it could also lead to some unintended consequences. 🤣 An image of a saint couldn't be used that way at all; if anything, it might do the exact opposite and clear away anyone you were trying to confuse. 😬

Benjamin Taylor6 said:The Kabbalah is solid, don't get me wrong. But there’s always something else out there that hits even harder. Especially for us guys:http://www.nytimes.com/article/wellness-lifestyle-connection
( though women can benefit too ). Personally, I haven't ventured down that specific path to find the "living truth" myself, but the method seems incredibly sound.
Even this guy (the President) had a mystical encounter with an Angel. And apparently, that Angel told him that through the union of the Penis and the Vagina, one can also attain the "Living Truth."

A good Angel, I hope. What was the name? I wonder if it wasn't actually Lucifer.😍🤣
It strikes me as interesting that Makaj gave his child the name Majam Ramun. I wonder... what does he call them as a pet name? 😁

Brian Foster3 said:Angels aren't some winged little people floating around with personalities—that's just how people misinterpret things because they can't wrap their heads around the truth. They are actually spiritual laws that construct our entire reality, acting as the fundamental forces driving both this physical world and the spiritual realms alike. It’s all happening according to the blueprint and command of the creator, so you could really look at angels as the specific ways the creator differentiates His power into active forces within existence.

It reminds me of that old Kabbalistic saying: "There isn't a single blade of grass out there that doesn't have an angel hovering over it, striking it and commanding, 'Grow!'"

So, I guess they act somewhat like the Creator's organs; they don't possess individual personalities. Personally, I can also perceive that there might be such "forces"—essentially energies in higher dimensions—that influence our world, and maybe, occasionally, they even serve humanity.

In certain Eastern traditions, angels are basically treated like gods, and demons are just demons. You can even go through reincarnation and become a "god" yourself. I guess this whole emphasis on angels feels a bit like polytheism to me; it seems like it could easily happen where someone starts worshipping a specific angel just as much as they worship God. Maybe it’s because God feels too abstract and complicated to truly grasp, so we try to experience Him through angels who feel closer and more human to us. But then again, don't Christians already have Jesus to bridge that gap? He was a man, after all, so He's the most relatable one to us. So, if we have Him, what's the point of the angels?😕It is the Holy Spirit that protects us, not some guardian Angel, and Jesus is the one who leads us back to God. I suppose angels are more necessary to God as messengers, or perhaps they show up during those rare moments when something needs to be handled in the physical world so that God Himself doesn't have to personally materialize as a "pillar of fire" or something like that. I think there was also a traditional idea that "guardian Angels" were actually just our deceased loved ones watching over us from heaven.☕

slymaker9 said:My prescriptions are actually quite mild. You would probably be relieved to hear that some certain ones were slated for reduction or even discontinuation because they carry an addiction risk. He is a good doctor; he genuinely ensures people don't overdo it with pills. It isn't as if he prescribes things for no reason.

It is obvious you could manage without the pills right this second—😁 you already anticipated this—you are just stalling a bit to give yourself more time to process everything.
🙂

This process needs to be handled carefully and gradually so brain chemistry can adapt.
I once decided on my own to stop taking my Ad, and since I felt fine at the time, I didn't follow the prescription. About ten days later, I was hit out of nowhere by a sudden, intense craving that wasn't triggered by anything external.
It should be done under supervision—tapering off slowly—so that when you finally stop, you don't even feel it.
I suspect this topic will eventually move to the off-topic section under the heading Stella's corner.🤣

Naturally, in my usual style, I have included an appropriate little song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnany...eature=related😍

The topic itself is framed so broadly that it’s difficult for anything to truly be off-topic, I guess. Even those measurements—let's say even a few inches counts as progress. If you hit seventeen, you’re doing quite well, and if you pass twenty, maybe you could even become a horse. And a horse is a noble creature, though perhaps somewhat underestimated in this modern era of machines and gasoline... in Chinese astrology, the horse represents healthy people, much like our Sagittarius—the centaur—which represents folks who are generally healthy and inclined toward sports, or football, or things of that nature.

It all comes down to personality, I suppose, and how one chooses to advance their character spirituality. Looking to animals for inspiration isn't such a bad idea, really. Kung Fu derives its various fighting styles from the way animals behave during combat; there are styles based on the crane, the snake, the tiger, the monkey, and the praying mantis... the crane style, for instance, is sort of a way of feigning weakness, where the basic stance is on one leg, and then you suddenly condense everything into a single point and strike with all your strength. Perhaps these styles could also be applied to verbal sparring and communication. In that sense, Stella might seem weak on the forum, but when she strikes, she would likely floor anyone. The tiger style is for those who prefer to be a bit wild and vehement, almost like a feral cat. Then there is the snake style, which involves striking suddenly, briefly, and with minimalism, before retreating back to a starting position, maybe somewhere below a pyramid. The praying mantis looks very much in love, but once those claws grab you... well, anyway, I am just saying, there are many such styles present here on the forum.

slymaker9 said:Certain anxieties are universal. No one escapes them because they are baked into the human experience. No amount of achievement can erase that; to suggest otherwise would be to suggest we aren't human. Therefore, total eradication is impossible—it's really just a question of intensity.
Life is a constant cycle of struggle and joy for everyone.
As for why my nervous system overreacts to stress, who knows? A doctor calls it a "vulnerable personality structure" (which is just a clinical way of saying I'm sensitive). 😉 By that metric, I'm definitely not average. I once actually fainted from sheer distress. 🤣
Does success make me stronger? It does, which is why my bouts of anxiety and depression are cyclical; they are fundamentally reactive.
Could some massive success eliminate them entirely so they never feel overwhelming again? I don't know.
Success might suppress them for a significant period of time—that much is proven.
But life involves stress. Period. For everyone.

When things are as intense for me as they are, someone who hasn't experienced it simply won't understand.
You don't even have the strength to give up.

Look, let’s say you’re just calibrated a certain way. You even mentioned it yourself—it’s about intensity. Some people are calibrated for high intensity, kind of like pneumatic jackhammers used for breaking up asphalt or those massive jet engines on a Boeing. Then there are others who are more like tiny jeweler's hammers used for delicate gears, or perhaps those little electric motors that drive highly precise mechanical devices.

Why has modern life evolved toward increasing the intensity of pleasure while sacrificing refinement? Well, I imagine it's because intensity is easier to mass-produce than quality. It’s much simpler to churn out something like a Red Bull than it is to craft a fine Champagne that needs to age for a century to reach its peak flavor. Even modern perfumes seem raw; they either hit one heavy note or create a bouquet of mismatched scents that, frankly, just smell bad. 😉

And, interestingly enough, progress isn't possible without creativity and creative individuals. In a way, creativity is similar to psychosis—just a thought. A high IQ alone isn't enough for true creativity; you also need high LI (latent inhibition) and SM (fantasy proneness). Of course, IQ matters, but people with high IQ and high LI tend to see everything the exact same way, even if they are brilliant, so they aren't truly creative since they don't question things from multiple angles. The downside of low LI—that tendency to constantly question everything as if seeing it for the first time—is that the same trait exists in psychotic individuals. The same goes for fantasy proneness.

So, there’s this thin line separating geniuses from the mad. It seems that rapid progress through reducing latent inhibition would lead to general madness rather than advancement, which might be why society needs a larger number of inhibited people to keep things from spiraling. It’s possible you are intentionally inhibiting yourself as a sort of shield against psychosis, but if you overdo it, you might end up suppressing your own creativity and inviting melancholy or depression... well, we shall see.

Carl Gauss... one of the absolute most brilliant minds in history ended up having his name become a synonym for being totally mediocre. 🤣

And when you think about Einstein, I guess you could add: "everything is relative..." including progress and evolution, my dear Darwin.

Stella, even though you say you're stuck in a Gaussian curve, maybe there's actually a certain 'magnetic personality' hidden within you, something akin to 1000 Gauss units? Or perhaps it feels more like you're psychologically oscillating toward various self-conscious magnetic fields, sort of like a mental compass needle, making it easy to slip into unconsciousness... where even a total vacuum, or just nobody, might knock you right out of your mental equilibrium. 😬

dustyskipper3:

I suppose I should probably mention that Stella1 was here. Or maybe I shouldn't. It feels like there's something worth noting about their presence, I guess. Perhaps. dustyskipper3 says: Well, honestly... if you're going to be such a cheapskate, I guess you shouldn't really act surprised when women don't seem to get you. Maybe it's just how things are.😂

Maybe they don't quite get it at first, I guess... people just don't see the vision immediately. But once it finally clicks for them, they end up slathering everything in cocoa butter and... well, you know how it goes. 🙂
Aside from that... I guess... what exactly does one mean by "reading by topic"...? Maybe I'm just missing something obvious, but I suppose I'm wondering how that even works.🙂

I suppose we have another intriguing little example to look at here—the logo on Fifth Avenue cigarettes:



It features the phrase "In hoc signo vinces," which is allegedly from a dream experienced by Emperor Constantine, the man who helped establish the foundations of modern Christianity at the Council of Nicaea. It also includes "Per aspera ad astra," or "through hardships to the stars."

We see this exact same motif over here, used by the Knights Templar during their ceremonies in New York City:



So, I guess you could say the progression of spirituality, which eventually led to our current state of consciousness, can be traced quite precisely.

This is a song by The White Stripes The White Stripes The Hardest Button , which is their big hit Blue Orchid, and this is their Coca-Cola commercial.

I suppose we can see how they used similar elements in the video, specifically that red and white color scheme, which they also used in other clips, like this one.

I guess the real question is what came first—the chicken or the egg? I mean, was Coca-Cola just a parasite that recognized the red and white aesthetic as its own and hijacked it, or was that specific code—red, white, and black, plus the barcode motif—already living in Jack White's mind when The White Stripes first formed? You can see that same stripe/bar pattern not just in the Coca-Cola branding, but also in that famous cigarette brand with the "M" logo and their cowboy mascot. In this photo, Jack even seems to be smoking a bit like that cowboy:



Maybe at first, it was just his way of poking fun at certain stereotypes, but then it eventually turned into a full-blown advertisement. It’s hard to say... I don't know if Jack was parasitizing advertising to create a style that would later serve to extend the life of some new ad, or if the advertisement itself was parasitizing his mind, using him like a bacteriophage virus to churn out more commercials.

It looks like some kind of symbiosis, I guess.

Anyway, you can see how extreme these things can get elsewhere, like that situation where cute girls dressed in orange were kicked out of football stadiums in South Africa because people accused them of secretly advertising Bavaria beer. Since Heineken was the sponsor, they apparently demand that only their colors be visible. 😁

Kevin Bailey2 said:Has anyone actually found a cure for changing your perspective? 🤣

Look. What can I even tell you.
It’s basically an act of will.

In the end, everything boils down to "practice."
Order, hard work, and discipline.

Everything else is just an illusion... let's call it that.

Nothing happens without effort... in this case, "working on yourself."
Working on order.
Putting things where they belong.

The problem is you have to force your thoughts toward the positive.

How do you think you get overwhelmed by negative thoughts?
That was also a process... a long, drawn-out process... that a person just gives in to.
Because it's easy.
Going downhill? Oh, there's nothing easier.
Just tumbling like a ball... 🤣 and rolling straight down.
Great!!! 🤣

That's just a pile of trash that builds up inside a person.

First, you have to purge it all out, then start building from the ground up.
Because how are you going to build on top of trash?
No chance.

I'm sorry I have to be blunt with you... but you have to fight.
That's the whole philosophy.
The struggle.
And it's hard... and that answer doesn't sit well with everyone.
It's easier to just pop some Zoloft, Xanax, or Prozac... 😍

But what does that get you? Eventually, you aren't even aware of your own personality... so what did you actually achieve?

What do you really have if you don't have yourself?

Today you look up at the sky and think it looks gloomy.
You tell yourself: "Gloomy sky. It's going to rain. Wonderful. Perfect! It's all part of nature. Man, I love life."

Besides, you mentioned you don't want to wake up at 50 and realize you wasted your entire self.

Isn't that enough motivation for you?

You won't be here forever.
This life might be the only one you get.
Learn to appreciate it.
It's short. You wouldn't believe how short.

Maybe you should start... not tomorrow... but... hm... right now? Right this second?

Life is a struggle... I mean, that's one way to look at it, but there are other aspects too. Maybe "life is cooperation," or "life is administration," or even "life is love," I guess.

Humans are creatures driven by conflict, and sometimes you really do have to push for your own way, but then again, we also have reason and the ability to communicate. That allows us to understand, or maybe even internalize, someone else's perspective and adjust our own because of it.