BaylorPRSer

I have a lot of rage, but those episodes involving screaming and dropping f-bombs I keep in my private life. Last January, I had a moment where my rage was not private. I told my parents I am planning on moving to Vietnam and that my decision was final. I did not want to hear their views on why I should/shouldn't. Despite this they kept trying to make alternative suggestions. My Dad mentioned I move to upstate New York and live with my grandpa who was an Episcopalian priest. I snapped. I started screaming/shouting at the top of my lungs and remember saying: "You have never seen me. You have never understood me. You have never wanted to see me. I don't want to live with a fucking ex cult leader." I think I said a good bit more than that, but I can't remember. I was reflecting on the other day on how people have pointed out that I stammer/stutter/fumble my words sometimes. I then thought about that incident. I didn't stammer once. I went off like a geyser and as hateful, loud and over-the-top as it was, the language flowed out completely effortlessly. It's interesting to me because this indicates that there was something raw, pure and honest about what I was saying. However, the ability to feel intense things without acting out is an important skill. If I let my rage have it's way, it will get me into VERY SERIOUS TROUBLE. Right now I'm planning on moving to Vietnam, taking space and processing this among things thoroughly, but there's a voice in my head that says processing my rage isn't enough, expressing anger isn't enough, it wants me to completely and uninhibitedly unload everything on anyone I feel like has wronged me. I severed a relationship with a friend recently, but I did it in a respectful and classy sort of way. There's a part of me that still says I shouldn't have done it that way. That maybe, "you're a fucking douche bag and you represent everything that I hate was the way to go."

I listened to the "Atheist Apologizes to Christians" call in show. I saw on the boards some people say they "reached a cornerstone" or made peace with their religious histories and relationships with religious people. I feel envious because I did not feel myself reaching a cornerstone. I feel every bit as angry as ever. In the call, Stef mentioned that he hadn't given Christians enough credit in the past. He mentioned the community aspects, the cooking dinners when other churchgoers were sick, etc. There happen to be a lot of people who identify as Christians who do a lot of laudable things such as selflessly helping others in the community, charity, volunteering time and energy, etc. I get all of that, but can't other organizations say that as well? What if a local Ku Klux Klan chapter was taking care of each other and participating in community service. Should i hold back on my disdain for their racism because they do certain things well? I guess it wasn't possible for me to reach a cornerstone here because I was raised in a network of Christians and observed the positive characteristics mentioned in the call to the point where I don't need reminding of them. I even went on a trip with a Christian organization called Family Legacy to Zambia where they are getting orphans off the streets, taken care of and educated. I even donated for a time and may donate again. I don't like that Family Legacy indoctrinates the children, but I'd rather them safe and indoctrinated than growing up on the streets where they'll be drunks at best and are very likely to get AIDS. I'm aware of the positive stuff. No matter how much i remind myself of it my hatred burns. The guilt, shame, the breaks from reality, the repression around sex, all of it wounded me deeply. My roommate in college had a pastor for a dad. Toward the end of the year he mentioned being unsure if he believed anymore and started to think that "god is chaos and only shows up when you don't need him." His approaching the acceptance that he was lied to must have been awful given how he adored his dad. I've mentioned him on this site before, but he hung himself on my ceiling fan at the end of the year. He had other issues as well of course, but all of them seemed to be in the realms of low self-worth and girls. 2 areas that I and TONS of other Christians struggle with to varying degrees. I've wandered for 6 years what a healthy and reality-based upbringing would have yielded in my roommate and myself. If instead of a religious family what if he had a reality-based upbringing with a healthy and balanced approach to self-worth and intimate relationships? What if he were raised without all of this shame-based bullshit and repressive nonsense? Deep down, I don't know if it is in my best interests to ever trust a Christian again. Anything positive a Christian has done can be attributed to human action, not God, as he or she will insist. Christians don't live in reality. I am glad the man in the call is doing what it takes to take care of his family, but after I wiped away the tears that call produced, I felt my seething hatred of religion come back to the surface as it is wont to do.

Thank you Kevin. Good review.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Philosophers-Toolkit-Compendium-Philosophical/dp/1405190183 Has anyone here read this? Is it worth reading?

I didn't know what to make of that line "you are entitled to nothing" because Frank Underwood is a villain after all, so is the show portraying that as an evildoer's way of thinking? I took the pissing on his father's grave as acknowledging the role bad parenting played in the development of Frank into a sociopath.

Basically, a 30 year old having sex with a consenting 9 year old isn't wrong it's just gross. You may be right, but all I can say is that my gut tells me there's some sort of philosophically rigorous way to argue that it's immoral. I'm not coming up with anything concrete though, so I may very well need to accept that it's APB.

This came up for me because I was mentioning how the morality Christians attach to sex is troubling to me. I made the case that with rape, it's not the sex that's wrong, but the initiation of force that makes it wrong. Somebody then brought up statutory rape. You guys provided some good answers, but I didn't provide any frame of reference. Now that I have, I'm curious if you have anything else to add . . .

I listened to UPB, but it was at work, so my reading comprehension was not at its max. Could someone remind me how UPB couches statutory rape? I'm talking about consensual sex between a 30 year old and a 10 year old or something like that. Can you argue that it's the initiation of force because a 10-year-old isn't emotionally mature enough to actually give consent?

i feel the same way RJ, but I've recently discovered just how much I enjoy going to the movies alone. It's become one of my favorite things to do. So few people have ever gone to a movie theater by themselves because they feel uncomfortable or think it's too loner-like. When you think about it though, why would you want to go to the movies with someone? You're not supposed to be communicating, you're supposed to watch the movie. I definitely agree with you though. I love showing one of my favorite movies or bands to someone and having that person like it. It just feels good.

Excited to check out these vids guys. What I think now about meditation and the mecosystem is that meditation is a trick for accessing the self. Meditation I think correlates with IFS in that when you get in the habit of clearing your mind, you effectively are habitually unblending from your protectors. I think the follow up work is what Eckhart Tolle might be less keen on. After you unblend (in Tolle's context this would be redirecting to the object of meditation) what you do from there is up to you. Now that you're in self you can objectively examine the protectors you were blended with without getting flooded. I think meditation trains you to stay in self, but the follow up self-examination while you are in self is where the IFS comes in. Is that making sense?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/09/hans-hermann-hoppe/smack-down/ Have you read this? Hoppe, an anarcho-capitalist, self-identifies as a right libertarian. I always thought libertarianism was neither left nor right. Anyway, curious of your thoughts on this piece.

Email [email protected]. Please mention that Chris from FDR referred you. She's fantastic and affordable. Your friend will get a free consultation, so he or she can decide if they're compatible and work out pricing. Cheers, Chris

Does she self-identify as anti-feminist?

And I gather you don't see that incident as something affecting the price very much/at all.

Could the feds snatching up Ross Ulbricht's bitcoins have put downward pressure on the price as well? I'm assuming they cashed out as soon as soon as they were in possession of them.

I have limited experience with IFS, but my limited and recent experience has definitely resulted in positive behavioral changes. I had a part that was causing me to second guess myself and I did some IFS work with it the other day and it told me to "work on identifying valid and invalid second guessing". I am now on a journey of identifying my impulses that get me what I want out of life vs impulses that leave me unhealthy, unsatisfied and unproductive. Shit's trippy man, do your best to hang on in these sessions. Also, don't be discouraged if you don't feel super connected to your protectors in the beginning. You'll be able to journey deeper and deeper with time. I hope some more advanced cats chime in on this thread

Hey I live in Houston. I'd love to meet you and any other Austin-based Freedomainers sometime. Let's stay in touch. I do occasionally visit Austin, so if I'll hit you up next time I'm planning a visit. Feel free to do the same if you're in Houston! I've got 2 FDR buddies here as well. Cheers, Chris

I checked out the power of now, but didn't finish it. Interestingly enough, I meditated for the first time in a month today. I intend to meditate daily and will report with anything I notice. I also began a book on IFS and have a therapist who is influenced by IFS. I've noticed some results. I'm not quite as consumed with my burdens or "blended" with protectors as I used to be. My renewed commitment to healing has also brought some very intense feelings to the forefront of my mind. I view this as positive as I know that I'm actually working through my traumas, but sometimes it can make being present difficult. I feel meditation may be a way to help me relax even in the midst of fully experiencing past traumas. My commitment to healing has also led me to decide to move to Vietnam and teach English. I will be able to work less and be free from a lot of distractions and triggers I have here n the states that slow down my healing. I'm hoping that taking space for healing will provide me a self-knowledge boost giving me some much needed clarity on some terrifying questions I have. I won't be in Vietnam until fall unfortunately.

Do you think you would enjoy yourself? If it sounds like fun to you, go for it. I have friends that do open carry rallies where they walk around Houston openly carrying rifles. Do I think they're helping the movement? No. Hurting the movement? Nah, but when I see photos of them in my news feed their smiles are cheek to cheek. I'm happy they take pleasure in the activity. I'd feel the same way about you getting involved in the libertarian party. Do it if you think there's a high probability it will make your life better. If you have mixed feelings about whether or not that's the case . . . eh, skip it. Do it/don't do it out of rational self-interest is my vote

Would you say that although we don't automatically differentiate between our self and our parts it can be learned through self knowledge? Once you've developed this could you then get better at accepting the reality of others acting in ways that you don't like?

"one ought to speak up if they want to be heard" that should actually say if "he or she wants to be heard" instead of they, correct? Just a grammar sanity check for myself, not super important haha. Good stuff guys. So I guess 'I' is in a sense, the self. However, your hands are separate from the self. The self can interface with different organs via the nervous system, but they are not the same thing. In the IFS sense, your parts are separate from the self and the self can interact with these parts. Because they are separate, then we can say it's likely that when one thinks "you are/were" that it is the self communicating with one or more parts (you can also be plural). A part(s) separate from the self ("I") is being addressed, so you makes sense. Could "you" also be a part doing the talking and the self would be an addressee. "You" would also make sense in that context as well. Also, "we" would make sense in that context if multiple parts are addressing the "self". I'm worried I'm going to tangle myself up if I think about this too much haha.

I was in my gym's sauna and introspecting last week and I had a thought that went like this "so you're in this situation with your mother". For some reason it really jumped out at me that I used the words "you are" instead of "I am". "I" is the correct word as it refers to the speaker, but "you" is also correct because it refers to the person being addressed. Am I over thinking this? It really took me away from what I was thinking about. All I could think about was, "am I introspecting correctly? Does this matter at all? Why is it that "I" seems slightly more logical, but "you" feels more natural?"

Hello Freedomainers, This post is to encourage anyone in his or her endeavor to connect with fellow members of this community as well as those who possess self-knowledge. I've had 3 dinners with two gentlemen from this community, Nathan Hoffner and Nathan Diehl. The very first conversation was absolutely mind-blowing and each subsequent conversation was superior to the previous. I found both of them to be incredibly intelligent and insightful as well as riveting to listen to. Funny thing, there is actually a Liberty on the Rocks chapter in Houston. I've been to several meetings and enjoyed shooting the shit and listening to the speakers. I've even hung out with a few of them outside of LOTR meetings. The conversations and experiences with libertarians at LOTR do not hold a candle to my conversations with the Nathans. I don't think we talked about the state at all honestly. We talked about way more interesting stuff, and it was incredibly refreshing and beneficial. Just posting this in case any of you are thinking about attempting a meetup. Pull the trigger! I can't guarantee they'll be as fascinating as the Nathans, but even if they're less advanced than you, be open to the idea that you can still learn from them! And if you're out in BFE, Skype with someone! Much love, Chris

I've encountered race-baiting libertarian lefties involved with SFL as well. It's frustrating.

JT wrote a piece the other day saying his New Year's Resolution was to "take back the word 'liberal'". Why he cares at all about that is beyond me. I get that classical liberalism is different than liberals today, I just don't see how it has any bearing on setting us free.