Is love really blind?

Drew Morgan said:They’re being downright primitive here—reducing everything to a simple "I would never do that" logic.

Essentially, he’s stripping his own arguments of any nuance just to avoid dealing with the actual variables at play.

There you go again... if you haven't noticed, people generally agree with my points, or at least don't see them as fundamentally different from their own logic. And no, I didn't carefully weigh every single word just to avoid hurting some fragile 🤣 ego... honestly, I feel bad for you.

The core issue is the argument that "most people" wouldn't act that way... but they actually wouldn't. The opportunists are the minority, not the majority, though many here seem to forget that.

Fine, what specific variables should I be considering? I tried to break down the reasons behind this opportunistic behavior, yet almost no one addressed it directly. I provided concrete examples, while most people here just engage in endless philosophy, seemingly thinking their words on a screen are somehow profound 😬... eventually, we even ended up talking about rabbits 😵 I think, so sorry... but I could easily say your takes on rabbits and other furry creatures 😁 are also based on ignoring a massive amount of variables...

Drew Morgan said:I already laid out exactly why that specific argument is flawed in another thread.

Go ahead, I'm all ears... at least until a moderator jumps in and starts making a fuss about us going off-topic.😛

I can't figure out how to link directly to a specific post. This is post #180 in that thread about the pole dancer. Here’s a snippet from it:

"The whole concept is fundamentally flawed; it attempts to force an unnatural hierarchy onto entities that shouldn't even be measured by the same yardstick."

Man, soul, just now saw your reply... or post, whatever. Better late than never, right? Keeping this brief so I don't end up bugging you with some endless back-and-forth over the next ten pages... 😉

Sean Cruz said:🤣
Self-confidence is essential. 🙂

Everyone loves only as much as they are capable of, knowing and being able to.

Is love blind? Well, I’d argue that love actually comes equipped with a microscope.
Passion, madness, or sheer frenzy—when you're caught in the middle of that emotional "wash," you can't be any other way. Now, why those emotions hit you with varying intensity is a different matter entirely and requires an individual approach. They are essentially obsessions; if you understand them theoretically, it's easier because you don't get quite as lost in the fray. It isn't even that strange. You know you need to reel it in, and you're willing to cooperate. Of course, there's a difference between experiencing such passionate loves in your youth versus later in life. Still, (or let's hope for most people, which I believe is statistically true from multiple angles) a person is more grounded. So, if those tornadoes hit, they are harder to endure, but easier to stop because you possess more wisdom (though, granted, if you lack it, my theory falls apart).

You know what I think? This emotional "wash" precedes actual love. We all have to go through this phase to realize whether we truly love and whether we are truly loved. Actual love arrives as a sense of calm.

Now, regarding pride, Sean Cruz mentioned it... In my view, within an "ideal" or "normal" partnership, pride is a useless thing because it evaporates through the cycle of giving and receiving. It becomes unnecessary fundamentally, not just conceptually. I assume you're thinking about insults and such, as you mentioned... but do you really think that is love? It isn't; you haven't reached it yet.
But playing games or turning your back on someone isn't exactly loving either, is it? Moderation... ugh. That's why people should ideally have one partner from beginning to end. It would be wonderful if we knew exactly who suits us and who would encourage us to change, just as we would encourage them—provided we were all aware of these dynamics, understood the theory, and had good mentors.

Naturally, pride fades and erodes over time. However, from what I gather here (I haven't read the specific thread on this), the issue is that people stay in relationships even when the other person treats them like a fool for years. Honestly, I can't wrap my head around that. If someone is intentionally humiliating you and expects you to take it, they don't love you. It's that simple, though people try to justify the behavior because they want to believe in something else. As for moderation, that is indeed best, but people tend to swing from one extreme to the other. Few manage to find the middle ground. I agree with the rest—the longer people are together, the better they know each other, it becomes less stressful, and they simply settle into a life together. Jealousy, pride, and everything else unnecessary in a "normal" relationship disappears. Provided, of course, the partners are compatible. And sulking? Well, I enjoy sulking occasionally—is there anything wrong with that?😁 🤣

Sure, I’ll apologize to all my exes (it’s always a good move). 🙂

What is there to apologize for?

Speaking of being suspended... one thing is for sure: it's easiest to manipulate someone who trusts you and is hungry for your affection. And you know how that goes with being sidelined... the less they give you, the more you crave it. It's a spiral. Usually, the people they end up with are folks who don't know how to give love at all, so it's just a never-ending loop.

Is there anything wrong with sulking? Depends on the person. For me, sulking gets on my nerves if it's actually about being hurt. I'm not apologizing for sulking, though, because that's just rude behavior and I'm not about that life.

Why apologize? It's always good to apologize when you feel the need to lighten your soul. 😉

silentpilot6 said:And you're hung up on why I called your avatar "sensitive"... 🤣...
Fine then... if I'm being "crude" and "primitive," I suppose those who would prioritize saving a rabbit over a child 😵 are just "enlightened" souls who have moved past such "limited" thinking... Good grief. If I had the choice to save a single child at the cost of every rabbit on Earth, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.

You're clearly a speciesist, because that's not how anti-speciesists think. Look at this example—it's just me being me. You're simply outraged by anything someone does that doesn't align with your own view.

...so what does it actually mean to be a total washout....
....(forgive an old lady who doesn't live in the States anymore)....

silentpilot6 said:There you go again... if you haven't noticed, people generally agree with my points, or at least don't see them as fundamentally different from their own logic. And no, I didn't carefully weigh every single word just to avoid hurting some fragile 🤣 ego... honestly, I feel bad for you.

The core issue is the argument that "most people" wouldn't act that way... but they actually wouldn't. The opportunists are the minority, not the majority, though many here seem to forget that.

Fine, what specific variables should I be considering? I tried to break down the reasons behind this opportunistic behavior, yet almost no one addressed it directly. I provided concrete examples, while most people here just engage in endless philosophy, seemingly thinking their words on a screen are somehow profound 😬... eventually, we even ended up talking about rabbits 😵 I think, so sorry... but I could easily say your takes on rabbits and other furry creatures 😁 are also based on ignoring a massive amount of variables...

The majority is completely irrelevant in a debate. If this world were a perfectly functioning machine, the majority criterion might hold water. In reality, that metric is nothing more than a wild goose chase.

silentpilot6 said:There you go again... if you haven't noticed, people generally agree with my points, or at least don't see them as fundamentally different from their own logic. And no, I didn't carefully weigh every single word just to avoid hurting some fragile 🤣 ego... honestly, I feel bad for you.

The core issue is the argument that "most people" wouldn't act that way... but they actually wouldn't. The opportunists are the minority, not the majority, though many here seem to forget that.

Fine, what specific variables should I be considering? I tried to break down the reasons behind this opportunistic behavior, yet almost no one addressed it directly. I provided concrete examples, while most people here just engage in endless philosophy, seemingly thinking their words on a screen are somehow profound 😬... eventually, we even ended up talking about rabbits 😵 I think, so sorry... but I could easily say your takes on rabbits and other furry creatures 😁 are also based on ignoring a massive amount of variables...

I did address it. You want a concrete example? Megashupandara was, for instance, a printer in one group, and a contrarian in another. He stated his individual reasons multiple times. pelin also went a bit deeper when analyzing his own motives.

Ultimately, the only truth is that every individual requires an independent study. Everyone has their own reasons.

Your explanation that it's just pure stupidity is overly simplistic and simply doesn't work.

Rebecca Scott3 said:...so what does it actually mean to be a total washout....
....(forgive an old lady who doesn't live in the States anymore)....

The term "unknown" was coined right here on Lonely Hearts. There’s a legendary "unknown" theme over there that has even leaked into other media outlets. If you read some of those stories, it’ll click for you.

To put it bluntly: being "unknown" means acting against all reason, spreading yourself thin like a welcome mat for a sadist in a toxic relationship.

Drew Morgan said:You don't need to take my word for it; just look around. You'll see the pattern everywhere. Every individual is different.

He does. He isn't stuck in a cage; he runs the show, and we even take him out to roam through the meadows. Honestly, his life is pretty much what he wanted when he was desperately trying to claw his way out of a box at Petco. I spotted him there and bought him on impulse. He was unique—you could see his drive for independence. Then again, how much can anyone truly claim to be free within the constraints of physical existence? In a sense, he’s freer than I am because he doesn't have to worry about survival. Of course, the trade-off is that we manhandle him sometimes, which he hates. We need some kind of payoff too; we aren't just here to be servants.😍

When I compare that to my friend who keeps her cats locked indoors "for their own safety" (she's not the only one)... well, that's selfish love. It's all about her ego, not them.

That sounds more like setting boundaries to protect your own autonomy, whereas breathing down someone's neck is a total disaster. Psychologists teach us that sacrificing your own freedom just to soothe someone else's excessive psychological needs leads to absolute chaos.

It's an excellent book—witty and brutal. It's only 60 pages and you can download it online. A great guy from the Philosophy forum recommended it to me.

I see that, but I also notice that people who can't have children tend to bond more deeply with pets. Then there are those who love animals but find it unthinkable to keep a pet confined indoors. I even see people abandoning children, abandoning pets... I observe all sorts of things, but in my value system, a love for a child simply cannot be compared to a love for animals.

Well, he isn't stuck in a cage; he runs wild around the house, and we actually take him out to the meadow for walks. Honestly, I think his life is pretty much what he imagined when he was desperately trying to escape his box at Petco. That's when I noticed him and bought him without any prior planning. He was special and different, clearly driven by a desire for freedom. Though, how much can we really talk about freedom within the constraints of material existence? In a way, he’s freer than I am because he doesn't have to worry about his own survival. Of course, he pays for that sometimes by being stubborn when we pick him up, which he hates. Dammit, we need some level of satisfaction too; we don't want to be mere victims.😍

When I compare that to my friend who keeps her cats locked inside just so nothing happens to them (and she's not the only one)... damn, her love is selfish. It's not about their needs.

This is moving into philosophy territory, and we've drifted quite far off-topic.

That would apply more to setting boundaries to protect your own freedom, but breathing down someone's neck is a total nightmare. Basically, certain types of people teach us that sacrificing our own liberty just to soothe a sick person's excessive psychological needs leads to absolute chaos.

That wasn't my point. I'm not looking to protect my own freedom; rather, I intend to set limits within my own freedom so that I don't hurt my partner. Surveillance, imposition, stalking, and things like that are completely absurd to me. Someone who wants to be with you will be, if they want to. If they don't, there is no way to force them. This is where I emphasize the importance of pride—you shouldn't trample over yourself for someone who treats you like a doormat. For someone who is worth it and respects you, primarily as a person, you'd walk through glass for them.
And everyone sets boundaries on their freedom for the sake of the other party, provided they respect and love the person they are with. You don't even necessarily have to love the person you're with, but mutual respect is essential for a "normal" relationship. Where those boundaries lie is something people can figure out for themselves from one relationship to the next, as there are no universal rules. It doesn't mean you and I have the same criteria regarding this matter—it's highly likely we don't.😁

It’s a fantastic read—witty, brutal, and only about 60 pages long. You can easily find a digital copy online. A dear friend from the Philosophy board actually recommended it to me.

I just downloaded it, but at first glance, it looks like one of those self-help books. Is that the vibe? I have a massive allergy to that kind of literature.

Gerald Ward61 said:Man, soul, just now saw your reply... or post, whatever. Better late than never, right? Keeping this brief so I don't end up bugging you with some endless back-and-forth over the next ten pages... 😉

Speaking of being suspended... one thing is for sure: it's easiest to manipulate someone who trusts you and is hungry for your affection. And you know how that goes with being sidelined... the less they give you, the more you crave it. It's a spiral. Usually, the people they end up with are folks who don't know how to give love at all, so it's just a never-ending loop.

Is there anything wrong with sulking? Depends on the person. For me, sulking gets on my nerves if it's actually about being hurt. I'm not apologizing for sulking, though, because that's just rude behavior and I'm not about that life.

Why apologize? It's always good to apologize when you feel the need to lighten your soul. 😉

Please, if you weren't going to bug me, we wouldn't be talking in the first place.🙂

Speaking of breakups: one thing is certain, it’s easiest to manipulate someone who trusts you and is hungry for your affection. And you know how it goes with these separations... the less they give, the more you crave. It becomes a cycle. Usually, the people they end up with are those incapable of giving love, so you're right back where you started.

I agree with everything here, especially the bolded part. Honestly, I find it fascinating how some people can't seem to break out of that loop. Sometimes it feels like even when they realize what's happening, they stay stuck. There are plenty of reasons for that, but personally, I'm all about cutting ties. It's not that I hold grudges—I tend to give people a lot of chances (sometimes way too many)—but if you see there's no point and you're just spinning your wheels without any progress, what's the purpose of staying in that relationship?🤷

Is there anything wrong with sulking? It depends on the person. For me, sulking gets on my nerves, provided it's actual sulking and not just being genuinely hurt. I don't apologize for sulking; it's rude behavior and I have no interest in supporting it.

🤣 I respect your take. In my case, it's usually about feeling hurt, though I'll admit I can be blunt sometimes, 😁 which is fair enough.

Why apologize? It's always good to apologize when you just need to clear your conscience.😉

I only asked because I only apologize when there's a chance people actually misunderstood me. If I am truly in the wrong, I don't see much point in apologizing; in those cases, an apology feels hollow. I'll admit I messed up, and that's that.

Sean Cruz said:Please, if you weren't going to bug me, we wouldn't be talking in the first place.🙂

Speaking of breakups: one thing is certain, it’s easiest to manipulate someone who trusts you and is hungry for your affection. And you know how it goes with these separations... the less they give, the more you crave. It becomes a cycle. Usually, the people they end up with are those incapable of giving love, so you're right back where you started.

I agree with everything here, especially the bolded part. Honestly, I find it fascinating how some people can't seem to break out of that loop. Sometimes it feels like even when they realize what's happening, they stay stuck. There are plenty of reasons for that, but personally, I'm all about cutting ties. It's not that I hold grudges—I tend to give people a lot of chances (sometimes way too many)—but if you see there's no point and you're just spinning your wheels without any progress, what's the purpose of staying in that relationship?🤷

Is there anything wrong with sulking? It depends on the person. For me, sulking gets on my nerves, provided it's actual sulking and not just being genuinely hurt. I don't apologize for sulking; it's rude behavior and I have no interest in supporting it.

🤣 I respect your take. In my case, it's usually about feeling hurt, though I'll admit I can be blunt sometimes, 😁 which is fair enough.

Why apologize? It's always good to apologize when you just need to clear your conscience.😉

I only asked because I only apologize when there's a chance people actually misunderstood me. If I am truly in the wrong, I don't see much point in apologizing; in those cases, an apology feels hollow. I'll admit I messed up, and that's that.

Man, Soul... do we really have to go there? It’s such a gorgeous day out and we’re all actually feeling pretty good... don't ruin the vibe. Honestly, let Legion and Vess find some way to make that fit into a life story or whatever, because all I can picture is just sitting in a dark basement... what a total waste of a good time. 😉

🤣 I value your take on this. Honestly, most of the time I just get super defensive... but yeah, sometimes I can be a total brat, too... 😁 What even is "is"...? Just a thought...

Look, I'm not exactly some untouchable saint, but I definitely know when being too blunt or honest is just... bad timing. Or at least, that's my take on it. Honestly, it's probably a good thing people have a hard time keeping up with me anyway. I tend to lean pretty heavily on sarcasm and weird metaphors to get my point across... or so I like to think... 🤣 😉 And if I screw up? Yeah, I'll own it. No excuses... just straight up admitting it. 🤣 😉
I don't know, man... talking about myself always feels a little ungrateful. I always end up tripping over my own feet when I try...

I only say sorry when there’s a chance people actually took me the wrong way... otherwise, what's the point? If I actually messed up, I don't see any reason to apologize. Honestly, saying sorry when you're clearly in the wrong feels totally pointless. I admit I'm wrong, and that's just that...

Look, saying Sorry actually means something... it’s not just some empty word people throw around for no reason. Seriously, just trust in ethics and morality if you have to... or go to God, I guess... 😉 Just feeling a little bit out of it today... maybe it's the coffee... or just life... who knows...

That’s not even what I meant... Look, I’m not trying to protect my "freedom" or whatever. It’s more like I’m setting boundaries within my own freedom just so I don't end up hurting my partner. All that stalking, hovering, and harassment stuff? Total nonsense. Purely absurd. If someone actually wants to be with you, they’ll be there. Period. If they don't, there isn't a magic trick in the world to force them to stay... And honestly, this is where pride comes in—you can't just let yourself get stepped on by someone who treats you like a literal doormat. Life is too short for that. When you find someone who actually matters, someone who respects you as a human being... man, you'd walk through glass for them. It's that simple. We all set limits on our own independence when we actually care about the person we're with. Heck, you don't even have to be head-over-heels in love, but if you want a "normal" relationship, mutual respect is non-negotiable. As for where those lines are drawn? That’s between you and your partner. There aren't some universal rulebook for this stuff. You and I probably don't even see eye-to-eye on where the limit is... and that's totally fine...

Man, this is spot on! 🙂 Honestly, I’m right there with you on this one. 🙂

Drew Morgan said:You're clearly a speciesist, because that's not how anti-speciesists think. Look at this example—it's just me being me. You're simply outraged by anything someone does that doesn't align with your own view.

I am appalled by things that are, to put it mildly, bizarre... like acting like a floor mat or using punching bags. Doesn't that strike you as odd?
To me, it’s just as strange that someone would value a rabbit as much as a human... yet to you, it's strange that someone might rather wipe out all the rabbits to save a single person...
What is the fundamental difference between you and me?
Are certain politicians strange or foolish? Well, some certainly are. Take those extreme ones, for instance—total oddballs. And since certain pundits have been exposed as liars, I won't even waste my breath on them.
As for being foolish... one can be born that way, 😬 which is the lesser evil. It isn't the person's fault. But one can also become foolish by simply switching off their own brain—which many politicians, especially those who have been in office for years, have done. They turned their brains off... is there anything intelligent about that? If it isn't intelligent, then what 😉
And please don't give me the "temporary lapse in judgment" excuse, because this hasn't lasted for a day or two, or even a month or two—it has gone on for years...

Drew Morgan said:The majority is completely irrelevant in a debate. If this world were a perfectly functioning machine, the majority criterion might hold water. In reality, that metric is nothing more than a wild goose chase.

I did address it. You want a concrete example? Megashupandara was, for instance, a printer in one group, and a contrarian in another. He stated his individual reasons multiple times. pelin also went a bit deeper when analyzing his own motives.

Ultimately, the only truth is that every individual requires an independent study. Everyone has their own reasons.

Your explanation that it's just pure stupidity is overly simplistic and simply doesn't work.

But how does this world function if not by the majority?

Think about what you consider the "majority" during the next presidential election 😉... or even when you're hanging out with your girlfriends, deciding where to go out, and most of them want to head to a specific spot...
Sure, the majority isn't always the deciding factor everywhere, but it is a criterion that is valid in many cases—not just valid, but decisive.

As for studying individuals... if we're talking about psychology 😬, does a psychiatrist or psychologist study every single person in total isolation? Of course they study the individual... but that specific behavior is always categorized within larger frameworks or groups that share certain behavioral patterns to allow for a "diagnosis."

soul says: ".. I guess people in relationships actually know where the line is drawn..." Unfortunately, most don't even realize they crossed it ages ago. The second you start feeling insecure, uneasy, or living in constant fear of being unwanted or abandoned—or if you feel like your concerns are just dismissed as baseless complaints—that’s the sign that the relationship is fundamentally broken.

So, some idiot asks you about someone you were seeing a year ago. If you don't want to give them a play-by-play (because, honestly, it's none of their business), they decide to go on a private investigation mission to separate fact from fiction. Then, they feed into their own delusions and end up accusing you of lying because you didn't volunteer details about who you slept with... then, in a fit of righteous indignation because you're a "liar," they decide to punish you by giving you the silent treatment for a week. What is there to even say to someone like that? They're just a total loser, and you're done. Permanently.

A lot of people would probably try to de-escalate, explain themselves, or justify this ridiculous behavior as just "jealousy" or "fear of losing you." They’d spend all their energy trying to prove their innocence through logic, waiting around until the offended party finally decides to be merciful and sends a text. It’s such a pathetic cycle. You see right through it; they only love themselves and their own ego. And maybe a few other vultures are just sitting there, waiting for His Majesty to deign to grace them with his presence. And when he finally does, they act like they've won the lottery. God, we really are suckers sometimes... 🤣

Gerald Ward61 said:Man, Soul... do we really have to go there? It’s such a gorgeous day out and we’re all actually feeling pretty good... don't ruin the vibe. Honestly, let Legion and Vess find some way to make that fit into a life story or whatever, because all I can picture is just sitting in a dark basement... what a total waste of a good time. 😉

🤣 I value your take on this. Honestly, most of the time I just get super defensive... but yeah, sometimes I can be a total brat, too... 😁 What even is "is"...? Just a thought...

Look, I'm not exactly some untouchable saint, but I definitely know when being too blunt or honest is just... bad timing. Or at least, that's my take on it. Honestly, it's probably a good thing people have a hard time keeping up with me anyway. I tend to lean pretty heavily on sarcasm and weird metaphors to get my point across... or so I like to think... 🤣 😉 And if I screw up? Yeah, I'll own it. No excuses... just straight up admitting it. 🤣 😉
I don't know, man... talking about myself always feels a little ungrateful. I always end up tripping over my own feet when I try...

I only say sorry when there’s a chance people actually took me the wrong way... otherwise, what's the point? If I actually messed up, I don't see any reason to apologize. Honestly, saying sorry when you're clearly in the wrong feels totally pointless. I admit I'm wrong, and that's just that...

Look, saying Sorry actually means something... it’s not just some empty word people throw around for no reason. Seriously, just trust in ethics and morality if you have to... or go to God, I guess... 😉 Just feeling a little bit out of it today... maybe it's the coffee... or just life... who knows...

That’s not even what I meant... Look, I’m not trying to protect my "freedom" or whatever. It’s more like I’m setting boundaries within my own freedom just so I don't end up hurting my partner. All that stalking, hovering, and harassment stuff? Total nonsense. Purely absurd. If someone actually wants to be with you, they’ll be there. Period. If they don't, there isn't a magic trick in the world to force them to stay... And honestly, this is where pride comes in—you can't just let yourself get stepped on by someone who treats you like a literal doormat. Life is too short for that. When you find someone who actually matters, someone who respects you as a human being... man, you'd walk through glass for them. It's that simple. We all set limits on our own independence when we actually care about the person we're with. Heck, you don't even have to be head-over-heels in love, but if you want a "normal" relationship, mutual respect is non-negotiable. As for where those lines are drawn? That’s between you and your partner. There aren't some universal rulebook for this stuff. You and I probably don't even see eye-to-eye on where the limit is... and that's totally fine...

Man, this is spot on! 🙂 Honestly, I’m right there with you on this one. 🙂

Nice comparison. I just found out that Legion is one of those rare moderators who actually gets thanked for doing an excellent job! Since he's clearly earning that lifetime membership, maybe there's one in it for me too. 🙂

You know what truly baffles me? 🤣 It’s hearing people claim that these socialites were just following their hearts, even though their partners weren't particularly talented, charismatic, or even attractive... let alone great in bed.
I could perhaps wrap my head around someone letting themselves be walked all over by a world-class supermodel who happens to be an Ivy League scholar and a total bombshell 😁... but many of these social climbers were being bossed around by the exact opposite. According to everything we read, some were even being dominated by guys who would struggle to find a date at a local dive bar, let alone in a high-end matchmaking service 😬

silentpilot6 said:You know what truly baffles me? 🤣 It’s hearing people claim that these socialites were just following their hearts, even though their partners weren't particularly talented, charismatic, or even attractive... let alone great in bed.
I could perhaps wrap my head around someone letting themselves be walked all over by a world-class supermodel who happens to be an Ivy League scholar and a total bombshell 😁... but many of these social climbers were being bossed around by the exact opposite. According to everything we read, some were even being dominated by guys who would struggle to find a date at a local dive bar, let alone in a high-end matchmaking service 😬

Man, and now people actually call that "love." It’s just pure, unadulterated masochism...

The Legion stands alone. It’s like a lone wolf facing a pack of hyenas—strength isn't found in numbers, but in conviction. The user says:
I find certain things frankly repulsive. Playing at being a doormat or using punching bags—it’s bizarre behavior. Don't you agree, Drew Morgan?

You’re being weird—period. If you think I’m the strange one, fine—I’ll just have to study them. ☕

silentpilot6 said:I am appalled by things that are, to put it mildly, bizarre... like acting like a floor mat or using punching bags. Doesn't that strike you as odd?
To me, it’s just as strange that someone would value a rabbit as much as a human... yet to you, it's strange that someone might rather wipe out all the rabbits to save a single person...
What is the fundamental difference between you and me?
Are certain politicians strange or foolish? Well, some certainly are. Take those extreme ones, for instance—total oddballs. And since certain pundits have been exposed as liars, I won't even waste my breath on them.
As for being foolish... one can be born that way, 😬 which is the lesser evil. It isn't the person's fault. But one can also become foolish by simply switching off their own brain—which many politicians, especially those who have been in office for years, have done. They turned their brains off... is there anything intelligent about that? If it isn't intelligent, then what 😉
And please don't give me the "temporary lapse in judgment" excuse, because this hasn't lasted for a day or two, or even a month or two—it has gone on for years...

I’ll admit we see things differently. I’m not surprised you’d burn the whole world to the ground just to save a single human being. You’re a racial specialist and an anthropocentrist—how could I expect anything else?

The Legion is a force to be reckoned with. It’s like a heavy artillery division rolling through an open field—unstoppable and absolute. Drew Morgan says:
Are those Megashupendaras weird or just plain stupid? Some certainly are. Take that Megashupendara guy—he’s a total freak among freaks. As for Pelin, he’s been exposed as a fraud, so he isn't even worth the breath it takes to mention him.
What does "stupid" even mean? You can be born an idiot. 😬 It’s the lesser of two evils. You can't blame that individual; anyone can become an idiot simply by choosing to switch off their brain. Plenty of Megashupendaras—especially those long-time Megashupendaras—have made a career out of it. Switching off your brain isn't exactly a stroke of genius, is it? And if it isn't smart, then what do we call it? 😉

They didn't just switch their brains off by choice; they hit some kind of bizarre neurological glitch. It’s strange to me, too—honestly, it's pretty intriguing.

Regarding Megashupendara, he isn't some oddball; he is an exceptionally organized and steady individual. As for Pelin, there is zero proof he ever lied. That’s just a baseless standard cooked up by that little clique from the USA—don't mistake their internal gossip for actual truth.

The Legion is an absolute joke. It’s nothing more than a disorganized mob masquerading as a force. Real power requires structure, not just noise. [Drew Morgan] says:
The concept of "temporary measures" is a joke. This isn't lasting a day or even a couple of months; we’re talking about years. It's like calling a permanent fixture a placeholder.

I’ve said it before—this isn't just the flu. It can drag on indefinitely depending on the individual.

silentpilot6 said:But how does this world function if not by the majority?

Think about what you consider the "majority" during the next presidential election 😉... or even when you're hanging out with your girlfriends, deciding where to go out, and most of them want to head to a specific spot...
Sure, the majority isn't always the deciding factor everywhere, but it is a criterion that is valid in many cases—not just valid, but decisive.

As for studying individuals... if we're talking about psychology 😬, does a psychiatrist or psychologist study every single person in total isolation? Of course they study the individual... but that specific behavior is always categorized within larger frameworks or groups that share certain behavioral patterns to allow for a "diagnosis."

The moment this world—which is supposedly run by the majority (though I don't buy that for a second)—actually starts behaving logically, then I'll concede that majority rule makes sense. Until then, common sense should always trump a headcount.

silentpilot6 said:You know what truly baffles me? 🤣 It’s hearing people claim that these socialites were just following their hearts, even though their partners weren't particularly talented, charismatic, or even attractive... let alone great in bed.
I could perhaps wrap my head around someone letting themselves be walked all over by a world-class supermodel who happens to be an Ivy League scholar and a total bombshell 😁... but many of these social climbers were being bossed around by the exact opposite. According to everything we read, some were even being dominated by guys who would struggle to find a date at a local dive bar, let alone in a high-end matchmaking service 😬

By the way, explain to me why letting a woman like that trample you would be okay? Does having social status just magically strip away your loser status? Is that how it works? If she’s important, suddenly you aren't a nobody? That logic is flawed.