barn

Hi @Spladam Good to see you back! I saw, you had fun with the tags... My contribution boils down to: Consequences don't care about our intentions. Deferral of gratification, putting things off until the right time, is harder to do if one's avoiding understanding/not trying to figure out what's going to be the consequence of acting solely on the impulses of 'the lizard brain'. Additionally, equally important, the true-self can make good decisions about compatibility of values ONLY. I agree with Stefan Molyneux's assessment because (empirical proofs) I have found people who have had less partners to be more dedicated to the relationship at hand and more truthful with themselves in general. Those who have had more partners have always tended to be less devoted to making things work out and more often than not, they simply had no clue of who they really were or what their true feelings were and why that was... they'd be continually jerked around by their false self (or allowing manipulation)... I'm repeating myself. It's also logically sound because the more you know what you want/makes you happy, the better choices you can make resulting in less incentive for trying something new. There are circumstances in which what I'm saying do not apply in the same fashion, such as: (a possible exception) less sexual partners: when someone is not having relationships out of fear and the deferral isn't so much a principle but a consequence of fear, they have not internalised the reasons. Kinda' not the end of the world... (a possible exception) more sexual partners: when someone is coming from a difficult origin and they're working their way through self-knowledge, the quality of their relationships has had a provable upward curve of improvement, duration, stability. The past can't be undone, it's there the same as the lessons learned, behaviours changed. (If I had to guess, I'd say Stefan Molyneux is closer to this group than the others) e.g. Not sure if it's the best example but one way to look at it is, as if you were comparing someone who'd changed jobs several times in the past for getting a new one (or sacked, here it makes little difference) to someone who has always worked at the same place. Have I been clear? Does it makes sense to you? Yes it does. It's like saying 'You're a wonderful person! I want to spend time with you!' - randomly. With a friend it's different (not sure what's your definition of 'friend', maybe explain if you'd like) as you are changing the relationship to something else. I'm certain (to me), after sleeping with a 'friend', the sky-high risk of losing the essence of trust is inevitable... It's like admittance to lack of self-control, posing a risk from that point on. Please clarify (if you do/did elsewhere, let me know) To do what? In return for what? Staying virgin for a long... Definitely until conscious and measured decisions can be made, responsibility taking is happening. I'd say it's preferable then, yes. Generally speaking, yes, I believe that is true. Given, such huge emotional charge, nothing comparable prior... etc. However, based on some of my past not being fully accessible to me (very blurry), abuse can get those memories miss-placed in one's storage of recollections. It's possible to unearth if not all but most of those 'lost items', me thinks. This is not to denigrate what you are asking but to illustrate a point: Is your question analogous to, Can someone change their ways and live healthily if they've spent most of their adulthood obese, continously making self-destructive life choices? As some opportunities are forever lost/can't be substituted for (permanent damage), how massive is the counter force that's required to make a noticeable, meaningful change in the now new and opposing direction?

Hi @Add984 Thumbs up man, is it ok if I pm you some ideas? Barnsley

Fair enough + agreed,.. you're good. As long as we are honest about these things and maintain a constructive heading, we'll be able to advance, avoid getting stuck or devolve. Same experience here, on maaany topics, I admit. Even then, those people (open minded ones) do the same, so it just shows me it's the right approach and worth emulating. I think, it's ok to have an opinion on subjects you are less versed in as long as you are using reason & evidence in conversations... but I repeat myself. Thanks for the op heads-up!

Indeed. Fully agree.

278. Yoko Kanno - Paradiso 279. Dj Maestro - Book Of Slim (or Madlib - Slim's Return)

A 1 star ('bad') review from 'Amuhzone': "I'm a professor of psychology and picked up this book to consider for my incoming PhD students. Don't waste your money... [...]" Can't help but be doubly intrigued now! Thanks for that, Barnsley p.s. (good to see you back, both of 'youz')

Simple scenario... after searching for a piece, you're greeted with an ask/warning to disable your protection against tracking/data mining. What do you normally do?

Hi @CygniAustralis I'm hoping it's not a problem if I'm curious... But first of all, Congratulations! 1. Why did you look online instead of, in person, with the aid of extended social approaches? as in: family, friends, acquaintances, normal exposure to people 2. When you said 'Let the girl come to you.' - were you referring to what approach women usually take? as in: men propose, pursue and women select, dispose.

Hi @J.L.W Thought you might be interested in this...

276. Morcheeba - The Great London Traffic Warden Massacre sorry, this is a tiny bit longer than usual but it's actually just ONE song... 277. artist(s): Monkey Ken & DJ Seto ft. Hazaed & Daddy Shadow / Orchestra & Choir Of Bulgarian Radio title(s): Taiyou Ga Arukagiri / Polognala E Pschenitza (simplified = 'Dj Krush - Polognala E Pschenitza')

Hi @RLAng Thank you for your time and effort highlighting the differences, providing credible sources. This video unfortunately didn't have them in the description beneath. Nice one, thanks again, Barnsley

274. Bo Kaspers Orkester - Hon Är Sí Söt När Hon Sover 275. Možder Danielsson Fresco - Incognitor /otherworldly piano/

Hi @FutureBankRobber How have you been? Good to see you back! Sorry for the situation, I can totally relate, something similar has already happened to me but but rather than telling an anecdote let me mention a few things to think about. It's great and I'm really happy that so many people are trying to give you advice/their take on it, hopefully some of the things here will induce an improvement or get you to the next level of solving things. * '0' argument.: People rarely change and if they do, it's usually due to some emergency, finally strong enough incentives. Unless it's internalised and conscious, reverting to the old ways is more than likely to be the case within a short period of time. (as in: having principles and keeping to them [integrity] is haaard to reach, much harder to maintain. Beware of the ones not having any!) 1. Procrastination is an important effect, should be explored as it is usually closely related with 'going out of our comfort zones' / 're-establishing', re-evaluation, changing the way we are. There must be curiosity or else it won't change, you can bend over backward if the other person isn't 'digging' there can't be much progress made. (as in: Is there evidence of trying to overcome something, proof of effort in order to improve anything?) 2. What are we saying when we allow ourselves to be late? It's like: - 'I don't respect you enough to care. You aren't as valuable to me.' Being late from a meeting for example means, you don't value/respect the other people's effort, time they carve out for you because if it was important enough for you, you wouldn't be wasteful. You wouldn't risk them turning around and saying: ' A'right, guess I was too kind, better curb that!' More importantly, it speaks to lack of self-respect, not taking your own promises/asks seriously. (as in: 'I say that, but it doesn't mean anything solid or serious.') It can be a powerplay too, expressing something along the line of 'You don’t have the last say, I do!' (as in: 'It is difficult for me to tell you then and there when I disagree... must reserve the option to change post-decision.' 3. BNAP (Bullshit Non Apology). Un-internalised errors, lack of true apology is promising repetition for the future. examples of a... bad apology: ' I'm so sorry, I didn't know... I didn't want to... I didn't do it on purpose... variations.' much better: ' I see. You didn't like that because...? Right. Sorry, I was... ,what do you think? How about if I... and maybe you... ? Deal?... Thank you, I really appreciate you telling me all of that. Can we speak again if something is up?' If we aren't close enough with someone and we don't want to be honest, we can say things just in order to escape a confrontation with what sounds good to the ears of the other, when directly called out for a thing we had done wrong or is the centre of attention. BNAP. It looks like we care and we want to be constructive... only it isn't true, disingenuous. There's no real 'connecting' with what's at hand and things will escalate as there's no release of true tensions, no learning and no aiming to change future behaviour... It's like: putting out a small fire in the immediate proximity while at the back the flames are growing at an increasing pace, freely. No-one knows where or when will the next fire start... UNCERTAINTY. 4. Laziness is avoidance, allowing others to do things for us is trying to transfer responsibility. Using, not trading. One direction only, is the flow of 'energies'. If we depend on someone, it's seemingly logical to assume that when bad things happen we weren't instrumental, there's an illusory 'buffer' and we don't need to take agency... not true. It falsely makes the other person believe that the anxiety they're experiencing is their own, when it's only our own projection and we made them take it upon them. If we realise others are suffering because of our actions... We can choose to change it, or not. Seeking independence to not affect the other or keeping up with the 'game' either way we are sending a powerful message about our appreciation for the dynamic. (as in: 'Sorry, I can't hear what you are saying from your actions; what you are actually DOING!') 5. There are ALWAYS consequences to every action. Ignoring, minimising is the worst possible way to go as it will only lead to catastrophic outcomes a lot faster, regardless if we believe it or not. Ignoring a ticking time-bomb won't make it stop, it IS going to speed it up instead, contrary to logic... in human relationships that is. (as in: WHAT we ALLOW we NORMALISE!!! - the single most important message I hope to transmit to you @FutureBankRobber ) Passivity in problem solving means, the problems get to be solved without our input/participation and more often than not it's something that we don't benefit from, usually even gaining new problems as a result. Many people, ... maaany people will go with the 'easy' route of having others figure out how things should be. Who benefits, what? Who doesn't mind being cared for and who wishes to stand on their own two feet?... Hope that helps, Barnsley

272. Mince Pye - Medieval Drum Dance 273. David Carbonara - Song Of India

Hi @S1988 Thanks for expanding on what you'd meant. I realise, you have strong opinions on the topic and that we seem to have quite different viewpoints. Let me share what I have come to understand so far: 1. Judging physical beauty when looking at physical features is coded in our genes, for the most part. Without cultural appropriation, it defaults to the baseline; it connotates with cross-border in-group preference observations. If anyone is to blame, it's mother nature. Wish it wasn't the way it is... or not, I haven't made up my mind on it yet. The example of fattening hutts/rooms in Uganda... After a bit of reading I could figure out/it looks like, it's about status, wealth in a culture lacking a variety of resources. Associated & myriads of health risks, regardless those sane arguments... it's culturally accepted/reinforced there to fatten women, something that has been normalised there. I don't see any reason why poverty isn't the only reason for it, there. I mean, in an environment where food is a scarce resource, it makes sense. Do you have a better argument? 2. What are 'markers' for beauty in men, aren't the same for women and in each sex they're HIGHLY correlated with the health of the individual's gene pool. (exceptions, such as plastic surgery apply here, too) 3. Attractiveness has a HUGE impact on opportunities/social interactions, though far from sufficient (only) for success, happiness, virtue, finding a virtuous partner... etc. Humans generally are highly social creatures. 4. 'pulchritude' = physical beauty, 'ephemeral' = short lived. (As you used them... I prefer/will be using simpler terms.) Evaluating physical attractiveness isn't superficial. It's like saying, evaluating physical health is superficial. It isn't, it's objective. Sure, I understand it's not the one and only thing we should (or sane to) look at but I don't see any problem establishing objective standards such as 'this person is, the other isn't'. (biologically, plenty correlations with gene health, easy to do for humans all over the world/everywhere interestingly) Physical beauty is more important in the earlier stages of women's life than in the men's because of the 'ticking biological clock' property, highest chance for healthy offsprings before it takes a rapid decline... after which, it's gone. Her SMV (Sexual Market Value) decreases faster than the man's increases. Without going into it too much, a man's starts out low and increases over time, lasts much-much longer. Generally speaking that is. SMV calculates-in both, gene health and availability of resources. 5. There are ways in which one can compensate for / diminish physical beauty to a certain degree but that doesn't change the BASE VALUE, genes; the 'starting out' number isn't relative. Loosing weight is one of the 'easiest' way to greatly affect physical attractiveness. Highly recommendable, I think. 6. Parents who let/facilitate their children to become overweight are saboteurs. Guiltily of sabotaging their children's social opportunities, indoctrinating them with toxic ideologies, hiding/withholding/erasing essential life-skills such as the importance of deferral of gratification, healthy self-care, weakening willpower ...tons more but they are definitely not wreckless, they're saboteurs for causing longlasting negative consequences for the child. Did the best they could, didn't know... bla-bla, can't apply since it's been everywhere but they chose to not follow reason & evidence. No exceptions, no excuses here imo. I'm fully empathetic to your struggles while being a child, dependent/under the care of your parents. They were sabotaging you, neglected your needs... it seems to me. It must have been really hard to start recovering and healing. Sounds like she wasn't motivating/supporting you in a healthy way, didn't teach you through good examples... A. Emphasizing? Seems to me, the culture war is partly about trying to erase it. B. it doesn't matter at large how tiny amount of people have accidents compared to the population. 7 billion people. C. Age. Everyone ages, not everyone ages the same 'gracefully' and men ages slower in general, but even then... So, what? We shouldn't go to see a movie because it's going to end eventually?! In order for your argument to have any traction, people should be blind to physical beauty. They're not. I'm sorry, it's how it is, has been, don't know if it will be always as is... but most likely it'll be the same for a few (many) more generations, given other phenomenons such as our tribal nature, irrationality... etc. changed very little, some argues none whatsoever. Oh, yeah. Sure, it's tough. I just think a biologically honed in mechanism should be respected and understood, used as best possible, not despised. It would be like getting upset for evolution trying it's best to do its job. I agree, kids need to do more outdoor, exploring, moving, playing with each other stuff. However, since humans are highly social beings, attractiveness having a huge impact on interactions... I think attractiveness is important, age appropriately for 5yrs old too. As in: clean, tidy, NOT RIDICULOUS or OLD FASHION, normal haircut... etc. Sensible approach, showing the parents DO CARE, show a good example, invested in the development of a healthy & independent individual. Kids can be 'cruel and heartless', especially when picking at someone... having said that, isn't the weak, the loner, the unsupported that gets targeted? Is it true that confident kids aren't seeked out by the 'vultures' and the confident kids have parents helping them, so they know how to deal with such situations?

Hi @bodhi I'm not going to say anything that'd rock your world by stating Jamie Lee Curtis has aged, after surgery... etc. She's perhaps prettier than many in her age but her SMV (Sexual Market Value) has undoubtedly decreased, considerably. I'd say the person in question could be anywhere from 9.1 - 9.9 Not necessarily. What sample group are you comparing yourself to (where in the world, size of group, only physical attractiveness) ? Are you just a bit or a lot less attractive? Did you know that although beauty isn't subjective (good looking/pretty, features), you can find traits that act as compensatory/diminishing factors? Barnsley

Hi @S1988 Are you referring to this (op's) question or beauty in general? Don't know if you've heard, the later isn't subjective. Why do you think it's a superficial query?

270. Wagon Christ - Perkission 271. Darshan Ambient - W. 52nd

Thanks for including it, any and every eyeballs COUNT DANKULA!!!

(bungee-ing in quick, brainy stuff ) There's an overabundance of papers trying to convince you the nonexistence of 'g' heritability/deciding factor, nevertheless I found (so far) quite a few, arguing for the higher chance that it's tied to the mother's armament. And no, environmental influence, affluence for that matter... nope, not really. If you are more (seriously) interested, have a look here. post script : If I was (efficient) mother nature...

Supplementary for this thread, worth a read-through, following up. (Genetics of Brain Structure and Intelligence by Paul Thompson and his team) take you (pdf) there

268. Quartetto Minimo - Khayyam 269. Emily Curtis - What's It For / 'I wake up to see the sun shining down on me.' /

It's not the finger but what's it pointing at... Yes, a tree fell. Not as loud or striking as some would expect. But I say this to you, humbly. Questioning... Can you hear the innumerable saplings growing, even more seedlings extending deep roots? I can't.

Apparently, there's a demo going on in London now, to free Count Dankula. https://heartoflondonbid.london/events/demonstration-free-dankula-march/

Until the new season (4) is out (if it ever will), we're treated with a darker, self-critical take on what went on in the mind's of the creators. (Although I wasn't so keen on their choice of new direction, regarding ethnicity, a certain despicable part (for me) ...etc. Still, it's a satire, not meant to be taken seriously, can be (should be) criticised though) Enjoy! NOT PG13, IT'S QUITE VULGAR TOO! DEFINITELY NOT FOR KIDS! Bushworld Adventures | Adult Swim