tjt

Sorry about all this. I was just reading through MattGrimes response and it really hit me... look at this enormous burden your friend has placed on you. Even though your friend did not cheat on you, I believe you have every right to be very angry with his actions leading up to this point. I don't know what you should do (getting angry is a start), but the others in this thread have offered very rational advice that I think is very much worth studying and stewing on.

Nope, that's not me. It's someone else I couldn't read music if my life depended on it.

Is this question for me? I'm sorry, I don't know exactly what you mean.

Wow, I really appreciate this conversation, it's so great! Although I became angry while listening to it, now I feel very optimistic. I don't have any illustrations, because for me dinner time was torturous growing up. The usual "you can't leave the table until your plate is clear," followed by spankings and punishment. I had a very sensitive and problematic digestive system growing up (probably IBS), so I preferred only certain foods, but my parents did not understand this (or chose to ignore it). I remember distinctly once being given the 'choice' between finishing all of the food on my plate or finishing a glass of milk (which I absolutely hated, and it's probable that I was also mildly lactose intolerant as a child). I opted for the milk and I remember sitting for hours at the dinner table alone, staring at the glass of milk and crying my eyes out... until my dad became distracted by the t.v. and my mom finally dumped the milk and gave me something else to eat. Ok, so that's why I was angry (luckily I have a healthy relationship with food today... not so much with my parents). But, now I'm feeling optimistic and am confident that I can break the cycle when I have children. These tactics are so cool! Thanks to the three who pulled this conversation together! I wanted to share another tactic that I've never implemented, but sounds good in theory. Why not get the kid interested in cooking and preparing the meal with the parents? That way, they could help out a bit, learn some culinary skills and it will be a great opportunity to demonstrate the work that goes into that meal. Then you can help them to see eating the meal for what it is, which is reaping the benefit of the work put into preparing the meal. I don't know if I've articulated my idea clearly, but hopefully. Back to LovePrevails original post, I'm looking forward to illustrations that people are willing to share!

This! You gotta learn the connection between your physical health and emotional health, otherwise you probably won't experience sustainable results. As you seek self awareness and understand your emotional state, there are so many ways to start chipping away and improve your physical health. When it comes to exercise, it's about finding the style that is right for you. For me, it's working physical activity into my daily lifestyle (I seldom have a planned workout routine, I prefer long and brisk walks (3-6 miles 3x/week), hikes, working in the garden, outdoor improvement projects around my property, etc.). And remember that diet has greater and longer lasting effects than exercise alone. Eliminating processed foods completely is a trip! VERY difficult in the beginning, but so worth it. To avoid processed foods, quit eating out (as other folks have suggested) and shop only the perimeter of the grocery store. Start reading the list of ingredients on everything you buy (it's way more important than the nutritional label). To avoid failure, create weekly meal plans. And whatever you do, don't cut healthy fats out of your diet... replace poisons like vegetable oil, canola oil, corn oil etc. with things like butter (if you tolerate lactose), ghee, coconut oil, lard, etc. And for god's sake, do not follow the food pyramid. That thing is government funded, and it recommends eating way too many friggen grains! The fact that it's taught in public school is reason enough to disregard it Research the Weston A. Price Foundation (you could start here http://www.westonaprice.org/know-your-fats/), and consider getting ahold of the following books (my bibles): Gut and Psychology Syndrome by Natasha Campbell McBride Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon And you go man! (And just so you know I'm not talking out of my ass, my BMI is 19... although I don't know if BMI is still a meaningful measurement as it used to be considered.) Edit: Wanted to also add that I don't have any personal experience with weight loss, but my SO eats identical to me. And even though he has always been considered fit, he actually lost about 15-20 pounds when we changed our way of eating 1.5 years ago. His weight has stayed consistent since and he says he feels better than ever.

That's a great idea.

This is not specific to Wiltin's complaints or his previous actions, and I admit I haven't read this whole thread here yet. But I have had some concerns with the reputation system myself. I don't mind that it 'flags the road hazards,'(I can take the rating into account as I decide if the majority vote is accurate or not) but it bothers me that at one point ALL of the person's posts are hidden (if I am understanding the system correctly)... even posts that would be considered logical, rational or generally helpful will be hidden because of down-votes received on other unrelated posts. I'm sure I've skipped over many informative posts just because I didn't see them (I understand that is my fault for not keeping an eye out, but it would be nice if I didn't have to seek out hidden posts when I'm ebbing and flowing through a thread). The function of hiding user's posts because of their reputation is an unnecessary step beyond just putting a red flag by the user name, in my opinion. I like being able to read all posts openly without having to unhide them... even if they do end up being retarded and a waste of my time. It was my choice to read past the first sentence. So, I guess it would be nice to let the reader decide if they will continue reading past the first sentence (the rating system suffices, no need to hide all of that user's posts). And now I'm crossing my fingers, hoping that I don't get any down-votes for this post

I would say it's codependency that's considered love. Or they think that just being family means love.

I am also looking for a movie that Stef mentioned, but it's the one he did the screen writing for (and maybe he directed it too). Anyone know more about this film and where I can find it? Hope you don't mind that I'm tagging my question onto your thread, Slavik.

I was thinking earlier of a similar example, in which I was trying to think of an analogy of when responsibility shifts from the parent to the child of that parent. My analogy I came up with is: You are carjacked and the perp drives you hundreds of miles from your destination. Then he suddenly pulls over, and gets out of the car and leaves you there. Then it becomes your responsibility to get back to where ever you need to be. This is my analogy for taking responsibility for the dysfunction that your parents and other aspects of your childhood caused you. If you continue acting dysfunctionally, for example treating people horribly because that's how you were treated, then you're essentially driving the car in the same direction that the carjacker drove it. But if you analyze why you are prone to treating people horribly and work to reverse it, then you've taken control over the car again and you will not continue in the direction that the carjacker was driving. Based on this analogy (which I came up with before ever reading this post) in combination with DaVinci's thought experiment where I'm replacing Man A with a child and Man B with the parent, are you guys saying that if someone was horribly abused as a child (the carjacker (parent) drugged him and blind folded him as in DaVinci's example) and the person is so completely lost and disoriented, then it will always remain the responsibility of his parents and he needn't take over responsibility for his own life at some point? I'm just wondering, because usually around this place we call FDR, it's common belief that a person is responsible for their own behavior once they become an adult, whether or not their lives were carjacked by fucked up people as a child. Which I ascribe to believing as well.

Erik, I'm sorry to hear about your struggles. I just wanted to add a few observations. Something doesn't settle with me about this statement. Wuzzums says that you need to focus on yourself entirely in an attempt to get her back. Well that doesn't sound like entirely focusing on yourself, because the motive is to get her back which is not an intrinsic motivation. If you pursue self knowledge to get her back, you don't have control over the outcome... she may or may not come back to you after all of that work you did. And if you put forward all of this energy and work thinking that it would bring her back to you, you will be broken inside when it doesn't work... because you tried to control something that you couldn't. But if you let go of that relationship, and your motive becomes to improve yourself, then you do have 100% control over the outcome. Which is why I agree with Xelent: Also, you said that your ex is nurturing, however you didn't demonstrate this while describing the current situation. In fact, she sounds like quite the opposite of nurturing, which is defined as: to support and encourage, as during the period of training or development You say that she is nurturing, but provided so many counter examples to that statement. She did not exercise patience with you nor did she help you discover things about yourself, rather she gave you an ultimatum demanding you go to therapy or else. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but it seems to me she was not curious as to why you were procrastinating or avoiding therapy. Curiosity would have been a nurturing attempt to support and encourage you to do what's best for you. Instead, she took it personally and tried to shame you by saying that "you won't go to therapy, therefore you don't prioritize me." That's not a good way to try to help or nurture someone... in fact she was actually attacking you. So I think you may be blinded by the propaganda and are having trouble seeing the truth in this relationship, because what you have described is NOT a nurturing woman.

Indeed. Haha, I'm insulted that you use the word hippie to describe this unnatural mutant. Hippies do not wear sequence and lip sync to Disney songs! And the paddle would most certainly be hand-carved from a renewable resource such as bamboo if this monster were a hippie.

I believe marriage is either coercion by the state, religion, or your family. My partner does as well. Coercion by the state - there are tax benefits to being married... as if to say "get married, and we'll give you some more scraps, you slaves... but you have to pay us for a piece of paper first, fools" Coercion by religion - you must be married in order to live together and get it on, otherwise you will burn in hell for eternity Coercion by the family - you gotta get married, because it's tradition... I am defooed and he does not serve the desires of his family Being an anarchist and atheist, I've never heard a good argument for getting married... not even from Stef (I've heard him say two reasons for marriage -- one being that if one person decides to move locations, you must follow them because you are married. Not convincing at all. And my apologies, but I can't remember the second one I've heard from him, but I remember not being convinced.) My partner and I have made verbal commitments to one another multiple times, and we demonstrate our commitment every day. There is no need for us to be married at this point in time. Really, the only reason we have been able to come up with in support of marriage, is that when we start having children we would want to make it easier on them so that they don't have to explain to people why their parents are not married. But yet again, this is not a very good reason to get married... to make it easier for your child to conform. My strongest argument for marriage is the symbolism of taking his name. It represents something that is voluntarily shared, and symbolizes a family unit that is tied together. But symbolism again is not based in virtue or rationality. Our outlook on marriage is always evolving and we talk about it often, but it just doesn't make sense right now. What about you... can you think of any solid, rational reasons for marriage? Absolutely not, it's pretty messed up. Thank you for this analysis, I completely agree. It makes me sad that I was driven to this point, but I certainly take responsibility now. Being aware of this dysfunction is a major step, and now with that awareness I am taking actions to change. The specific steps I'm taking, and seem to be working, are: Not being ashamed to ask genuine, honest questions... or questions that might cause people to feel 'defensive' Maintaining a sense of curiosity in my discussions with people, rather than following their lead (meaning that I normally read into the way they are saying something... if they feel good about it, then I must feel good about... if they feel bad, then I must feel bad)... so, instead I am trying to remain unbiased and listen to my own internal reactions to what they are saying rather than jumping on their bandwagon and blindly agreeing with or reinforcing what they are saying. Hopefully that's not confusing. Being patient with my own responses and reactions (really just skipping that step of automatically jumping on their bandwagon... slowing down and contemplating what is actually being said and how I actually feel about it) The benefit of these steps, also, is that it will make it easier for me to identify case by case if: I am the source of my dishonesty - in which case, I would be able to resolve by taking these steps to achieve acting on my real self They are the source of my dishonesty - in which case, they are not responsive and respectful of my true self, and then I will be able to recognize that they are toxic to be around... and are an obstacle to my own improvements... therefore I'd be able to move on from them Sorry if this all seems fluffy, hopefully it's clear. Again, I really appreciate your honest analysis. It's good to hear that truth in words that are different from my own. Thanks again, Lians. Feel free to keep sharing your thoughts, I find them valuable.

Ah, now I see. I understand, thank you for clarifying. You have a good point around the connectedness between child and parent, but I still believe that spanking can get the parent the results he desires in the short term. I guess I'm applying a bit of a utilitarian analysis, in that it might be emotionally challenging the first couple of times the parent does it, but the 'benefit' of winning control over the child outweighs the 'pain' that it causes the parent, from their dysfunctional, messed up perspective. For example, just watch this insanely disturbing confessional of a parent who is proud of the results that using a paddle on her child has had. (OH NO, the video is now private! That is no surprise... these people feel the need to hide. Anyways it was posted on this thread, and really demonstrated the points I'm trying to make: https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/40196-a-disgusting-video-on-youtube-titled-how-to-discipline-our-child/?hl=paddle#entry368597) I realize that it might sound like I'm defending aggressive parents, but I'm really not. Don't forget that in my own personal utilitarian perspective the short term "gain" (which is really not a gain) is never, ever, ever worth a dysfunctional long term relationship with your child, nor is it worth the emotional damage you are causing the child. The fact of the matter is, there are better, healthier, and more productive ways of interacting with your child without ever physically harming them or emotionally scaring them, and instead nurturing their growing empathy and fostering their ability to negotiate and be happy in general.

These evil people are hiding. Just came to borrow the link to this original video, and it's private! Darn. Not surprising in the least. Although maybe it's a good thing, that they are feeling shameful.

Oh yeah, definitely. Sometimes it will stop me in my tracks. Now I will start to more closely observe my internal disagreements... it's not obvious at first that this could be happening, because you'd think you need another person to disagree with... but now I see that it makes sense, particularly between the false self and the real self. I'll have a listen to this call. Glad to see you didn't make the same typo that I did! Personally, no. That is a great question, though. I can see how others would consider him attractive, however I don't find myself thinking anything of it... he is quite a bit shorter than me (sorry, I don't know if that is a shallow opinion or a fact of biology that women are more attracted to men who are at least the same height as themselves). Additionally, he lacks the intellect that I am attracted to. So no, I am not sexually attracted to him. Probably also helpful to mention that I've been with my soul mate (haha, I know, using this word combination on this forum seems a little questionable, so I suppose I should byline it with "for want of better words") for six years now.

I'm having a hard time understanding what you are saying here, but I'm really trying. I've read this post many times and still don't think I'm getting the point. Would you be able to expand or rephrase? In this analogy is it the child or the parent who becomes addicted? I guess in my earlier post I was focusing mostly on how the child is effected, and as a child I never acquired a taste for being spanked, no matter how many times I got spanked. I was responding out of experience -- I remember being spanked by my father, and it instilled such a fear in me that afterwards I did whatever he asked. I became very obedient. In his eyes, it was working. Fast forward 20-some years later, he is missing a daughter (I don't speak to him) and I have a boat load of personal issues all because he couldn't manage his own emotions and his solution was to blame his children and scare the living daylights out of them with violence to change their behavior in the moment. Here's an example of the perspective I was trying to demonstrate - a father comes home after a stressful day at work and the kids are rowdy, yelling and running around. They are getting on his nerves (what they are doing is neither morally "good" nor "bad", it's just not what he wants them to be doing), so he gets them to stop by scaring the living shit out of them with a spanking. The kids will stop being rowdy to prevent further violent attacks from their father. Notice how I did not use the words "good" or "bad" in my earlier post... spanking is done on behalf of the parent to change the child's behavior without any regard for the lasting effects and without any introspection as to why the parent wants the child to change. These are all just my thoughts on the fly, so nothing is concrete yet.

I agree with the other guys and wanted to second the fact that spanking works really well if you are living in the moment and have no regard for the future. It's a solution that will get you immediate results which will last 10 minutes or maybe a day. But you're not going to achieve positive long-term results with your child... in fact spanking is quite detrimental in the long term. There are tons of good podcasts on the subject. Like the interview Stefan did with Dr. Elizabeth Gershoff:

Hi powder, this was also intriguing to me when I first heard about the concept of love being a response to virtue... and now it's become an integral part of my life. The best resource I can think of is Stefan Molyneux's book, Real Time Relationships. He does an excellent job of explaining the concept, supporting it with evidence and examples, and showing how it can apply to you personally. It is available here on freedomainradio.com/free

Where do you think pet peeves come from? Are they unhealthy, and if so how do we overcome them? I personally think that yes, they are unhealthy because they are generally irrational. Yet when I try to analyze their origins, I struggle to understand and therefore have a difficult time overcoming them. For example, I sometimes get very agitated when people smack their lips as they chew their food. I think I have somewhat of a hold on this, in that as a child my father was the loudest, fastest eater. He had horrible teeth from a lifetime of smoking. I don't know if I would have found this repulsive in and of itself, but he would constantly yell at my sister and I for our table manners -- "don't fidget at the table" "sit on your butt and keep your feet on the ground" "you're holding the knife like a retard" etc. So, could it be that I made an irrational connection that loud chewing is representative of hypocrisy? Anyways, I believe this pet peeve is bad because a special someone in my life is a passionate chewer and this is absolutely not something that should annoy me and I don't want it to. I feel also that pet peeves are something that we can focus our other frustrations on, rather than dealing with the true sources of our frustrations. If that's the case, it's very unhealthy because it's basically a scape goat meant to distract us from working on ourselves. So maybe pet peeves don't have origins in our past... dunno, what do you think?

Wow, I really appreciate your honesty, Robert (formally known as cynicist, right?). I was completely oblivious to all of my contradictory statements when I wrote the original post! I've really been thinking about it, and I don't know if I've made much progress, but here's what I think... I have a difficult time being honest with people when my honesty is counter to what they are saying, and could burst their bubble... or rather I have a tough time giving criticism (the true kind that Stefan recently spoke about). I believe this is because as I was growing up, I was supposed to "get along" with people. By this, adults meant that I had to agree with others to be able to get along with them. And getting along was held as a high "moral" standard. Specifically, I'm thinking about public education... you shouldn't disagree with your little friends because it might cause an argument (in reality, it will cause a situation that the adult child teacher will not be comfortable handling)... and you certainly cannot disagree with your teachers (again, it will make the uncomfortable because they don't know how to think). Otherwise, they will feel offended and you will no longer be a nice little girl/boy. Basically, disagreeing and criticizing someone is rude. Furthermore, I was never allowed to disagree with my father growing up. He was a loose cannon, and the best way to keep him from going off was to just agree with him (even if that meant throwing myself or even my sister under the bus). I realize too, that when my sister and I would disagree and an argument would ensue, we would both be punished. Disagreements seemed to always end in tears in my household (and believe me, it was never my dad doing the crying). Amazing though how this is such a double standard in that I couldn't safely disagree with people, however people could openly criticize me and disagree with me and I would just take it. And actually, the criticism that people were giving me was the malicious kind, yet I would still take it seriously! That's sad! So there's my problem, the way that I have been conditioned to view my own criticism and disagreements is as a bad thing--as if I'm just trying to cause trouble. This is the thought process of my false self, and really I guess a defense mechanism. So I'm working to overcome it, beginning by understanding that my opinions and thoughts are not malicious, they are just honest. Thanks again for pointing all of this out. I also realize that I am more vulnerable to giving malicious criticism because that is what was given to me as a child... so this requires an extra step of caution and analysis before I begin criticizing. More specifically related to my friend's engagement... Overall, I realized that a major reason that I haven't able to question her commitment to her fiance, and vice versa, is because my own commitment as a friend to her has still been wishy washy. That's a whole 'nother analysis that I need to do. But as an exercise to overcome my issues mentioned earlier, I really really started to ask her questions and I gave honest reactions to her responses. I also stated my own objectives and concerns... to find out if this is the best thing for them. I straight up told her that I can't say that I think they should truly be together nor can I say that this is a terrible idea and it won't last. She was very understanding. I also straight up told her that 10 years down the road I don't want to stand by calling myself a friend as the get divorced. I told her it would hurt me and I would have serious doubts about my own judgment. I told her that I would feel like a failed friend for not seeing the red flags. So it was really good for both of us. I think I started out feeling like I had to know: will this relationship work for them, yes or no?... and that I had to tell her whatever the answer was. Well, I don't know the answer, and that's the truth. And I realized it was important to at least tell her that. So I did, and we had a great long conversation. She discovered the roots of her own doubts about their relationship, and it gave her a lot more to evaluate from a self knowledge perspective. I know I didn't address everything that you pointed out, Robert. But I feel like this is a really good start!

Good vid! Makes me hopeful, I wish I was more like this kid when I was in high school! Also, this kid inspires me to be more honest in my own life. I don't know much about Asbergers, but it seems like those with it are incredibly blunt and aren't in tune with 'social norms' and 'politeness.' I don't know what the other symptoms are, but I can see why 'society' would want to label this as a disease, illness, or disorder... to protect their precious veil of status quo... "now, now little Johnny, it's not polite to point out the hypocrisy of your teachers, none of the other children do this because they've threatened by their dictators their whole lives not to, therefore something is very, very wrong with you and we deem you ill." I'm not trying to dismiss Asbergers as imaginary, as I'm sure it's very real. And like I said I'm no expert, this is just my simple 5-minute analysis.

Taxes are another consideration - did you include them in your calculation? There are certainly ways to live minimally when it comes to money, but it effects your whole lifestyle and you have to be willing to live nontraditionally. However, if you want to live a social life of networking and what not to help drive your film-making career, living on next to nothing may not be for you. It's something you'll have to decide and then think very, very creatively about... out of the box, as they say. It can be done, and people do it every day. I would suggest researching these lifestyles first before you decide it's for you. The book Possum Living by Dolly Freed demonstrates how one young lady lived on almost no money. If you read it, it's one example of how living on almost nothing requires a whole lifestyle change. The biggest red flag I see in your scenario, is that you won't be able to start paying off a house until you are older and more established. Maybe that's not a problem for you, as many young adults wait until they are 25-30 years old to purchase their first home... furthermore, some people find it more beneficial to continue renting their whole lives (I don't understand this personally, but that doesn't mean it's 'bad'). These are the things you should be thinking about too, not just "how am I going to get by on only $150 next month." And then there's the whole tiny homes movement... people don't want to be in debt, so they build tiny homes for a small amount of money and then they always have something to live in. That would require you to be able to put some money toward building a tiny home, which you wouldn't be able to do if you have to pay rent somewhere. Here's another good example of the type of lifestyle change a young man is willing to make in order to live on next to nothing and be free of debt: So I just wanted to reiterate, that living simply and minimally can be done, but it effects your entire lifestyle. Think outside of the box and research how others have done it. You might be able to do it too, but it won't be easy.

That is a legitimate question, I'm also wondering why I don't know him better. When she and I get together, it's usually just the two of us. Our SOs are either at work or busy for the day. She has consulted me a little bit. For example, she confessed to me that she has doubts about their relationship. My response was a question... "Do you see these issues remaining over time, or do you think you will both be able to work on these together and overcome them?" Hopefully she has given this more thought since I brought it up, because she had a knee jerk reaction of saying that the issues can be overcome. Then I told her you can't change people, but rather you can understand their goals and help them work towards that. Her reply to that was, "he doesn't have goals." Which baffles me because he owns his own business, although it's not yet successful and I think she consults him frequently on how to run it. I don't know exactly how to press her better on this issue, which is what I was hoping you all could help me with. Your statement @Lians that "This is probably the most important decision in her life" would be a good opener for a deep conversation. I'm feeling very confused about them. Like there's some kind of a block for me, I guess. Any more advice?

Bump.