A little bit of nagging and jealousy with confession of your sins. Being stabbed in the front as opposed to the back. Knowing things you could use to really screw them and then not doing.
You're a sensitive being and yet the world you live in is hellishly inconvenient. Spiritualism is that gap where you are nicer than your experience of the earth.
Convenience culture and the modern world where the environment is nicer/better than you are leads to first world problems of which spiritual but not religious is one. The starving try not to think about food for different reasons to the obese and that difference is the same difference between spiritualism and spiritual but not religious. In the former case spiritualism exists to endure what you lack, in the latter case it exists to ingrate you have.
It means postmodern. It's where we've ended up at the end of the machine age, weary and disgusted by, well, being advanced. Spiritual but not religious means artificial without the intelligence.
As far-fetched as it sounds we could be the most intelligent species in the universe. I'd wager there is life out there - single-celled organisms like amoeba.
I would say America always had a strong middle class because of the landgrab and later the world wars, that's what the republic stands on: Property-ownership and ease of opportunity. Security being easy to come by is why America didn't end up with a strongman leader. But that 300 year window where it was easier to be an American than anybody else is coming to a close.
And I say in the whole for a reason. I feel a whole lot differently about local voting, there are times and issues where the average man being overruled by the intelligent or by someone in a greater position of responsibility isn't the right thing to do.
It's a republic and a republic is the will of the people according to the opinion of an educated class whose say is worth more than yours. China is also a republic. Trump didn't win the popular vote but he won anyway because the system is rigged to devalue the vote of commoners. Meritocracy is not democracy although being undemocratic does not necessarily entail merit..
The best charismatics have the Jesus in them. The unhappy and the wretched of the earth, the true leader reaches down to the runts of the litter and inspires the weak and weary. The poor will always be with him, his main focus of attention is not necessarily the happy and the rich.
I can see why it matters a lot to women. The charmer is the manipulator you easily forgive and women need corruption, two-facedness and things not being as they seem. You have to be well-versed in the methods of deceit to succeed with woman and the charmer certainly is. Woman are all over the system of who you know/who you blow I’d said it before and I’ll say it again - women are not the builders of civilisation; they are it’s benefactors. Men might make most of the money in the world, but women spend it.
Anyway the charmer might be against fair play and merit and what constitutes a happy and prosperous civilisation, but he might step in front of a grizzly bear. To make amends for walking all over you and be at peace with mankind he might just give up his life for you. Because he does love you, you may have spoiled him in many ways that cause him not to show it or try very hard at life - particularly with an absent or weak father - however you’re quite right to feel that there’s something special about this person.
I guess the problem is that whilst you set standards for yourself the whole world sets you no standards. You won’t get that challenge or the sense of satisfaction, the love from other people leaves you powerless in a way. All you have to give for the kindness and low bars the human race has set for you, is guilt for dreaming.
All power corrupts and the style over substance power corrupts most of all.
Which isn’t to say the lovable rogue is a bad person per se only that what you forgive and allow often leads to a parasitic lifestyle in that person who can get away with murder. I’ve seen them turn to feelings of guilt and depression over their own corruption, it’s not ok that you’re ok with whatever it does no matter how low it is. It doesn’t want to get away with murder, a lot of people don’t want to be that guy.
In the old days everybody had keys to everybody else’s house because strangers were not expected. Insurance and surveillance do what being territorial once did in today’s cosmopolitan international, money isn’t connected to a place it doesn’t have roots it has status.
School mates were the best thing about school it was when I got older that I realised the point of learning anything. You stop me going out and having fun that’s the niche CS is for me, thrifty and can’t get roped into anything.
Nobody can know everything but there is an everything to know. Perfection exists beyond reach, the world could be a better place ten years from now. I mean obviously it won’t, but it could. In that way I believe in perfection and I deplore the premature discovery of quantum physics. Primitive tools leading to a completely stupid understanding of what’s actually there which has had important ramifications for the world culturally.
And it could be that women from peak cilvisation are the least impressed by that.
In the peasant days maybe she’d say “the antelope got away but look at that wonderful hut he’s built”. I do believe there’s a difference in skills between building the hut and killing the antelope and when these huts become fully-furnished flats, killing the antelope becomes everything.
I don’t know why they call it woman’s intuition when surely killing an antelope requires an instinctive “feel” for what it’s going to do next.
And that’s the point. A mans world teaches you to think practically and productively and this is different to the personal eugenic competition going on around women. We look and see child-bearing hips or we don’t see child-bearing hips and to a large extent this is the end of our testing phase. Not so for women, reading between the lines is the closest measure to being able to kill an antelope. Logic and reason are civilised but civilisation is temporary where peasantry is eternal, having the wits to survive the most challenging environment is what she’s testing you on. Women are not civilisation-builders per se, they’re the eternal gatekeepers of the gene pool.
And it makes you wonder what the bloody hell happened because these people were not so different to us once. Their grandfathers were at Dunkirk and Pearl Harbour just like ours.
The same as I would with anything else. The relationship might not have worked out but a nice pair of jeans is a nice pair of jeans, it’d be unfair to take it out on the jeans.
It wouldn’t leave room to silently judge who you are. Its just a test to show her you could give her babies that stand a chance, you should take it as a compliment.
ChesneyChrist Forum Posts (7,144)
RE: When do you know someone is exclusively yours?
Basically you let your guard down and see if you get punched in the face. The only way to know for sure if you can trust someone, is to trust them.