LovePrevails

a good use of time.

I wish I had the writing addiction right now love writing but hard to get started, sometimes I can keep going forever look forwards to seeing your work welcome to the board

At the risk of seeming terribly vague it seems to me that masculinity is, at leasst to some degree, an abstract and therefor it means what people define it to mean as a man I am more concerned with what my masculinity means to me I love it when I feel "strong, centred and in my masculine" - I feel I enjoy being a man then sometimes when things get tough I lament the fact there is such a taboo on male vulnerability in our society Do we have to impose clearly defined positions on what a abstracts such as masculinty are? Or is it better they remain fairly subjective and we can explore what they mean to us personally?

the main problem is that the shooter couldn't rationally will it to be universal law that all disputes over Kantian ethics be solved by pistol.

Many a time I have wanted to extract a pistol and fire during a philosophical discussion of this enlightenment philosopher.

Hi I have some suggestions, would you like to Skype? my user name is amashaman I used to not think any girl would ever like me as anything more than a friend and now I am glad to say since I have improved my self-esteem, communication skills, assertiveness, confidence and mental state I always have reasonable options when it comes to women. I have adorable female friendsand have had some good luck with romantic partners in the past, but I used to be in the habit of self-sabotage when it came to those kinds of things. I have luckily overcome that damaging repitition compulsion. I would love to speak to you more. Some basic suggestions you can start off with to improe your confidence is desensitisation. I think a great way to overcome the feal of social anxiety is to go stand at the mall at a weekend day and try and hold eye contact with everyone who passes, if you can hold eye contact and not feel nervous that is a great start, if you want to break eye contact, break it to the side! not down which projects low self-esteem and makes you feel low self-esteem Once you have mastered this try saying "hi" to some people in a friendly way as they pass maybe 70% will say hi and keep walking, 20% will ignore you and 10% will say something back soliciting a response this all goes to retrain you that the world is not a scary place and most people are friendly if you start enjoying this, then you can move on to some small talk "I was wondering if you'd seen any good movies lately? I wanna go to something tonight" I know small talk isn't very soul enriching but it's a great way to practice overcoming social anxiety by getting lots of practice talking to people it will pave the way for feeling comfortable in more deep and meaningful interactions ok I hope this helps best of luck to you, Antony

that is badass!

Growing up in my late teens most of my friends were older than me, I grew up with two siblings one 6 year old, one 9 years older this gradually changed through my early 20s Now I am the usualyl the oldest member in my main group of associates which ranges from around 19 to 27 with people at all posts in between, although my flatmate is older than me by a good whack and I have other older friends also, I know this thread is more about romantic relationships, but I just want to say this rich age range in my associations has proved to be extremely enriching both to me and my friends - we benefit from bring one anothers experience of being at such-and-such an age at this time in history, I bring some experience, wisdom and self-knowledge tips, the younger members bring freshness and contemporary views. It's a truly excellent arrangement, I highly recommend having a group of friends that fill in an age range of a decade.

quotes on any particular topics?

why don't you record these shows and make a show out of them so others can benefit?

perhaps a better home for Stefan than wikipedia, which keeps removing any reference to Stefan as a "philosopher" you know how elitist those lefties are when it comes to applying "their" words http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page anyone care to start off his page?

funnnehhhh http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLmY3FtSr9U

Extras was one of the best shows out in ages, but I guess that's another character flawed male what would you like to see in British comedy?

Hi Dan, and welcome, hope you enjoy being part of the community and your learning brings you happiness. See you on the board!

let me know when you have a space for that collab

I see oyu reposted it Michael, that was quick! Cheers - nice knowing that it will be seen

Tasty excerpt, please repost on social media etcc.

that was funny

came across it by mistake, a bit of a laugh http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEzY-ZU59cg

some people I pick up where I left off, others i have nothing left in common with!

I would say the price of housing is likely to drastically fall over the next years due to state debt, decreasing income etc. when people can't afford the rent the landlords will have to bring it down which will mean the value of houses will come down plus they may raise interest rates which will make it less easy to buy on credit which will lower the value the value is artifically inflated due to years of government tampering with itnerest rates and printing money sad to say we came out last, if we were around in the late 70s we could have bought lots of property and sold it in the that 90s but there you go, they sold us off

Would anyone care to expand on this? Any more historical context could prove useful I may add a section on this to my book.. Robert: What is the difference between a right anarchist and a left anarchist? Antony: Left anarchism, which was the common usage of the term up until recently, is a political philosophy very closely related to communism, with the central socialist principle that workers should own the means of production. Having bosses run businesses or capitalists own the means of production is considered to be expploitative and hierarchical, wheras right anarchists see these relationships as acceptible so long as they are voluntary: if employees can agree to contractual terms, quit any time they like, unionise except where probhibited by voluntary agreements, etc. it is considered that the bosses are providing value by organising the work force, and capitalists are providing value by anticipating the market, organising production in terms of demand, and risking their investment (and also their property where uninsured, as the state would not exist to give them limited liability in the form of a Ltd. corporation or Plc.) Right anarchists are not opposed to workers owning their own workplaces as long as this is organised by mutual agreements and voluntary interactions rather than imposed by violations of property rights (eg. workers getting a loan from the bank to buy out bosses and owners.) Right anarchism is a more recent development but it can also be traced back to Baukunin who is seen as influential to both schools as an anarchist. It's more of an extension of American libertarianism, with the central principle being the NAP - ie. Thou shalt not initiate the use of force - no violence or theft, including taxation, as a rule, although levies for public goods could be extracted through a system of social pressure, ostracism, and refusal to engage in collective buying for people who did not pay their share (eg. If you don't pay your share for street lights you can expect to have to make your own arrangements for garbage collection as well.) Government regulation would similarly be be replaced by a system of insurance companies or cooperatives (often referred to as DROs - dispute resolution organisations) who were financially incentived to solve problems before they occurred instead of being called upon to respond after the fact (like police, government fines, universal sick care, fire fighters, climate taxes etc. and all government services which are called upon only when a problem has all ready arisen.) These companies would lose money through payouts when they failed to protect their clients from harm or loss of property, which would encourage them to develop preventative measures and disincentives to criminals which would be constantly optimised through competition on the free market - whichever organisation was most effective as preventing harm or loss would gain the greatest market share, if someone advanced on their developments they would become lucrative, and if any such company got "too big for its boots," or abused its authority, its clients would have the option to pick another service provider, rather than remain at the behest of a state monopoly for provision of this service. Left anarchism tends to focus more on problems of capital and capitalism, much like state socialists do. Right anarchists tend to talk primarily about the problems of statism, those which are created or exacerbated by governemnt, and they therefor tend to have the most convincing arguments for the abolition of states. Despite coming from different angles, both agree that the state is based on force or the threat of force for its existence, that the state is a tool wielded by the ruling class for unfair advantage over everyone else, and that corporations and corporatism are products of statism which allow the rich to privilege from privatizing gains and socialising losses, which is immoral. All forms of anarchists acknowledge that where there are rulers there can be no rules, as rulers by their very nature, make themselves the exception to the rule. Anarchists are egalitarians, no special privileges for law-makers or corporations. If you kill, harm, steal, or damage someone else's property, you are to be held personally liable for it - not the state (tax payer) or corporation (consumer/share-holder) - you personally. There is to be no hiding behind institutions which are mere abstractions of the mind in anarchy. This implementation of this moral hazard for the privileged is meant to do away with much of the corruption, cronyism, and war crimes which are part and parcel of statist societies. So some common ground between the two despite philosophical difference on very key points. For example, left wing ideals such as workers running their workplaces are thought by some to be more likely under right anarchism that statism, since the public education system trains children for individualism and competition, but the evidence on how individuals learn best is in favour of a cooperative learning environment. Without the kind of schooling which is prevalent and imposed by the state (which right anarchists are strongly opposed to) children would be raised with lots of experience of cooperation and mutualism, and so would more likely to create workplaces that capitalised on those skills than top-down hierarchies which follow the prevalent pattern of schooling and parenting.

Sounds good Wesley, I am willing to be a compiler, I have writter 100+ reviews of plays as a theatre critic, had articles published and magazines and an academic papers presented at a conference, I have also written two short non fiction books (unpublished) and edited work for friends, so I think I might be a good person - but I'm willing to be fired if cast into doubt

Could this community not write a book called How To Defoo? I know it's majorly controversial but people here have a lot of experiences here they could tlak about their challenges, victories, successes, where they went wrong I would be happy to be one of the editors, and contribute a couple of sections on emotional handling/communication approaches I am an experienced writer and part of my work is as a communication coach so I think I could help it can go through (some suggestions please add) - what is deFOOing - why you should/shouldn't - a checklist of things you should think about (rate on a 1 to 5 scale to see if you really want to?) - if you've decided to, communication skills for doing it - how to do the process what do you think? is this worth doing

welcome, so glad you could join us.