Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 The title is the brief of it. I have 3 uncles and one aunt on my mother's side. All were horribly abused by my grandmother who beat the shit out of them on a regular basis though my most successful uncle is the youngest and the least physically abused from what I have been told by my mother. He was also "the baby" of the 5 and thus given the most attention and care by his elder siblings. My grandfather worked all day and spent little time with his kids, though I've heard he once angrily denounced my grandmother when he caught her verbally abusing my adult mother before I was born. Interesting fact: I nearly died while my mother was pregnant because my grandmother verbally abused my mother to the point where well... Apparently extreme depression can kill the unborn. But that's a tangent and a backstory. The main issue is in the title: my most successful uncle, the only one to have his own children (my eldest uncle married a single mom who was divorced twice, and though he's financially successful as a real estate broker he's very personally unsuccessful as his step kids are all either drug addicts or impending single moms. My middle uncle is almost retarded and lives like a frat boy at the age of 40). He has two sons (twins) and now a daughter. Similarly young. He's 35-ish with a wife 5 years younger than him. My mother is a (platonic) single mom and my aunt is married to a roofer (herself being involved in law, apparently a typist of some sort) and has only one child, a boy, whom is 5 years younger than me and I grew up with on and off. Here's the issue: I want to separate as much as possible from my mother's family of origin because most of them are shitty, manipulative, Democrat, cucky, verbally manipulative, and all around terrible people. My successful uncle is the best of the bunch and I've rarely seen him growing up. I don't think he's a bad guy but I barely know him and am afraid to know him because I expect a whole lot of poison to emit from him or his environs and what can I possibly due to remedy that when I'm still as of yet nobody worth listening to (at least from a life-success standpoint)? Because I want to totally divorce myself from my mother's family of origin, I also want to distance myself from my cousins. Of which I'm the eldest (if I only include biological cousins and not single mom spawns). I don't feel much in terms of obligation but I do feel a certain primal desire for connection with my blood. However I am pretty sure I will be disappointed and I am too young and too busy to willingly kick myself in the shin. I don't want to build connections with people I will barely see and most likely watch self-destruct over time. However my mother, who switches from "wanting to be a part of her (abusive) family" to basically de-F.O.O.'ed has been bothering me about it and projecting her own insecurities and fears onto me about them. Like her fear of deep connection for having it severed, specifically. I am tempted to think I share that weakness but empirically I don't. I have a great relationship with my therapist who is almost a father to me and he really does see me as a middle son (he himself has two sons with a wide age difference). However I do know that's my only real relationship. I'm not counting casual internet relationships because most of them are superficial and the ones I have gotten deep with I don't necessarily trust or see as reliable friends or whatnot. I have made no efforts whatsoever to change this since I've been in what one M.R.A. site calls "monk mode" which is basically about focusing on self-development, career, and advancement that way with relationships and most luxury activities put on hold. I know there is some truth though: I do fear making and losing deep connections. However not very much. But I also lack much motivation to make friends (let alone womanly connections--I'm turning 20 next week and I'm still a virgin and have never dated let alone touched a woman). Perhaps I ought to talk in that direction. I dunno. I do know there are more than a few psychological experts and smart laymen here on the board so I thought I'd confess this here. I do want a family. But I want my family. A family built by my own hand with people of my own choosing. I want a tribe. But I want my tribe. A tribe of like-minded rational, moral, and intelligent people. Not one assigned to me or imposed upon me. However I don't think I can just be a total rebel and expect things to work out. If I really want to go this way, I need to think about what I need to do to get what I want. I've thought long and hard about what I'll be doing professionally (as I'm doing it). That part (writer/investor) is clear (for the next 5 years at least). What's foggy is relationships. I don't like using people for utilities but I do understand reciprocal business relationships and am not afraid of making those. I think I'm doing all right as far as my readiness and ability to make co-worker or business-partner relationships, of course I have minimal experience, but here I think my mind is in the right place and am therefore able to do what I must to get what I want. Where I'm worried about is the personal stuff. The friends and lovers stuff. I intend to be all kinds of good Catholic and waiting till marriage for sex, and perhaps that's for the best, but besides that I'm pretty much winging it and that means doing very little outside work/internet/business connections. And I would be foolish to assume they're all divorced from each other. After all, I only have one brain and whatever I feed into it at one point of my life inevitably affects my mindset in other areas. With that knowledge, I ask for help. I want to know if I'm making the right decisions (as far relationships at least) and am on the path to success or if I'm walking off a cliff with a blindfold on. I have only my thanks to give. Please help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barn Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 (edited) Hello @Siegfried von Walheim On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: The title is the brief of it. I suppose, (as you predicted) here's one layman's take on things... I found your telling of the story VERY EMOTIONALLY ENGAGING, even though it having done so in ambivalent ways for me(it's me, not you... I assumed) . I can't walk past by it and must honour your clear and (what it seems to me) straight-from-the-heart ask. Dunno if it'll be of use to you, but I try my best to not let down the serious ask you put out. Perhaps it's useful for you if I shared a bit of my own past struggles, so that when you see some 'echoes' in my responses, you'll know roughly what had contributed to the perspectives I have developed over time. I was born into a family of a bunch of narcissists, where the men had been severely abused and neglected, the women were selfish and enablers/agents of sadism, personality erasure. Quite indicative that going back to my grandparents(they were? the first I know to had done it), all had decided to settle down far away from their parents to use it as an excuse for not being able to keep in touch with them as much (soft pre-defoo?, cowards). From a very young age, 8-9 I guess, I knew that I was also going to leave and quite literally was 'biting my time', until the day had arrived. At around age 18, I moved out and started living on my own with a family where the mother had left her 3+ children for a guy with more money and also took the ex to court for half of the wealth they had generated. The older middle child was my best friend back then, who still to this day has been avoiding, has not processed the severity (probably, as I cut ties with him 2 years ago) , the egregious nature of her decisions/the father's responsibility for choosing a horrible person as the mother. After leaving behind that realm as well, all I wanted to feel is safety from mad-abusive narcissists and be surrounded with people who had genuine curiosity and were willing to connect with their true-selves. Instead of projecting and constantly aiming to manipulate people for their own advantage mercilessly; I wanted to experience for the first time having spent 20+ years on the globe, what it was like to not have to fear, constantly experience disappointments. My desire was so strong, my critical thinking (self-protection, skills) was so lacking, that I had chosen to enter into a series of long-term relationships with (successively decreasing) softer but still narcissistic partners. I had not taken the time, effort to connect with my past to the point of internalising what had happened. In a way, you could say I was 'shell-shocked, bleeding, limping' and desperately looking for some cover. While passing by places where people were safe 'n sound, it pained me to see all the spots were taken up and I constantly had to keep moving forward as I made a commitment to never try to' game the system but play instead strictly fair and square'; only faith on my side that once I'll get 'there'. I'm not 'there' just yet, though I don't fear anymore and with each 'dime spent on self-wok' I know my steps lead me to ever firmer grounds. I'm still in therapy and planning to continue until I have verified my 'scars have stopped bleeding', good people feel comfortable in my company... as it is unacceptable for me otherwise, 'the ball stops with me' or I'm still not doing something right. There's no other way I can think of / wish to go. I can't deny, philosophy had saved my life. It literally did. About that, maybe some other time... My observations, hopefully they benefit you... Some of them are very hard questions, please believe me when I say I don't treat them lightly or without respect. On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: My grandfather worked all day and spent little time with his kids, though I've heard he once angrily denounced my grandmother when he caught her verbally abusing my adult mother before I was born. Why did he choose a lifestyle where he was too far away, to be able to protect the vulnerable, the dependent when necessary? How did he end up choosing such a horrible person? Has he acknowledge the fact that he knew, that he enabled it? On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Interesting fact: I nearly died while my mother was pregnant because my grandmother verbally abused my mother to the point where well... Apparently extreme depression can kill the unborn. Whhhh... Shhhh... speechle... <the smallest fine print: to me that's more like 'shocking fact', not to correct you or anything...> On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: My middle uncle is almost retarded and lives like a frat boy at the age of 40). He has two sons (twins) and now a daughter. Similarly young. He's 35-ish with a wife 5 years younger than him. paraphrasing: "Stupid people get them like candy at Halloween"... On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: My mother is a (platonic) single I don't understand why ' platonic '. Could you fill me in, on it? On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Here's the issue: I want to separate as much as possible from my mother's family of origin because most of them are shitty, manipulative, Democrat, cucky, verbally manipulative, and all around terrible people. My successful uncle is the best of the bunch and I've rarely seen him growing up. What do you think is the reason behind seeing this uncle so little while growing up? Would it be practical to ask him? I don't deny your characterisation at all. I accept it. ("shitty, manipulative, Democrat, cucky, verbally manipulative, and all around terrible people.") My second question here is, can democrat leaning people be virtuous, if so, does it matter what political views they hold? (So that you know, I ask myself the same question time-to-time.) On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: <1> I don't think he's a bad guy but I barely know him and am afraid to know him because I expect a whole lot of poison to emit from him or his environs and what can I possibly due to remedy that <2> when I'm still as of yet nobody worth listening to (at least from a life-success standpoint)? 1. Completely agree with your hesitation, I think you're smart to keep an eye on the likelihood of 'the fins belonging to sharks rather than playful dolphins'.... 2. Absolutely disagree, (coming off as a binary person all of a sudden eh?! Coincidentally.) Take it for what's it worth: I THINK YOU'RE SOMEBODY. I CONSIDER YOUR IDEAS WORTHY OF ATTENTION AND LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING YOUR ARC OF FURTHER DEVELOPMENT, CURRENTLY! On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Because I want to totally divorce myself from my mother's family of origin, I also want to distance myself from my cousins. Of which I'm the eldest (if I only include biological cousins and not single mom spawns). I don't feel much in terms of obligation but I do feel a certain primal desire for connection with my blood. I think, when you have spent enough time and depth exploring the topic in various setups...blood-ties? It won't be more than just a part of the ABC of your childhood/adulthood false limitation. ("A.ccidental B.iological C.age of childhood" - Stefan Molyneux) On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: However I am pretty sure I will be disappointed and I am too young and too busy to willingly kick myself in the shin. I don't want to build connections with people I will barely see and most likely watch self-destruct over time. You can't know what the future holds but you can be sure you won't like it if you don't do things for the right reasons. (echo) I didn't have to force myself to do what I wanted to, once I understood the full extent of what it would have meant, had I not done so. I'm not saying, it was easy. I'm saying, it was the only SANE option. Hell, I wish I started assessment earlier, that I spent more effort being observant and asking those essential questions sooner. It's all I could muster completely on my own. Do the work, only blame yourself if it's just, fair... ... Me thinks. On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I don't want to build connections with people I will barely see and most likely watch self-destruct over time. Yes. I can see that. Would you say that you're spending more or less time thinking/visualising the things you want vs. the things you don't, proportionately? On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: However my mother, who switches from "wanting to be a part of her (abusive) family" to basically de-F.O.O.'ed has been bothering me about it and projecting her own insecurities and fears onto me about them. You must harden your skin, strengthen detoxifying mechanisms against the unhealthy propaganda / evacuate 'alien influences' ASAP so that you remain, you. Conscious or unconscious BS coming from people, you MUST stay vigilant and guard your true-self, the most precious gift you received from life and if you loose it... i.e. - ° What's in it for me? ° Am I being treated with respect, virtuous love, genuine curiosity? btw, it goes the other way too. On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: However I do know that's my only real relationship. I'm not counting casual internet relationships because most of them are superficial and the ones I have gotten deep with I don't necessarily trust or see as reliable friends or whatnot. Unless you have a wider choice of more wells with clear water, returning to the only one you know so far, doesn't mean there aren't more in the area. It just means, you know where to find that one refreshing, good tasting source of water. Nobody should just switch their habit of quenching their thirst at the usual spot, for a sign scribbled onto a cardboard saying 'fresh water here'. Evaluation, knowledge, confirmation. But if you aren't looking, you won't... Some wells have more water in them than others, sometimes our thirst is greater than what the available water in one single well can quench. On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I have made no efforts whatsoever to change this since I've been in what one M.R.A. site calls "monk mode" which is basically about focusing on self-development, career, and advancement that way with relationships and most luxury activities put on hold. Yes, I assumed you chose that. What if you took back a bit, having seen how one extreme feels/looks like. Just a bit, to see if that waz even more desirable? Taking the idea for a brief test-drive? On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I know there is some truth though: I do fear making and losing deep connections. I think that's great. I think that's evidence, that you're a feeling & living, conscious being. (phhue... not a Russian bot, but a real human being. Relieved. ) Think of this. You can't and won't lose that you've never had. If someone chooses your friendship, they do it for your virtues and will make a conscious investment for it staying in their life... same as you. Ergo, in a healthy relationship, both of you are 'invested' in each other and wish to care for the relationship consciously, knowing that other than staying virtuous the connection will be eventually severed. In other words, it will be evident to you because by being the real you, you're more/less liked and vice versa the same for the other person from your perspective. On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: (let alone womanly connections--I'm turning 20 next week and I'm still a virgin and have never dated let alone touched a woman). Perhaps I ought to talk in that direction. I dunno. Do things for the right reasons. Having the right support groups to talk about issues like this, do result in reducing doubts. Missing such environments tend to increase, strengthen those doubts. It is for a good reason, why you haven't... likewise, it's also for another good reason why you (in my clumsy estimation) seemingly tend to beat yourself up about it. (?) Stay curious, don't make pre-emptive judgements. You'll figure it out, the right way I hope. On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I want a tribe. But I want my tribe. A tribe of like-minded rational, moral, and intelligent people. This looks like a fantastic idea for a novel, that if you put your mind to it, I'm sure would be a fascinating and powerful read. (Having seen what you can do with syntax and flow of ideas.) Thinking is writing. (Why do you think Jordan B Peterson's assessment suite is sooo powerful. Add to that someone with a talent for writing, well...) On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: After all, I only have one brain and whatever I feed into it at one point of my life inevitably affects my mindset in other areas. Well said, remember that! I recommend the most humbly humble humblest of all... (to myself also) Lastly, thank you Siegfried von Walheim for sharing. Have a great one, Barnsley Edited March 23, 2018 by barn trying to follow SnapSlav's guidance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 22, 2018 Author Share Posted March 22, 2018 (edited) 8 hours ago, barn said: Hello @Siegfried von Walheim I suppose, (as you predicted) here's one layman's take on things... I found your telling of the story VERY EMOTIONALLY ENGAGING, even though it having done so in ambivalent ways for me(it's me, not you... I assumed) . I can't walk past by it and must How have you found it emotionally engaging yet ambivalent? Less a question for the topic but how I wrote it. Quote honour I knew you were English! My mental image of your voice isn't far off. Quote your clear and (what it seems to me) straight-from-the-heart ask. Dunno if it'll be of use to you, but I try my best to not let down the serious ask you put out. Having read it, I can certainly see the similarities. In my case I don't think it's as bad entirely because my mother tried to limit my access to her family of origin to "only" thanksgiving and Christmas. Which frankly I don't think was limited enough because I seldom had a Christmas (at her parent's) that didn't end with some kind of argument where her mother played the victim and bullied my mother before all her siblings and in-laws. Which was why eventually she stopped going to their celebrations and it was just me. I was never embarrassed in such a way (except one time, there was a dog and I am/was extremely fearful of dogs. I say "except this one time..." but it was a pretty big deal. My mother slapped my shoulder as if to hit me for her mother, whom I kept from opening a door because I was hiding outside from her son's (my successful uncle's) dog. I have never forgotten her apology afterwards where she confessed she pretty much defaulted to being her mother's daughter before my being her son's mother. Which was a big part of why my mother's actively avoided her own mother since)... But I have argued with her parents and siblings, but unlike her I have always done so confidently and rationally. I've impressed my mother more than once since she was "shocked" I could argue with her mother (and little sister and brothers) without cowing or wincing. I can remember quite a few emotionally volatile moments, actually. So while I was never "embarrassed" I can definitely say I've never enjoyed visiting my "family" for Christmas/Thanksgiving. I chose not to last year, and it was the best Christmas/Thanksgiving in a very long time. I also think my experiences have made me prone towards being overly confrontational and aggressive. When I was younger I never wanted to be a coward like my mother and as I grew older resented myself for cowering before the teachers. So eventually I stopped cowering and demanded respect. It worked out better than I would have assumed; I had better teachers at the time and they enjoyed my frank and straight-forwardness (with one huge exception) but I was going the wrong way (towards Socialism/Communism). I also gained my first "friends" (both real and not real) whom also enjoyed my frankness and directness since they were used to wishy-washy sweet-tongued types. In fact my one old friend, an Objectivist who read Atlas Shrugged, especially enjoyed my company because even though I was a die-hard Communist with open intentions on establishing a totalitarian state, I was open to argue about how I could be wrong and he could be right. And eventually he won the argument as I slowly left Communism for Fascism then Minarchism and now a sort of Monarchism/AnCapitalism. However I haven't seen him since I remonstrated him for taking a join in college. Quote Perhaps it's useful for you if I shared a bit of my own past struggles, so that when you see some 'echoes' in my responses, you'll know roughly what had contributed to the perspectives I have developed over time. I was born into a family of a bunch of narcissists, where the men had been severely abused and neglected, the women were selfish and enablers/agents of sadism, personality erasure. Quite indicative that going back to my grandparents(they were? the first I know to had done it), all had decided to settle down far away from their parents to use it as an excuse for not being able to keep in touch with them as much (soft pre-defoo?, cowards). From a very young age, 8-9 I guess, I knew that I was also going to leave and quite literally was 'biting my time', until the day had arrived. At around age 18, I moved out and started living on my own with a family where the mother had left her 3+ children for a guy with more money and also took the ex to court for half of the wealth they had generated. The older middle child was my best friend back then, who still to this day has been avoiding, has not processed the severity (probably, as I cut ties with him 2 years ago) , the egregious nature of her decisions/the father's responsibility for choosing a horrible person as the mother. After leaving behind that realm as well, all I wanted to feel is safety from mad-abusive narcissists and be surrounded with people who had genuine curiosity and were willing to connect with their true-selves. Instead of projecting and constantly aiming to manipulate people for their own advantage mercilessly; I wanted to experience for the first time having spent 20+ years on the globe, what it was like to not have to fear, constantly experience disappointments. My desire was so strong, my critical thinking (self-protection, skills) was so lacking, that I had chosen to enter into a series of long-term relationships with (successively decreasing) softer but still narcissistic partners. I had not taken the time, effort to connect with my past to the point of internalising what had happened. In a way, you could say I was 'shell-shocked, bleeding, limping' and desperately looking for some cover. While passing by places where people were safe 'n sound, it pained me to see all the spots were taken up and I constantly had to keep moving forward as I made a commitment to never try to' game the system but play instead strictly fair and square'; only faith on my side that once I'll get 'there'. I'm not 'there' just yet, though I don't fear anymore and with each 'dime spent on self-wok' I know my steps lead me to ever firmer grounds. I'm still in therapy and planning to continue until I have verified my 'scars have stopped bleeding', good people feel comfortable in my company... as it is unacceptable for me otherwise, 'the ball stops with me' or I'm still not doing something right. There's no other way I can think of / wish to go. I can't deny, philosophy had saved my life. It literally did. About that, maybe some other time... Well, I honestly don't know how useful it was. On one hand I can definitely see the similarities; on the other you don't have a history of successfully working with it and then making something meaningful happen (i.e. get a wife, a house, and begetting a bunch of kids). You're old enough to be my father, yet based on the fact you didn't mention marrying and having kids, I assume you aren't really a man yet. You're still in you twenties as a forty-something year old man. Frankly I consider you an example of failure, and if I were you I'd be doing whatever I can to change that ASAP. I understand the argument you might have in response: it is better I am healed and prepared then "go in" still injured. However my reply is this: your injuries are not tangible. You don't have a literal hole in your heart or soft spot this way or that way. You may have a few problems but I think you could have solved them at my age (19-20) rather than spending decades masturbating around the globe (I don't know what you did but I can assume it was a major waste of time. Again: a waste of time relative to becoming a family man. I criticize my therapist for spending thousands of dollars on vacations rather than investing in his retirement, but his reply is that he values the experiences he gets doing so as he makes a lot of money doing what he does and works very hard, so he wants to "relax hard" too. But then, I suppose, is the conflict of interests: I am not interested in expensive vacations nor "worldly experiences"; I am interested in laying down foundations and building dynasties). Of course I think I need to stress: while I am criticizing you, I am not doing so with anger or a desire to drive you off. I see you as a potential future for me, and I do not want that future. I know I have issues to work on but I think I am good enough to do what I want to do in life as it is in front of me. Namely, I believe I am prepared plenty to have a successful career, build wealth, and begin looking for a woman. Now actually having and breeding with a woman? I could use some more lessons for that. And of course I could use supplementary lessons for my career and wealth-building as well. I just think I am at the point where I can act, try and fail and learn from my failures so that I win in the long run. Again I could always use more information and better methods so I can do what I am doing better and more efficiently. It's just the difference between practicing how to bike-ride by actually bike-riding as compared to needing training wheels and an instruction manual. I could always listen to some pointers on how to bike-ride better but I am good enough, I think, to start riding and wobbling until I eventually "get it", though again, repeating myself for the third time or so, I would appreciate pointers so I can "get it" sooner--and with fellow travelers who might make friends, perhaps. Quote My observations, hopefully they benefit you... Some of them are very hard questions, please believe me when I say I don't treat them lightly or without respect. You know this sentence breeds doubt rather than assurance, right? :-P I understand, but I think you're too careful and delicate with your words. If I wasn't used to your speech-style I'd assume negatively about you based on how gently you're treating me. I prefer the gruff, stern, "walk it off!! -Stef's childhood coach" types myself. Quote Why did he choose a lifestyle where he was too far away, to be able to protect the vulnerable, the dependent when necessary? I don't know. I can make guesses and assumptions but I don't know and really I don't want to know. If I make a hundred guesses, I'm bound to be right with one of them and even if I'm wrong it's surely another. Quote How did he end up choosing such a horrible person? From what little I know, she's like his mother. His mother was a little tyrant who beat her kids with a wooden pan. Quote Has he acknowledge the fact that he knew, that he enabled it? Nope. "Silent observer" is the type he seems to want to emulate. I don't know if he's stupid (my mother's IQ is 139, supposedly--she took it drunk) but I can assume he's average at best and would rather cuck out like a little bitch than be a dominant alpha wolf. Quote Whhhh... Shhhh... speechle... <the smallest fine print: to me that's more like 'shocking fact', not to correct you or anything...> Shocking for you, predictable for me. Quote paraphrasing: "Stupid people get them like candy at Halloween"... To be clear I meant my successful uncle has 3 kids. My retarded one is an eternal bachelor without children. Quote I don't understand why ' platonic '. Could you fill me in, on it? She hasn't had sex since my conception. She tried twice to replace my father but neither stuck around because she wouldn't put out and my father wanted to get back in the picture, scaring of the first guy and delivering justice against the second guy (who was a little slimeball and thief. I told him off when I was a friggen pre-teen since I heard him verbally abusing my mother. I was scared at first but when I saw him talk back to me, I felt more confident and basically told him to f__k off without cursing it. He was eventually beat up by my father since neither my mother nor I had any care for him and he was a little prick. The first guy I actually have fond memories of since he resembled my father but with both arms and legs. However he eventually left as my father tried to come back. And when my father came back, it was a nightmare. My mother was always trying to prevent my father from using the welfare money to score heroin while my father vomitted in the toilet and all walked out to do whatever in the great beyond. I have no positive memories of my father from back when he lived with us after my mother let him back in, and I was happy when we finally "escaped" into our current tiny apartment owned by my aunt's cucky husband. And yet unlike all my mother's family of origin, my father actually actively tried to reach out to me a couple years later after rehab. I greatly missed him and so I would call him at around 8:00pm almost every night to talk about school and politics. As I grew older and wiser though, and started to remember the past, I distanced myself from him and as of now... Well, I did call him a few months ago since I had nightmares of both missing him (crying and all that) and fearing his physical return to my life. I told him everything and while he was understanding I did not feel secure or safe; what's this old deadbeat who sired around 8 children with 3 or more women going to do for me? Why do I love him? Really the only answer was because I wanted to see his face and I wanted a father in my life. My therapist has in many ways replaced him. And unlike my father, my therapist isn't afraid to call bull-shit with me and educate me. My father, with me at least, has always been a "listener" type. Meaning he listened but had nothing meaningful to reply with and avoided disagreeing with me. What I have always found attractive, perhaps as a result of all this, are men (and women) who are straight forward, honest, and not afraid to disagree. I despise cowards, idiots, and cucks. I love champions, geniuses, and protectors. However while my IQ is high, I cannot call myself a wiseman and am a far cry from a champion & protector. Perhaps as I write and perhaps when or if I become more political and speak publicly, I'll fulfill my desire to be a champion, but I fear I am too soft on the inside to be a protector. More precisely: I'm afraid I cannot get a good woman because I want my emotions to be tended to more than I want to tend to her emotions. I would want her to be the logical one while I am the emotional one. A reversal of what is normal and I don't think that's good. I either have to lower my standards/desires or simply become great enough to warrant a unicorn. At my young age I'm trying for the latter but if I fail I'll have to make compromises. Quote What do you think is the reason behind seeing this uncle so little while growing up? I assume because he knows it is/was toxic and therefore distanced himself largely from his family of origin. Quote Would it be practical to ask him? My mother might have his phone number but he lives very far away and I don't have any means of getting there, beyond public transit and some maps maybe. Plus he still has a dog that I am afraid of. Quote I don't deny your characterisation at all. I accept it. ("shitty, manipulative, Democrat, cucky, verbally manipulative, and all around terrible people.") My second question here is, can democrat leaning people be virtuous, if so, does it matter what political views they hold? (So that you know, I ask myself the same question time-to-time.) No, and yes. There cannot be a moral Leftist because Leftists fundamentally violate the principles "thou shalt not steal" and intend to violate "thou shalt not kill" via the welfare-warfare state and voting for people and importing people that would love to see me in a concentration camp for being White, male, full of testosterone, and a Christian Nationalist. I cannot read minds, and therefore gauge intent--I leave that to Almighty God. I can, however, read cause-and-effect and judge people based on whether they side with anti-White, anti-Male, anti-Christian causes, whether they're pro all this stuff, or cucking in the middle. "The path to Hell is paved with good intentions"; assuming the best, I would see a Leftist as misguided. I am willing to speak with Leftists and try to reason with them but if I cannot or it goes one ear and out the other or whatever, then I am dropping them from my considerations. However, in regards to women, I do consider their methodology (can they reason? Do they have empathy? Do they have sympathy? Do they care?) as more important since, as Stefpai stated, it's better to have a woman who starts off with the wrong conclusions but has a solid methodology than a woman with the right conclusions but a bad or weak methodology. Like I'm willing to debate a Leftist woman to the altar if I can rationally convert her to the Right and if she can demonstrate conviction and integrity--both in her values as well as in accepting when she's wrong and deferring to the better. And I may have to debate a Leftist woman to the altar since I fear Rightist women are just as likely to be passive weaklings as the average Leftist woman. Quote 1. Completely agree with your hesitation, I think you're smart to keep an eye on the likelihood of 'the fins belonging to sharks rather than playful dolphins'.... 2. Absolutely disagree, (coming off as a binary person all of a sudden eh?! Coincidentally.) What do you mean "binary" lol? I am an outtie, not an innie. I am a Rightist, not a Leftist. I believe in truth, not falsehood. I value honesty and integrity, not lies and cuckholdry. I have a lot of such binary beliefs and characteristics. I do not think, in many cases, there is a true middle ground since, for example, what is the middle ground between "thou shalt not steal" and violating that? Stealing a little? How about "thou shalt not kill"? Beating half to death? Of course there are times where there is in fact an Aristotelian mean but I am inclined to recognize and speak out when there isn't. Quote Take it for what's it worth: I THINK YOU'RE SOMEBODY. I CONSIDER YOUR IDEAS WORTHY OF ATTENTION AND LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING YOUR ARC OF FURTHER DEVELOPMENT, CURRENTLY! I hope so. I especially hope thousands of future fans agree. After all I have made the decision to enter the world of ideas and beliefs and try to steer people by informing them, stimulating them, and entertaining them. Via writing novels. Quote I think, when you have spent enough time and depth exploring the topic in various setups...blood-ties? It won't be more than just a part of the ABC of your childhood/adulthood false limitation. ("A.ccidental B.iological C.age of childhood" - Stefan Molyneux) I know... I know. But evolution has made us nostalgic for our cages for a reason. However, for the most part, I think my cage is not a good one. Therefore I'm best off building a new and better one (since at the moment there is no replacing the cage as biology demands it for the children's sake). Quote You can't know what the future holds but you can be sure you won't like it if you don't do things for the right reasons. (echo) I didn't have to force myself to do what I wanted to, once I understood the full extent of what it would have meant, had I not done so. I'm not saying, it was easy. I'm saying, it was the only SANE option. Hell, I wish I started assessment earlier, that I spent more effort being observant and asking those essential questions sooner. It's all I could muster completely on my own. Do the work, only blame yourself if it's just, fair... ... Me thinks. Yes. I can see that. Would you say that you're spending more or less time thinking/visualising the things you want vs. the things you don't, proportionately? I would say I think more optimistically about what I'm heading to versus what I fear, if that is what you mean. As a kid I idealized being a warlord and waging wars for supremacy and peace. Like Nobunaga Oda, or Cao Cao. As I've grown up, I idealize becoming a writer/investor and making both myself and my tribe richer and wealthier and more powerful. I especially idealize the image of living in a Japanese-style (or Roman villa-style) mansion with a georgous wife, six feet tall, long platinum hair with the Japanese princess cut, 36-22-36 or whatever numbers=hot, with a voice like serene waves and a temperament to match; a motherliness that makes me curl like a baby, and by her, 3 sons and 3 daughters named Siegfried, Siegmund, Felix, Sieglinde, Irina, and Yulia. All of whom loving of their father and mother, and well on their way to become the future kings and queens of the next generation. And of course a secret vault where I store beloved old video games, and a comfy room with a great view of the interior-garden, where I can play video games when my little ones are asleep and eventually fully grown. Quote You must harden your skin, strengthen detoxifying mechanisms against the unhealthy propaganda / evacuate 'alien influences' ASAP so that you remain, you. Conscious or unconscious BS coming from people, you MUST stay vigilant and guard your true-self, the most precious gift you received from life and if you loose it... Oh yeah, I get it plenty. Sometimes, I think, I'm too hard. Quote i.e. - ° What's in it for me? ° Am I being treated with respect, virtuous love, genuine curiosity? btw, it goes the other way too. And sometimes I forget! I have a tendency towards selfishness and narcissism, perhaps solipsism as well. I am always on guard to prevent myself from becoming a hypocrite and a wastrel. Quote Unless you have a wider choice of more wells with clear water, returning to the only one you know so far, doesn't mean there aren't more in the area. It just means, you know where to find that one refreshing, good tasting source of water. Nobody should just switch their habit of clenching their thirst at the usual spot, for a sign scribbled onto a cardboard saying 'fresh water here'. Evaluation, knowledge, confirmation. But if you aren't looking, you won't... Some wells have more water in them than others, sometimes our thirst is greater than what the available water in one single well can clench. Yes, I assumed you chose that. What if you took back a bit, having seen how one extreme feels/looks like. Just a bit, to see if that waz even more desirable? Taking the idea for a brief test-drive? I don't want to get to know more people at the moment. I want to build! And I want to attract people as I show off my creation and work on profiting from it! I don't want to get to know Philly kids without futures! However I don't know where to look for for decent people around me. I think the best thing is to either find people I share a common interest in or a common work field in. Like here, for example. I think my social needs are satiated plenty by interacting on this forum and with my therapist. I doubt I'll be finding a wife here or on the internet though. However I'm not ready for a woman anyway. Quote I think that's great. I think that's evidence, that you're a feeling & living, conscious being. (phhue... not a Russian bot, but a real human being. Relieved. ) Think of this. You can't and won't lose that you've never had. If someone chooses your friendship, they do it for your virtues and will make a conscious investment for it staying in their life... same as you. Ergo, in a healthy relationship, both of you are 'invested' in each other and wish to care for the relationship consciously, knowing that other than staying virtuous the connection will be eventually severed. In other words, it will be evident to you because by being the real you, you're more/less liked and vice versa the same for the other person from your perspective. I get that plenty. I totally get that. However I don't want to make the effort to reach out because I'm not as of yet a man living as a successful example of my values... ...And I found a contradiction. To be a successful example, doesn't that include friends? I see the catch 22 I might have put myself in. My solution at the moment however is simply to put making friends on the distant back burner and rely on making them as I try to sell my book and invest the profits next year. Of course work-friends aren't exactly the same thing as personal friends, but I think I'm far more likely to make a meaningful friend by bumping into them on the common road of either writing or investing. Quote Do things for the right reasons. Having the right support groups to talk about issues like this, do result in reducing doubts. Missing such environments tend to increase, strengthen those doubts. It is for a good reason, why you haven't... likewise, it's also for another good reason why you (in my clumsy estimation) seemingly tend to beat yourself up about it. (?) Stay curious, don't make pre-emptive judgements. You'll figure it out, the right way I hope. Well, like modern women, I do feel the stress to be a whore. However I guess I'm better at resisting it. Like that's really an accomplishment. Quote This looks like a fantastic idea for a novel, that if you put your mind to it, I'm sure would be a fascinating and powerful read. (Having seen what you can do with syntax and flow of ideas.) Oh yeah I'll be sure to self-promote here once I'm done and having it sold somewhere. I assure you it'll be the best thing Generation Z has ever laid eyes upon and put to shame the older generations of nihilism and hedonism! To give you a brief idea: The series follows primarily two characters and those close to them: Alois von Adlerheim, and Roland Heike. Alois was raised in a brutal orphanage until he escaped as pre-teen with four other children and spent 2 years getting educated at a church. Eventually, as a child laborer, he was discovered by a nobleman he was delivering a book to and that nobleman recognized him as the son of Haraldr von Adlerheim, the Hero of Copenhagen who saved Denmark and won great battles both as a guerilla and as a general during the Forty Years War. Alois is sent off with his albino girlfriend, Lia, to be raised by his father who secreted him in the orphanage to protect him since the capital was under assault and many noble children were secreted and hid as common children so not to be taken as hostages or killed. During the beginning, he spends his remainder years of youth in the arms of his father with his little half-sister, makes new friends and explores abstract ideas as he's destined to marry his cousin the Princess of Denmark and succeed her deceased father, Frederik the Great. His oath with his four friends remains strong as they regularly exchange letters from their thousand-mile distance accross the sea--from "Adlerhafen", in Lapland, to Copenhagen in Denmark. Meanwhile he makes new friends and crushes as he explores the Free City his father built, where "Man For Man" is the motto, property rights are sacred, and entrepreneurial spirit dominates the zeitgeist of the German settlers. Roland Heike is the grandson of (I am writing his story, which is parallel to Alois's, second so unlike Alois is pretty much done his 2/3rds of the first book--I mention this because there are a few things in the air) the illustrious Marshal Roland Heike, the Thuderbolt, "He Who Never Retreats", and the son of the less famous General Stefan Heike, who served under his father. Being born towards the end of the Forty Years War, Roland grew up in the tense and grim Dutch Democratic Republic as it was assaulted on all sides by the French, English, and North German rebels. As he's grown into a man, he's wanted to follow his father and grandfather's advice on becoming a civilian but has no idea what to do as a civilian. Meanwhile, since the French King was assassinated by a radical republican terrorist, the D.D.R. has been active in attempting to reform France as a republic while the nation is torn in four as several cadet branches seek to reunify France but with foreign backing causing them to conflict. With seemingly endless war and increasingly tyrannical government, Satanist groups are infiltrating the system's institutions and are becoming increasingly visible and radical amongst the lower classes. Meanwhile the existing Liberal Nationalist Party and Democratic-Republican Party are both losing favor to their more radical youth wings; the Radiant Cross Party and the Militant Citizen's Party. Wishing he was not forced to choose between two extremes, he struggles to maintain moral integrity as his republic falls down around him, and alongside his brothers, father, and uncles seeks to restore the order and relative peace of the Pre-War Republic. ...That's my brief for the beginning of the two major heroes. Both champions who represent different ideologies in the long run. Quote Thinking is writing. (Why do you think Jordan B Peterson's assessment suite is sooo powerful. Add to that someone with a talent for writing, well...) Well said, remember that! I recommend the most humbly humble humblest of all... (to myself also) Lastly, thank you Siegfried von Walheim for sharing. You're welcome. Quote Have a great one, Whatever that means! Lol what am I having that you wish to be great?! :-P Just a "Russian joke" since I've learned there are no such expressions in Russian while you English-English have an awful lot of "polite" expressions! Even more so than we Americans! Quote Barnsley :-) EDIT: What do you mean by "syntax"? I looked up the definition so I guess I have some idea... But I'm fishing for compliments and specifics. Edited March 22, 2018 by Siegfried von Walheim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barn Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 No problem, I like (stretching the definition here a bit... ), you being you. Though, still ambivalent(not you, tis me, I suppose). "Beggars can't be choosers" contrasted with "don't wish for something you aren't prepared to receive". Still processing, evaluating. Be back soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 22, 2018 Author Share Posted March 22, 2018 42 minutes ago, barn said: No problem, I like (stretching the definition here a bit... ), you being you. Though, still ambivalent(not you, tis me, I suppose). "Beggars can't be choosers" contrasted with "don't wish for something you aren't prepared to receive". Hey man you're being too subtle for me! Be straight with me bro! :-P Like, am I the beggar and you the guy giving me the handout and you saying I'm asking for something I really shouldn't be asking for? Too subtle! I'm confused! I can interpret this a hundred different ways but only one of them can be right! 42 minutes ago, barn said: Still processing, evaluating. Be back soon. Got'cha! Chances are this reply will accompany my big reply to your big reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Good to see you! (Mostly because I haven't been coming around, I'm sure you've been here far more frequently than myself! ^_< ) It goes without saying that it's really commendable how much detail you went into on what you've experienced and how it's helped shape your decisions for the future. I'm not sure if I should go into such detail, myself... although I think I would be spoiling the party if I don't? XD Maybe, lemme warm up to it... But my advice, in little bits and pieces, wherever I can find it appropriate to offer any: On 3/19/2018 at 1:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: writer/investor Y'know, I was a writer in the past, and although I haven't really been arranging any books lately, I still have the old skills kicking around in my head. I can always offer some pointers, or at the very least, some constructive, critical feedback- say, like pointing out errors in MUCH of barns' post, for example? =D (But he's not the subject of this discussion, so I won't put him on the spot (unless he wouldn't mind? =o), suffice it to say, I'm not trying to be mean, just saying............ saw some errors, and I'd only offer corrections for correction's sake.) While it's certainly true that every writer has his/her own writing style, there are still many objectively true things to consider about the process of writing. Active rather than passive language (don't even get me STARTED on reading wiki articles), proper placement of particular punctuation (pardon the alliteration, it honestly was a happy coincidence), so on and so forth. Everybody doesn't have to read exactly like Steinbeck, but it's a REALLY good idea to have as few errors as possible! *_* Just throwing that out there... On 3/19/2018 at 1:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: If I really want to go this way, I need to think about what I need to do to get what I want. I've thought long and hard about what I'll be doing professionally (as I'm doing it). That part (writer/investor) is clear (for the next 5 years at least). What's foggy is relationships. I don't like using people for utilities but I do understand reciprocal business relationships and am not afraid of making those. I think I'm doing all right as far as my readiness and ability to make co-worker or business-partner relationships, of course I have minimal experience, but here I think my mind is in the right place and am therefore able to do what I must to get what I want. Where I'm worried about is the personal stuff. I'm afraid I must be the bearer of some bad news... Work relationships? Business-partner relationships? Using people for utilities? All of this IS "personal stuff". Whether you're starting a business, or you're on the job any given day, or you own a big and profitable company, EVERYTHING is "the personal stuff". I have found that, for whatever reason (perhaps it's the increasingly-detached distance people have from the services around them, or the manner our culture looks at the world, or whatever), people seem to think of things that don't involve directly looking at another human face as being some kind of "machine". They see their interactions with business as minor plays in the midst of giant cogs trying to move things along, and they don't feel like anything human is going on. They consider that the world is just flowing along in a very systematic manner, with corporations being these gigantic monoliths that don't involve any human emotion at all. All of this is false. EVERYTHING is people interacting with people. Every time you pick up the phone to deal with customer support, you're talking to a human being who is worrying much the same way you might be that they might come off weird and embarrass themselves over the phone. Products getting "churned out" is the direct result of people passing the time as they chat with one another, helping machines do what other people want them to do. Most of all, every business relationship is a close friendship LONG before it ever reaches the point of "want to go into business with me?" The term "nepotism" gets thrown around, when in fact, that's just the reality of humans being humans. Business teams are husbands and wives, families, or very close friends. It's not some kind of "unfair" deal that you are disadvantaged by, it's just that people naturally wish to help those they are close to, before they ever wish to help a total stranger. So friends and family ALWAYS come first. Simply put (and to stop belaboring the point), you've gotta get a handle on interacting with people on a deeply personal level before you can EVER hope to move into a productive and professional level with anyone. Chances are you're not going to go into business with a total stranger. It will be a friend, or at the very, very least, a friend of a friend that you have good reason to feel that you can trust. This might seem like a non sequitur, but I think this might be important to touch on: 4 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: there was a dog and I am/was extremely fearful of dogs How have you been addressing this? Have you been addressing this? It might seem small or possibly inconsequential, but I've found that every "limitation" has a tendency to grow itself into an impassible barrier over time. I had a trauma in the past that gave me a pretty wicked trigger, but it was associated with such a specific situation, I figured I could avoid it. WRONG! I was humiliated in front of peers and coworkers on several occasions because I didn't get a handle on my traumas and failed to address them. This was affecting me in my life in more and more ways as time wore on, because I wasn't handling it. Finally I did (gradual and controlled exposure in therapy setting), and a few years later I can say that while the core trauma still upsets me to this day, at least I'm not rendered a useless, quivering mess if I remember it. 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: I knew you were English! My mental image of your voice isn't far off. Actually, the "u" in "honor" doesn't necessarily demonstrate "English", so much as it demonstrates ANY of the Oxfordian English approaches to writing... basically EVERYTHING ELSE but American English! XD The Canadians do it too, as do the Scotts, the Irish, the Aussies, and plenty Europeans who learned English as a non-primary language. 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: What I have always found attractive, perhaps as a result of all this, are men (and women) who are straight forward, honest, and not afraid to disagree. I despise cowards, idiots, and cucks. I love champions, geniuses, and protectors. Hmm, and why aren't we besties? =D Kidding (maybe). 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: I fear Rightist women are just as likely to be passive weaklings as the average Leftist woman. From personal experience, I've found this to be quite the opposite case! Might I suggest Blonde in the Belly of the Beast, for observation purposes? =D I watch her weekly podcast she co-hosts with Matt Christiansen, "Beauty and the Beta" (though I'm a few weeks behind), her being the conservative, and him being the liberal, and she's quite the outspoken firebrand! Sadly for any of us, she is taken, but whenever I have in mind the kinds of women I want to form a relationship with, she certainly serves as my model. The more like her they are, the better I'll get along with them! =D So, I think that's enough "distractions" out of the way... Now onto the meat of your concerns... So how well do you know your uncle? You surely have reasons that you would like to maintain a relationship with him, in spite of the concerns you have that make you think it would be best to cut yourself off from that entire wing of your family. There's the matter of interconnected relationships, for one thing (as Stef mentioned in his latest video about Forgiveness, that a "family tree" is much more like a giant web, because there's lines between everyone) and cutting yourself off from certain people doesn't actually guarantee that others won't try to push you back together. This is especially difficult when it comes to family. I can remember an interaction I had with a cousin when we met (for the first time in years) for Thanksgiving back in 2016, and without naming who I was referring to, I mentioned that there was "evil" within my family. My cousin just laughed, in complete disbelief that ANYONE in our family could be "evil", and thought that I MUST be joking. So, guess that means don't keep that cousin terribly high on my list of contacts? Lucky for me it's not much of a problem, cause like I said, hadn't seen them in years before that gathering... You either see something in your relationship with that uncle and your niece/nephews that gives you pause from cutting yourself off from them entirely, or you just like them "enough" that you don't mind putting up with the rest of their baggage for the rest of them. You don't have to have 100% of your relationships be absolutely ideal models of virtuosity, but your close circle should definitely meet all your requirements and expectations. That circle can be one that you've chosen... but you can't choose your family of origin. If that uncle from your family of origin is the best of the bunch, why not give him a chance? To pull another example from my own family, I have another cousin that is a sweetheart, I get along very well with her, her husband, and her daughter, but she's very soft when it comes to holding the rest of our family accountable for their actions, and she herself has forsaken the "family religion" in favor of abstract woo-woo spiritualism. Those latter 2 things do bother me, but are they bad enough that I have to cut ties with her altogether? In my estimate, no. She has a great head on her shoulders, and we can talk things out. More importantly, even if she forgives the rest of our family a bit too easily for my tastes, she hasn't repeated those mistakes on her daughter, so she may not be the most virtuous person in my family, but she's in that ballpark, and that's enough to keep a relationship. Perhaps your uncle is similar in this regard; not the most virtuous person, but worth knowing? Make no mistake, when I first learned that Stefan was an open advocate for "deFOOing", I was happy to learn this, because I had long-held sentiments that I needed to cut myself off from my own family of origin. So if it's the best thing for you, I might be the first to support your decision to well-and-truly sever those ties for good. But the important thing is assessing that this is, indeed, the best thing for you. Cutting yourself off from people who abuse, and who pardon abuse? Absolutely. From people who adamantly support the demonic Democratic party because they believe in all its distopian ideals? Certainly. But people who are, as you put it "at best, misguided"? Perhaps a chance would not be unwarranted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Good to see you! (Mostly because I haven't been coming around, I'm sure you've been here far more frequently than myself! ^_< ) Good to see you too old man! :-P If I could I'd DM you. You can email me at [email protected] . 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: It goes without saying that it's really commendable how much detail you went into on what you've experienced and how it's helped shape your decisions for the future. I'm not sure if I should go into such detail, myself... although I think I would be spoiling the party if I don't? XD Maybe, lemme warm up to it... But my advice, in little bits and pieces, wherever I can find it appropriate to offer any: Y'know, I was a writer in the past, and although I haven't really been arranging any books lately, I still have the old skills kicking around in my head. I can always offer some pointers, or at the very least, some constructive, critical feedback- say, like pointing out errors in MUCH of barns' post, for example? =D (But he's not the subject of this discussion, so I won't put him on the spot (unless he wouldn't mind? =o), suffice it to say, I'm not trying to be mean, just saying............ saw some errors, and I'd only offer corrections for correction's sake.) While it's certainly true that every writer has his/her own writing style, there are still many objectively true things to consider about the process of writing. Active rather than passive language (don't even get me STARTED on reading wiki articles), proper placement of particular punctuation (pardon the alliteration, it honestly was a happy coincidence), so on and so forth. Everybody doesn't have to read exactly like Steinbeck, but it's a REALLY good idea to have as few errors as possible! *_* Well, I am hugely skeptical of writing advice since most writing advisors make their money primarily from advising about writing rather than from their novels. That being said, I could always use feedback from a reader's perspective because ultimately the job is to please the reader not other writers. If you want I'll email you my current draft of it. Email me and I'll know who you are. Of course I'll probably have to state I have little memory for what "active language" and other terms mean anymore since literacy class bored me to tears all my life. I'm guessing... I dunno, using actions rather than descriptions of actions? Like instead of saying Johnny Johnson is smart, demonstrate how he's smart? 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Just throwing that out there... I'm afraid I must be the bearer of some bad news... Work relationships? Business-partner relationships? Using people for utilities? All of this IS "personal stuff". Whether you're starting a business, or you're on the job any given day, or you own a big and profitable company, EVERYTHING is "the personal stuff". I don't know if that's "bad news", because I was actually hoping it was that way. I suppose the challenge is the ordering of me doing things. More on that below. 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: I have found that, for whatever reason (perhaps it's the increasingly-detached distance people have from the services around them, or the manner our culture looks at the world, or whatever), people seem to think of things that don't involve directly looking at another human face as being some kind of "machine". They see their interactions with business as minor plays in the midst of giant cogs trying to move things along, and they don't feel like anything human is going on. They consider that the world is just flowing along in a very systematic manner, with corporations being these gigantic monoliths that don't involve any human emotion at all. All of this is false. EVERYTHING is people interacting with people. Every time you pick up the phone to deal with customer support, you're talking to a human being who is worrying much the same way you might be that they might come off weird and embarrass themselves over the phone. Products getting "churned out" is the direct result of people passing the time as they chat with one another, helping machines do what other people want them to do. Most of all, every business relationship is a close friendship LONG before it ever reaches the point of "want to go into business with me?" The term "nepotism" gets thrown around, when in fact, that's just the reality of humans being humans. Business teams are husbands and wives, families, or very close friends. It's not some kind of "unfair" deal that you are disadvantaged by, it's just that people naturally wish to help those they are close to, before they ever wish to help a total stranger. So friends and family ALWAYS come first. Which makes sense. I know people are becoming increasingly isolated socially and I'd admit myself as a prime example of that. I don't really talk to people in person beyond my mother and therapist. 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Simply put (and to stop belaboring the point), you've gotta get a handle on interacting with people on a deeply personal level before you can EVER hope to move into a productive and professional level with anyone. Chances are you're not going to go into business with a total stranger. It will be a friend, or at the very, very least, a friend of a friend that you have good reason to feel that you can trust. Makes sense. "Networking" and all that. I have a vague idea on how that works, and plenty of ideas on how that's helpful, but I don't know how to build one. I mean, is it as simple as go to places (in person or online or something in between? Or both?), find people I can talk to, then see how well we connect in terms of values and beliefs, and then from there we have a link? 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: This might seem like a non sequitur, but I think this might be important to touch on: How have you been addressing this? Have you been addressing this? It might seem small or possibly inconsequential, but I've found that every "limitation" has a tendency to grow itself into an impassible barrier over time. I had a trauma in the past that gave me a pretty wicked trigger, but it was associated with such a specific situation, I figured I could avoid it. WRONG! I was humiliated in front of peers and coworkers on several occasions because I didn't get a handle on my traumas and failed to address them. This was affecting me in my life in more and more ways as time wore on, because I wasn't handling it. Finally I did (gradual and controlled exposure in therapy setting), and a few years later I can say that while the core trauma still upsets me to this day, at least I'm not rendered a useless, quivering mess if I remember it. I'm not addressing it at all. It's "only" been an issue once, but I found a way around it (namely stand behind the counter and remember there's a leash) when I was foolishly attempting the rat race. I have plenty of imagination as to how this weakness can go badly. Like, say, if I'm inviting a bunch of friends and friends of friends to an event... and one of them brings a dog... Or if I'm pursuing a woman... and she's a dogf__cker... well, you get the drift. Now I don't like pets in general. I fear them at least a little but dogs in particular. I think you're plenty right in saying I have to find a way to tame my fear of dogs. For now I'm just winging it, figuring I can just kick myself in the shin should I ever get fearful. I do have a way of "easing myself into it" as occasionally there are dog walkers en route to where I'm coming and going. Hypothetically a means of easing myself is simply to walk past them without purposely hiding behind a car or whatever. I'll be sure to do that next time... And I know it's a connected thing. 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Actually, the "u" in "honor" doesn't necessarily demonstrate "English", so much as it demonstrates ANY of the Oxfordian English approaches to writing... basically EVERYTHING ELSE but American English! XD The Canadians do it too, as do the Scotts, the Irish, the Aussies, and plenty Europeans who learned English as a non-primary language. Well, English-English are the second biggest native speakers of it and while barn's thing says he lives in Spain I could just assume he's an English speaker who immigrated to Spain or lives in Gibraltar. Canadians and Australians and the rest are pretty few in number compared to nearly 100 million Englishmen (especially if you include their neighbors) or 300 + million Americans and loiterers. 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Hmm, and why aren't we besties? =D Kidding (maybe). Tease! If you want to chat with me, email me using the address above. Like I said, I cannot Direct Message since I'm under moderation since around this time last year. Or maybe not that long, but it's been many months and I haven't kept track. 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: From personal experience, I've found this to be quite the opposite case! Might I suggest Blonde in the Belly of the Beast, for observation purposes? =D I watch her weekly podcast she co-hosts with Matt Christiansen, "Beauty and the Beta" (though I'm a few weeks behind), her being the conservative, and him being the liberal, and she's quite the outspoken firebrand! Sadly for any of us, she is taken, but whenever I have in mind the kinds of women I want to form a relationship with, she certainly serves as my model. The more like her they are, the better I'll get along with them! =D I'll have to check her out to really know. I mean, who's to say she hasn't arrived at her conclusions simply because she had an initial bias in favor of Rightism? Of course that's probably rare (or maybe not--I mean, how many women can freely admit to being Rightists without being ostracized for it? Or more precisely, while caring about ostracism?). However... I don't know. Personally I'd rather wait until I am wealthy before I go do something I fear I will have a lot to work on before even contemplating. Like my friendlessness for example. I doubt I am in the right mindset and possessed of the right character traits to be a good man to a good woman. And I hate settling. So I gotta improve! 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: So, I think that's enough "distractions" out of the way... Now onto the meat of your concerns... Oh that's not a distraction! Not at this point! 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: So how well do you know your uncle? You surely have reasons that you would like to maintain a relationship with him, in spite of the concerns you have that make you think it would be best to cut yourself off from that entire wing of your family. There's the matter of interconnected relationships, for one thing (as Stef mentioned in his latest video about Forgiveness, that a "family tree" is much more like a giant web, because there's lines between everyone) and cutting yourself off from certain people doesn't actually guarantee that others won't try to push you back together. This is especially difficult when it comes to family. I can remember an interaction I had with a cousin when we met (for the first time in years) for Thanksgiving back in 2016, and without naming who I was referring to, I mentioned that there was "evil" within my family. My cousin just laughed, in complete disbelief that ANYONE in our family could be "evil", and thought that I MUST be joking. So, guess that means don't keep that cousin terribly high on my list of contacts? Lucky for me it's not much of a problem, cause like I said, hadn't seen them in years before that gathering... I don't really see him at all. Like once or twice a year at family events (that I no longer go to). However the last time I spoke with him was Halloween of 2016 or 17. And what we talked about was racial realism and white racism. He claimed there must be white racists in government because marijuana is more highly prosecuted than cocaine, which apparently are drugs favored by blacks and whites respectively. I don't remember much else, but I do remember us being very distant on the political spectrum, and he was too busy to have a real conversation with me (and I chose to do more probing and listening since I wasn't sure where he stood). Frankly I don't want to reach out to get to know him. However I have no reason to believe he's a bad guy. I just don't want to do the work to get to know him. 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: You either see something in your relationship with that uncle and your niece/nephews that gives you pause from cutting yourself off from them entirely, or you just like them "enough" that you don't mind putting up with the rest of their baggage for the rest of them. You don't have to have 100% of your relationships be absolutely ideal models of virtuosity, but your close circle should definitely meet all your requirements and expectations. That circle can be one that you've chosen... but you can't choose your family of origin. If that uncle from your family of origin is the best of the bunch, why not give him a chance? To pull another example from my own family, I have another cousin that is a sweetheart, I get along very well with her, her husband, and her daughter, but she's very soft when it comes to holding the rest of our family accountable for their actions, and she herself has forsaken the "family religion" in favor of abstract woo-woo spiritualism. Those latter 2 things do bother me, but are they bad enough that I have to cut ties with her altogether? In my estimate, no. She has a great head on her shoulders, and we can talk things out. More importantly, even if she forgives the rest of our family a bit too easily for my tastes, she hasn't repeated those mistakes on her daughter, so she may not be the most virtuous person in my family, but she's in that ballpark, and that's enough to keep a relationship. Perhaps your uncle is similar in this regard; not the most virtuous person, but worth knowing? I understand the idea of having categories since no man's an island and an "big individual" like myself would have very, very, very few friends if he only chose people he considered virtuous and admirable. At least that I know of... Hopefully I'm wrong, but nothing worthwhile is built with hope. I am perfectly willing to tolerate people I disagree with substantially to work with them--just not closely. People I disagree with minor-ly... Well, who cares if it's minor? However if it's fairly significant (to borrow your example) and I think he's nuts, but at the same time he's surprisingly level-headed and smart, I might actually enjoy his company and speak with him. Even if he isn't in the "close" ring he's still in the "middle/friend" ring. And I think I have to grow that ring if I want a network. After all, as an entrepreneur, I have to get to know people if I want to grow substantially. I need people for advice, promoting, brokering, and for advising. I need someone to help me publish (or decide if I should self-publish), someone to help me promote my books, someone to help broker deals once I use the profits for investment (as a corporation? I got an idea from Rich Dad Poor Dad to make myself into a corporation so I can reinvest profits and thereby pay minimal taxes on my earnings), and advise me on whether I'm going straight or heading off a cliff. I think I have character to offer. As a writer I have at least books (product) to offer and am therefore a person to potentially invest in. However beyond that... I don't know. I think I'm a decent, loyal, and reliable man but I'm a bit rough with words and don't like to BS and may be a bit anti-social for it. 17 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Make no mistake, when I first learned that Stefan was an open advocate for "deFOOing", I was happy to learn this, because I had long-held sentiments that I needed to cut myself off from my own family of origin. So if it's the best thing for you, I might be the first to support your decision to well-and-truly sever those ties for good. But the important thing is assessing that this is, indeed, the best thing for you. Cutting yourself off from people who abuse, and who pardon abuse? Absolutely. From people who adamantly support the demonic Democratic party because they believe in all its distopian ideals? Certainly. But people who are, as you put it "at best, misguided"? Perhaps a chance would not be unwarranted? I agree. If I meet a good (seemingly anyway) man who appears to be on the wrong side, I'm inclined to try reaching for him. I don't think that's my uncle (well I don't KNOW) but I don't really care. I want to clean my slate and build something new on it. However, I am a completely newbie to business and friendships and how they intertwine. I might be ahead of the curve since I'm studying privately and working on my career while most are indebting themselves in college, but I am lacking the people experience that comes from college as well as the tolerance for BS and networks that might be formed be being with the diamonds among the coals. What do you think? Am I thinking right? Should I make friends after I've finished my book (and would therefore need them) or should I make friends first? Or around the same time as each other? Or... Should I make friends naturally as I try to self-promote and get published? Like should I build networks with fellow travelers who are going through the same process? And record them over time based on what I can gauge from them and their histories? By default, that's basically my plan. Finish book. Learn how best to publish. Publish. Promote, and invest with the profits from what I've made from my first book (and before that, copyright it and all that) and during this entire process keep tabs on the people I meet as I go from step to step. How big of a network do I need and how much energy do I have to expend maintaining it? Do I just need a half-dozen reliable people or do I need a few families worth of people I can phone/email as needed? Something in between? A lot of questions, and I'm not sure where to begin. By default, I am writing my book and studying off the internet while I have free time. I'm not really connecting with anyone outside FDR and I generally try to be as self-sufficient and island-like as possible. But I am pretty sure there's a better way of doing things and there may be value to be gained by reaching out to people with similar interests and paths but they might be doing something different yet complimentary to what I am doing. And I think one way to find them is to search forums that novelists/wannabes hang out and look for ones that have similar interests and politics as myself and try debating with them. Alternatively I could instead reach out to political websites and try debating with them and thus make connections with people who are of a similar view but not directly doing what I am doing. I don't know. At this point I'm inclined to repeat myself in a loop. Take the baton from here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 @twinklingwinter please email me at [email protected]. We haven't spoken in months and I cannot DM, so if you want to reach me, email me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barn Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Hello @Siegfried von Walheim Before all: I had pinned my tent prior to have written to you first. It's the kind that serves to protect against the elements, easy to disassemble and has no food in it as it might lure all sorts of beasts of the wild. Effective. Something I'd like to add. I'm also a human, not a Russian bot. Hi! (Sorry... more like empathising, though I did shorten the formalities to the essential.) You'll see me commenting, at times apparently critical but as you've already heard 'my voice' it's rather intrigued than judgemental of all things...you'll see. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: How have you found it emotionally engaging yet ambivalent? Less a question for the topic but how I wrote it. It's what you wrote and how you wrote it. Cold, but yet vulnerable and still fragile from certain angles. Fascinating, really. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: my mother tried to limit my access to her family of origin to "only" thanksgiving and Christmas. Which frankly I don't think was limited enough because I seldom had a Christmas (at her parent's) that didn't end with some kind of argument where her mother played the victim and bullied my mother before all her siblings and in-laws. Which was why eventually she stopped going to their celebrations and it was just me. I was never embarrassed in such a way (except one time, there was a dog and I am/was extremely fearful of dogs. I say "except this one time..." but it was a pretty big deal. My mother slapped my shoulder as if to hit me for her mother, whom I kept from opening a door because I was hiding outside from her son's (my successful uncle's) dog. I have never forgotten her apology afterwards where she confessed she pretty much defaulted to being her mother's daughter before my being her son's mother. Which was a big part of why my mother's actively avoided her own mother since).. Do you mean she 'intended/said' one thing but did facilitate some other actions? (i.e. - Um, I'm sober. Honest. Me chugging down a glass or two doesn't really count.) On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: 've impressed my mother more than once since she was "shocked" I could argue with her mother (and little sister and brothers) without cowing or wincing. Would you say that's something you'd be proud of? On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I can remember quite a few emotionally volatile moments, actually. So while I was never "embarrassed" I can definitely say I've never enjoyed visiting my "family" for Christmas/Thanksgiving. I chose not to last year, and it was the best Christmas/Thanksgiving in a very long time. Do you remember, what had brought about the change? What made you change your mind? On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I also think my experiences have made me prone towards being overly confrontational and aggressive. When I was younger I never wanted to be a coward like my mother and as I grew older resented myself for cowering before the teachers. So eventually I stopped cowering and demanded respect. I would be lying if I said I hadn't noticed your ample collection of colourful thorns, good on 'ya for taking agency in that department. (I mean it. More, the second part.) How do you distinguish between earned respect and fear of superiority/power? I mean, there's the lingering threat of dire consequences on one end, longing desire and curiosity for wisdom on the other. How have you verified... with friends and teachers... etc? Also, some people are just drawn to confidence, boldness, power... as you know. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Well, I honestly don't know how useful it was. On one hand I can definitely see the similarities; on the other you don't have a history of successfully working with it and then making something meaningful happen (i.e. get a wife, a house, and begetting a bunch of kids). You're old enough to be my father, yet based on the fact you didn't mention marrying and having kids, I assume you aren't really a man yet. You're still in you twenties as a forty-something year old man. Frankly I consider you an example of failure, and if I were you I'd be doing whatever I can to change that ASAP. Without going into it... My aim was to be somewhat reciprocal (given your straight-from-the-heart op, I had to... ) and basically indicate some paths that had taught me some valuable lessons; could be seen as distant 'echoes' in my response. Thanks for giving your impression though. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I understand the argument you might have in response: it is better I am healed and prepared then "go in" still injured. However my reply is this: your injuries are not tangible. You don't have a literal hole in your heart or soft spot this way or that way. You may have a few problems but I think you could have solved them at my age (19-20) rather than spending decades masturbating around the globe (I don't know what you did but I can assume it was a major waste of time. Again: a waste of time relative to becoming a family man That's exactly it, how did you know... Just kidding. Actually, my experience was... Kinda disheartening, making me want to share less the details with you if you have such a good imagination to not require my input. Anyhow, thanks again for giving your impression on the 'would've'. It's interesting to read your ideas. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Of course I think I need to stress: while I am criticizing you, I am not doing so with anger or a desire to drive you off. No problem, I'm a big boy(?). It's not like we know each other or we've been friends. Though, trying to be friendly can get a bit difficult to maintain over time unless a guy called Aristoteles means well...I'm sure you got it. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: You know this sentence breeds doubt rather than assurance, right? :-P It did? Well, apart from having no intention of doing so, I can't do much about it as it's, what it is. I'm sorry, I won't be gruff nor stern. Straightforward? I can be. (It's too fine a knife's edge to balance, easy to slip and come off sounding abusive, unempathetic... right?!) On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Shocking for you, predictable for me. This is one such example of 'frostbite'. (I'm exaggerating, all-right. Was thinking of frost-roses) On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: The first guy I actually have fond memories of since he resembled my father but with both arms and legs Ouch. (very engaging metaphor) I don't need to quote the rest. That's horrible. I'm sorry, you had to be part of that mess. That's horrible. I don't think it's something that should EVER be part of any child's youth. Or irresponsible parents, the same ... THunders! Gosh, man. (I'm far from pitying, trust me... sorry, how could you trust me...huh) Siegfried von Walheim, that wasn't normal. For people to do such egregious acts... You may have cooled to freeze, normalised it... this is, what f_cked up people generate in their environment due to a great series of bad decisions, avoidance and hiding from responsibility. You were supposed to be protected from all of that, you were supposed to NOT experience THAT, the 'work of evildoers'. At all. Shame on those who caused so much unnecessary, headless suffering to you. Thunders! (I need a break) (back) On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: what's this old[....] but had nothing meaningful to reply with and avoided disagreeing with me. I don't say I do understand that fully, I know I can't. Goes over my head. The nearest is when I felt truly in proximity isolation... etc. I hate how drugs are handled, relationships torn, shredded. I'm not trying to cut slack for your father, as he IS responsible, same as others. Does he want to sort himself out? (my lunacy, could be a bad idea... ask people who are credible and all that...) How are you assessing the relationship, from what side are you looking at it? I mean, fear/possibility of losing someone does tend to feed dependency... almost as a drug. A big challenge. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: What I have always found attractive, perhaps as a result of all this, are men (and women) who are straight forward, honest, and not afraid to disagree. I despise cowards, idiots, and cucks. I love champions, geniuses, and protectors. This is veeery interesting. I have a similar liking but with a slight dip towards anti-heroes. B-man, especially. The despising part not so much. Empathising, given the right circumstances is wiser, yet the harder. I have always been interested in contexts after having realised how easily final judgements can be one's worst enemy, same as with the everlasting limbo. There's a nothing burger for you. Sorry, longer version some other time. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Perhaps as I write and perhaps when or if I become more political and speak publicly, I'll fulfill my desire to be a champion, but I fear I am too soft on the inside to be a protector. How about, just (hehe... 'just') being virtuous? I see plenty of heroes already, that way. On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: More precisely: I'm afraid I cannot get a good woman because I want my emotions to be tended to more than I want to tend to her emotions. Yes. It can happen. For that, make sure to take plenty of self-erasure, insecurity, dependency, lying - classes. +Dicknap. or You could be your true self with integrity and internalised principles. In contact with your Shadow for the rough stuff if necessary but centered to still feel and live all the colours of the emotions palette. It's up to you, which and how much. (To a certain degree because genetics but your true potential is a different matter.) ... me thinks. Are we seeing eye to eye on this one? On 03/22/2018 at 7:56 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I either have to lower my standards/desires or simply become great enough to warrant a unicorn. I'm afraid this sounds 'stickman forest'-y to me. I'd rather discuss this topic with you again if your social endeavours... say... extended, a tiny bit more? I'm trying to gain an unfair advantage ;-} over the current situation where proving you the point of 'there are many fine ladies around you'... is, sort of haaaard. Do you see what I mean? Later, ok? (When you are socially more active) ... still editing... (... a day or so later, apparently I needed another break. For the better.) (I missed to say earlier) Thanks for explaining what 'platonic' was regards to your mother. I assume because he knows it is/was toxic and therefore distanced himself largely from his family of origin. Now!!! It makes sense. I mean, it's probably a close enough guess. A good guess in my estimation. My mother might have his phone number but he lives very far away and I don't have any means of getting there, beyond public transit and some maps maybe. Plus he still has a dog that I am afraid of. Isn't this something of an 'orc-skin, paper-thin' excuse? I'm not saying you should get in touch with him, I'm saying how easy it would be to give it a try. Obviously you know better your family and your thinking must be reflecting that. There's a good reason behind it I'd theorise. Even so. Why not tick this box and get it over with? It might surprise you what you'll find. No, and yes. [...] Thank you. If I properly grasped you, this is about 'ideologues vs. people lost in the woods possibly, temporarily'...right? Sounded a bit too polarised but perhaps you were just trying to give a general idea of it. I particularly liked that you'd remembered to include the 'good conclusion vs. wrong methodology' example. What do you mean "binary" lol? (Nothing of an importance, really.) When I looked at my responses at that section it drew a smirk on my face... As in: agreeing , then the next paragraph disagreeing... Like I was a binary minded person responding there. Coincidentally. I hope so. I especially hope thousands of future fans agree. Illusions of grandeur? Don't think so. From what I've seen from you in other threads, you are keeping a regular work routine... It helps if you visualise and work towards such chosen objectives. In my experience, it is a wise thing to keep such goals to yourself and not speak them publicly until you've made it an unshakeable conviction. The reason behind it, (besides me supporting you regarding it, more power to you) is that there are a great deal of vicious soul-crushers out there. People who can't stand you becoming more than them; realising your dreams in a powerful manner and they must minimise/fizzle out your flame. Not to mention the 'Person from Porlock' types. I know... I know. But evolution has made us nostalgic for our cages for a reason. However, for the most part, I think my cage is not a good one. Therefore I'm best off building a new and better one (since at the moment there is no replacing the cage as biology demands it for the children's sake). If your own cage, built by your own hands pleases you more, so be it. Or You could build one, that you can open and secure when necessary(a castle :-P). I remembered vaguely a quote that was something along the lines of locking a door to keep insane people out, instead of holding good people locked up in their homes... I would say I think more optimistically about what I'm heading to versus what I fear, if that is what you mean. I'm sorry, no it wasn't my focus. Like, I know the reason why I'm not spending as much time in a 'constructivity mode' is something that has clear reasons behind it. I was curious if you'd thought about to assess a usual day of yours to see, what proportions of your time is spent on thinking/visualising the things you want/comes next vs. the things that are worrisome in your estimation. (40, 60% or 70, 20%...etc.) I especially idealize the image of living in a Japanese-style... I have a vivid imagination too. Nicely done. Quite idyllic. Thanks for sharing a peek through 'this' window. And sometimes I forget! I have a tendency towards selfishness and narcissism, perhaps solipsism as well. I am always on guard to prevent myself from becoming a hypocrite and a wastrel. Those are some brave words in my eyes. Yes, one must be on guard constantly. I have verified it, there's a curious phenomenon happening with attention and how the brain splits up the available resources. It occurs once the brain is actively being engaged/stimulated ... it can't allocate as efficiently to other parts. I use it for banishing unproductive thoughts, when I'm aware it's happening. Use it. (I'm reminding myself too.) I don't want to get to know more people at the moment. I want to build! And I want to attract people as I show off my creation and work on profiting from it! I don't want to get to know Philly kids without futures! However I don't know where to look for for decent people around me. I think the best thing is to either find people I share a common interest in or a common work field in. If that's trully what you want/have decided, go for it. I don't think it is wise or something I would agree with. (I mean, not getting to know more people for the reasons you put.) Not because I don't think there are people who don't need as large quantity of social interactions... i.e. introvert vs. extrovert and the scale... No, I get it. Philly kids... sure, I get that too. Just an idea but thought you might be willing to answer it, and it's quite personal so don't worry if you don't want to reply... What if the reason you don't want to get to know more people is because you don't trust your skills at evaluating? Like here, for example. I think my social needs are satiated plenty by interacting on this forum and with my therapist. I doubt I'll be finding a wife here or on the internet though. However I'm not ready for a woman anyway. Haha... Just jumped in my mind the ''impregnate'' ask from a page or something, somewhere I must have read it or something...- wink, wink. Legend. (Balls, my fella. Big, boulder sized ones! Thumbs up on the boldness!) I get that plenty. I totally get that. However I don't want to make the effort to reach out because I'm not as of yet a man living as a successful example of my values... ...And I found a contradiction. To be a successful example, doesn't that include friends? I see the catch 22 I might have put myself in. My solution at the moment however is simply to put making friends on the distant back burner and rely on making them as I try to sell my book and invest the profits next year. Of course work-friends aren't exactly the same thing as personal friends, but I think I'm far more likely to make a meaningful friend by bumping into them on the common road of either writing or investing. (Kindly mocking 'yer...) You're right. People only start having real friends after their mid 20s. Until then, they are just preparing, preparing some more and then starting to aim, aiming...aiming some more...keep aiming...ai... What contradiction? Can't you buy the coat for the buttons? This is a 'pillar' looking topic from where I stand. And, I could be wrong or projecting some of my own ideas. But I doubt it. Do you think I'm way off? Well, like modern women, I do feel the stress to be a whore. However I guess I'm better at resisting it. Like that's really an accomplishment. I didn't like this part. It seemed as you were putting yourself down unjustly and ridiculing your true desires, painting with too broad of a brush. To give you a brief idea: The series follows primarily two characters and those close to them: Alois von Adlerheim, and Roland Heike. Alois was raised in a brutal orphanage until he escaped as pre-teen with four other children and spent 2 years getting educated at a church. Eventually, as a child laborer, he was discovered by a nobleman he was delivering a book to and that nobleman recognized him as the son of Haraldr von Adlerheim, the Hero of Copenhagen who saved Denmark and won great battles both as a guerilla and as a general during the Forty Years War. Alois is sent off with his albino girlfriend, Lia, to be raised by his father who secreted him in the orphanage to protect him since the capital was under assault and many noble children were secreted and hid as common children so not to be taken as hostages or killed. During the beginning, he spends his remainder years of youth in the arms of his father with his little half-sister, makes new friends and explores abstract ideas as he's destined to marry his cousin the Princess of Denmark and succeed her deceased father, Frederik the Great. His oath with his four friends remains strong as they regularly exchange letters from their thousand-mile distance accross the sea--from "Adlerhafen", in Lapland, to Copenhagen in Denmark. Meanwhile he makes new friends and crushes as he explores the Free City his father built, where "Man For Man" is the motto, property rights are sacred, and entrepreneurial spirit dominates the zeitgeist of the German settlers. Roland Heike is the grandson of (I am writing his story, which is parallel to Alois's, second so unlike Alois is pretty much done his 2/3rds of the first book--I mention this because there are a few things in the air) the illustrious Marshal Roland Heike, the Thuderbolt, "He Who Never Retreats", and the son of the less famous General Stefan Heike, who served under his father. Being born towards the end of the Forty Years War, Roland grew up in the tense and grim Dutch Democratic Republic as it was assaulted on all sides by the French, English, and North German rebels. As he's grown into a man, he's wanted to follow his father and grandfather's advice on becoming a civilian but has no idea what to do as a civilian. Meanwhile, since the French King was assassinated by a radical republican terrorist, the D.D.R. has been active in attempting to reform France as a republic while the nation is torn in four as several cadet branches seek to reunify France but with foreign backing causing them to conflict. With seemingly endless war and increasingly tyrannical government, Satanist groups are infiltrating the system's institutions and are becoming increasingly visible and radical amongst the lower classes. Meanwhile the existing Liberal Nationalist Party and Democratic-Republican Party are both losing favor to their more radical youth wings; the Radiant Cross Party and the Militant Citizen's Party. Wishing he was not forced to choose between two extremes, he struggles to maintain moral integrity as his republic falls down around him, and alongside his brothers, father, and uncles seeks to restore the order and relative peace of the Pre-War Republic. ...That's my brief for the beginning of the two major heroes. Both champions who represent different ideologies in the long run. It isn't particularly what I normally read. Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised to pick up some stuff you wrote out of curiosity. Sounds like a deep look into how dynasties 'work' amongst many other things, seeing it from within. Am I roughly in the same ball-park with my very broad generalisation? Whatever that means! Lol what am I having that you wish to be great?! :-P Just a "Russian joke" since I've learned there are no such expressions in Russian while you English-English have an awful lot of "polite" expressions! Even more so than we Americans! I wasn't trying to be 'extra'-polite. I didn't know what you were up to and wanted to wish you success at it, in general. Or, just that your day turned out to be a great one... Pick your choice. On the other hand, I fully accept you being suspicious of the 'silver tongued', the pretend characters. Sure, I would be too. EDIT: What do you mean by "syntax"? I looked up the definition so I guess I have some idea... But I'm fishing for compliments and specifics. I find it easy to do both; gist read and savour your written words. Obviously, you do a much better job at formatting your text too (,as SnapSlav has so constructively pointed it out to me, (i.e) seeing the difference in the two of your writing contrasted with mine.). Oi! You better not get fat on my compliments, young one! (With all, due, un-/deserved and genetic :-P respect!) Have a great one at whatever you're doing, Barnsley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barn Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Hi @SnapSlav How dare you!... 1 hour ago, SnapSlav said: On 03/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Y'know, I was a writer in the past, and although I haven't really been arranging any books lately, I still have the old skills kicking around in my head. I can always offer some pointers, or at the very least, some constructive, critical feedback- say, like pointing out errors in MUCH of barns' post, for example? =D (But he's not the subject of this discussion, so I won't put him on the spot (unless he wouldn't mind? =o), suffice it to say, I'm not trying to be mean, just saying............ saw some errors, and I'd only offer corrections for correction's sake.) While it's certainly true that every writer has his/her own writing style, there are still many objectively true things to consider about the process of writing. Of course. Actually, I would much appreciate it if you did so. Please, send me your suggestions /corrections /advice. Constructivity is something I fully embrace. (nice one) Feel free to pm me or else(?), I'll defer to you on this one. OR ELSE... Barnsley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, barn said: Hello @Siegfried von Walheim Before all: I had pinned my tent prior to have written to you first. It's the kind that serves to protect against the elements, easy to disassemble and has no food in it as it might lure all sorts of beasts of the wild. Effective. In other words you wanted to signal you read me so that I kept paying attention?? Quote Something I'd like to add. I'm also a human, not a Russian bot. Hi! :-P Quote (Sorry... more like empathising, though I did shorten the formalities to the essential.) You'll see me commenting, at times apparently critical but as you've already heard 'my voice' it's rather intrigued than judgemental of all things...you'll see. Honestly I have the mental impression of... Well, it's a bit insulting. I imagine you kind of like a cautious monkey who picks and pokes to see what triggers what but is old enough and savvy enough to flee or move on if the subject is either hostile or inert. Of course that might not be insulting at all if you take it as a complement. Which frankly makes me more interested in you since I think most people would be insulted by that, however the positive angle is that the monkey in question is clearly very intelligent. He naturally turns off the shallow and the dull but simultaneously stimulates the interesting and the smart. However it also comes off as some kind of defense mechanism. Like you're wearing a mask. And if you're a totally honest man... Well, that makes me more interested in you. Quote It's what you wrote and how you wrote it. Cold, but yet vulnerable and still fragile from certain angles. Fascinating, really. lol when I read this I had the mental impression I was some kind of war hero (or war villain). I kind of like the mental image but at the same time don't like it because... Well, I have vulnerable and fragile angles but when I am that way I tend to appear cold and resolute. I will admit I was a bit angry when I initially typed this up because it was after cooling off when I argued with my mother about the subject. I didn't like the fact she kept wanting to show off the new born even though I kept saying, in different words each time, that I wanted nothing to do with her extended family. Quote Do you mean she 'intended/said' one thing but did facilitate some other actions? (i.e. - Um, I'm sober. Honest. Me chugging down a glass or two doesn't really count.) No, I mean like she didn't do enough of some things and too much of others. I was very bubble-wrapped growing up. I never went to a friend's house or a party of their's or whatever. I was very isolated though I had plenty of acquaintances as a kid and a few kids found me really interesting, and I felt happy rushes whenever someone paid me interest. However I had the nasty tendency to "erupt" and "self-sabotage" my potential-friendships, and I am trying not to do the same thing. Like you for example: I am feeling increasingly close with you because you are trying to help me and allowed yourself to be vulnerable with that history. Also, you're taking interest in my bluntness and attempts at simplicity and directness. I am trying to be attractively direct; not unattractively. And I am pretty sure there's a difference. I think the difference lies in knowing and respecting boundaries. For example, if you had a certain soft spot or exposed a soft spot, it would be very autistic if not cruel of me to dismiss it or poke it intensely, especially if I detect it. I think I over-think things, but at the same time am prone to missing beats. Quote Would you say that's something you'd be proud of? Yes. I had no modeling of that middle ground between aggressiveness and passiveness: assertiveness. And being able to stand up for myself, even when wrong, was an improvement to passive-aggressiveness and over-aggressiveness. Quote Do you remember, what had brought about the change? What made you change your mind? I stopped prostituting myself for money. I.e. I stopped valuing the money gifts so much that I was willing to put myself in a place where I know I was going to hate it and knew I had to falsify myself to keep the peace. And guess what. I happen to be old enough where, gradually, I no longer need to depend on people I don't like to survive. I still need "other people's money" but now I can responsibly get that through loans and being productive rather than by being a prostitute of sorts. Quote I would be lying if I said I hadn't noticed your ample collection of colourful thorns, good on 'ya for taking agency in that department. (I mean it. More, the second part.) How do you mean? Do you like my use of language or personality? Or do you tolerate it because you find me interesting? Quote How do you distinguish between earned respect and fear of superiority/power? Simple: love. I love those I respect; I fear those who are bullies and valueless powermongers. I did not mean what I said in the sense I became a bully rather I became assertive and recognized when I ought to leave a scene. Like I never had a fist-fight in High School. The wannabe thugs were afraid of me physically because I had a natural ability to inspire fear into them while the real deals I kept a safe distance from because I have a natural survival instinct. I made friends with both peers and teachers because I was honest and took my work very seriously. I wasn't a straight-A student but it was clear I spent hours doing my International Baccalauerete work because... Well, I often emailed the teachers for stuff I missed and kept tabs with my classmates to get things done both personally and as a group. I may not like everything about the program in hindsight, but it did teach me a lot and help me mature. I learned to depend on other's and be reliable for other's. But it was a rocky journey and it wasn't till the middle that I was really in it versus a self-isolating automaton who tried to do everything himself and please the teachers. By the end I was debating freely with my teachers and classmates. Then I became redpilled, and then I fell into a deep depression and anxiety and coudn't continue school... In the end I needed doctors' notes to get my diploma. I failed I.B., and barely graduated High School. I sometimes wish I didn't have access to the internet until after High School because having it at home for the first time meant researching a whole mess of things with no one to guide me or help me. It was like learning I was in a matrix (a move I never watched but I think I can use the metaphor) and that some stuff was totally wrong/false while others were true/good but without the ability to tell the difference. I learned about White genocide in Spanish and History class... And that was the most bone-chilling moment in my life. Learning about all that stuff and having no clue whether... Well, it was scary. I never felt more alone. Quote I mean, there's the lingering threat of dire consequences on one end, longing desire and curiosity for wisdom on the other. How have you verified... with friends and teachers... etc? Like I said above, I think you misunderstood me. Quote Also, some people are just drawn to confidence, boldness, power... as you know. I know. I am very drawn to confident, bold, and intelligent people. Power not so much by itself because... Well, it can be meaningful if it's earned and deserved but it's meaningless to me if it's stolen or unjustly acquired. Quote Without going into it... My aim was to be somewhat reciprocal (given your straight-from-the-heart op, I had to... ) and basically indicate some paths that had taught me some valuable lessons; could be seen as distant 'echoes' in my response. Thanks for giving your impression though. That's exactly it, how did you know... Just kidding. Actually, my experience was... Kinda disheartening, making me want to share less the details with you if you have such a good imagination to not require my input. Anyhow, thanks again for giving your impression on the 'would've'. It's interesting to read your ideas. How do you mean? Are you upset that I presumed to guess what your response to me might be? If so... well I cannot apologize because I do not feel like I should. I think you ought to simply correct me and assert yourself rather than withdraw, but then again I understand why you might want to. I think. After all not asking but rather guessing is a sign of coldness and a lack of empathy. In which case I actually am sorry because I don't want you assuming that (hey, doesn't that mean, if I'm right, that you're doing what you may be criticizing me indirectly for? I shouldn't try to read minds this deep... I don't know if I'm right and if I'm wrong it's more than just awkward). If there is more you want to say, tell me. If there's not, I want to know why. I want to be attractively direct and forward, not unattractively so. I want to be a champion , not a bully. Quote No problem, I'm a big boy(?). It's not like we know each other or we've been friends. Though, trying to be friendly can get a bit difficult to maintain over time unless a guy called Aristoteles means well...I'm sure you got it. I dunno. I guess I am turned off by false friendship (i.e. I don't like being spoken to as if I am someone's good friends when I don't know them. I'd rather they be straight with me and then treat me nicely because then it feels like I earned it rather than I'm being toyed with it). Perhaps this is a cultural barrier? Where I'm from, or at least with me personally, I am naturally untrusting of those that try to sweeten their words and honey their tongues with over-politeness and caution. However if you actually are English (and not Spanish) I would assume in your culture it's the norm. Quote It did? Well, apart from having no intention of doing so, I can't do much about it as it's, what it is. I'm sure you misread me to. The difference is, I think, I'm actively trying to state where I am confused and might be giving a wrongful impression. Or where words you say might have a double-meaning with me. Quote I'm sorry, I won't be gruff nor stern. Straightforward? I can be. (It's too fine a knife's edge to balance, easy to slip and come off sounding abusive, unempathetic... right?!) No it doesn't. It comes off as raw, genuine, and human. I am naturally more attracted to the man (or woman for that matter) that directly states to me what he thinks while at the same time expresses curiosity on moments where confusion may occur. Which is common when two different kinds of speakers are speaking. Like I am sure we've misunderstood each other a few times already because we're two different kinds of speakers. I prefer bluntness, you prefer softness. And you might interpret my bluntness as coarseness and apathy while I might interpret your softness as manipulative and insincere. Which is why I try to openly say when I could interpret things that way because I think we're speaking two different languages and need to bridge the gap to really understand each other. Quote This is one such example of 'frostbite'. (I'm exaggerating, all-right. Was thinking of frost-roses) Ouch. (very engaging metaphor) That wasn't a metaphor. My father is missing his right arm and right leg. Quote I don't need to quote the rest. That's horrible. I'm sorry, you had to be part of that mess. That's horrible. I don't think it's something that should EVER be part of any child's youth. Or irresponsible parents, the same ... THunders! Gosh, man. (I'm far from pitying, trust me... sorry, how could you trust me...huh) Siegfried von Walheim, that wasn't normal. For people to do such egregious acts... You may have cooled to freeze, normalised it... this is, what f_cked up people generate in their environment due to a great series of bad decisions, avoidance and hiding from responsibility. You were supposed to be protected from all of that, you were supposed to NOT experience THAT, the 'work of evildoers'. At all. Shame on those who caused so much unnecessary, headless suffering to you. Thunders! (I need a break) (back) Thank you for telling me that. I was in a good and light mood when I first read this, but I am always yearning for someone to give me sympathy when I am in pain or having a moment of sorrow. I don't want to belittle you in this moment: thank you. Thank you for saying this to me. Only my mother and therapist have said this to me thus far. Quote I don't say I do understand that fully, I know I can't. Goes over my head. The nearest is when I felt truly in proximity isolation... etc. I hate how drugs are handled, relationships torn, shredded. I'm not trying to cut slack for your father, as he IS responsible, same as others. It's not the drugs fault. It's his fault and my mother's fault. I never blame inanimate objects. Quote Does he want to sort himself out? Yes. He wants to quit smoking and be the best man he thinks he can. He seems sincere and I believe him. I just don't think he can because he's weak and needy and I don't think anyone can give him enough propping when he has barely the spirit to prop himself. I really do love him. At least, I think I do. A part of me yearns to see him do well and really pull a 180 even though I know he most likely will not. I guess I don't love him per se but the man he wants to be and the man he could be if only... Well, if only he was wiser when he was younger and made better decisions. If only he was a better man. Quote (my lunacy, could be a bad idea... ask people who are credible and all that...) How are you assessing the relationship, from what side are you looking at it? I mean, fear/possibility of losing someone does tend to feed dependency... almost as a drug. A big challenge. Based on listening and paying attention. I know he fears losing me. Honestly I fear losing him. The idea of him at least. Frankly he lives on, that is, his better and idealized version, as the father of one of my protagonists. I so dearly want a father and I try to be my own father when I can. Imagine myself as my own son from the perspective of an already successful older version of myself. With an idealized version of a wife or mother as well. In many ways I live in my own head because when I'm down, I have imaginary characters and personas to speak to. I guess it's like Stefpai's described "Mecosystem". Quote This is veeery interesting. I have a similar liking but with a slight dip towards anti-heroes. B-man, especially. In fiction, I love the heroic and the virtuous the most. Almost always have. Especially characters like (fictional) Liu Bei, (fictional) Nobunaga Oda, and Luis Frois (a real missionary). I always have a soft spot for the heroic man who fights on against evil, as well as the wise father who guides and is stern. I even like the somewhat superhuman anime heroes that are good and single-minded, like Natsu from Fairy Tail or Edward Elric (not superhuman but a bit single-minded) from Fullmetal Alchemist. I also have a soft spot for delicate and attractive women. Particularly albino ones. Undoubtedly as an idealized victim-version of my mother. Quote The despising part not so much. Empathising, given the right circumstances is wiser, yet the harder. I have always been interested in contexts after having realised how easily final judgements can be one's worst enemy, same as with the everlasting limbo. There's a nothing burger for you. Sorry, longer version some other time. Well... Despise is too strong a word unless I am really face-to-face with the after-effects of those bad kinds of people. But I do believe it necessary for me to "speak the truth to shame the Devil". Quote How about, just (hehe... 'just') being virtuous? I see plenty of heroes already, that way. Well... I want to be a champion. I want to be heroic and beloved by the good. I want to be the best man I can be. Even if I fall short, I'll still be a decent man worth respecting and remembering. Quote Yes. It can happen. For that, make sure to take plenty of self-erasure, insecurity, dependency, lying - classes. +Dicknap. or You could be your true self with integrity and internalised principles. In contact with your Shadow for the rough stuff if necessary but centered to still feel and live all the colours of the emotions palette. It's up to you, which and how much. (To a certain degree because genetics but your true potential is a different matter.) ... me thinks. Are we seeing eye to eye on this one? I think so. I am literally a genius IQ-wise, so my mental penis is big and fluffy. :-P But I do worry that my... well, I think I get too emotional and am prone to being abusive if I'm not careful. I don't want to be the emotional tampon of a woman nor do I think I'm solid enough to bear the emotional rawness and bipolarity of the average woman. I think I need a "manly" woman in terms of how she handles her emotions. Like ideally Stefanie Molyneux would be best (that is a female version of Stefpai). But I think she'd be a really high quality woman and I don't think I'm there yet. I need to work more to be worth more. Quote I'm afraid this sounds 'stickman forest'-y to me. I don't get it. Quote I'd rather discuss this topic with you again if your social endeavours... say... extended, a tiny bit more? I'm trying to gain an unfair advantage ;-} over the current situation where proving you the point of 'there are many fine ladies around you'... is, sort of haaaard. Do you see what I mean? Later, ok? (When you are socially more active) Do you mean to say there's actually more women that meet the basic requirements of rational, empathetic, and logical than I think? I hope you're right. And that you'd rather I make some friends and be productive as a man before attempting to sire the next generation? I agree with you. My hand is my wife for now lol. Quote ... still editing... :-P I'll reply to whatever you add in a separate post because moderation and impatience. Edited March 23, 2018 by Siegfried von Walheim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 56 minutes ago, barn said: Hi @SnapSlav How dare you!... It's all in good spirits, of course! ^^ 57 minutes ago, barn said: Constructivity is something I fully embrace. (nice one) Feel free to pm me or else(?), I'll defer to you on this one. I can just throw out a couple off the top of my head, cause it's not just you, but anyone can learn from these. I'll be specific, but I don't want to cite and quote exact examples. We've each written A LOT at this point, and needless padding just seems excessive. For one thing, there are differences in idioms and phrases from country to country, so shared language does not mean shared customs or shared phrases. "Blood is thicker than water" is the way one culture says it, and "blood isn't water" is the way another says it, for example. That being said, I'm not aware of ANYONE who says "clench thirst". The proper phrase would be to "quench thirst", as quenching is specifically defined as satisfying ones thirst. There were a few other curious instances of phrasing that I think likewise spawn from writing homonyms in place of the words they should have been, similar to how people these days will incorrectly write "would of" instead of "would've". Next, syntax is everything. If a sentence has all the structure of going from setup to revelation to conclusion, only to lack the final piece of the puzzle. <- That just looks all WRONG, wouldn't you agree? Likewise, an aside- either denoted by pause through commas, or by separation through hyphens, or by segmentation through brackets/parentheses, or by emphasis through quotes -needs to be held to the same flow of the sentence. (I find hyphen separation is best when the side thought itself requires a few commas to pause and collect your thoughts, and parentheses seem most appropriate to serve as examples, as seen with this very explanation!) If your thoughtful aside interrupts a thought, at the end of the aside, you finish your thought. I noticed you had a slip of misreading this exact thing when you thought Sieg said that the "retarded" uncle had 3 kids; the structure of the statements actually made clear that he was back to talking about the favored uncle. (Granted that came after the end of a LONG parenthesized section, so it's easy to make that mistake, cause one can lose sight of where he's going when an aside keeps going... and going...) And finally on the topic of syntax, place your commas and your periods where they belong. Periods end the sentence, commas denote where you pause. Your pause may come before you make an aside, but it should also come after the conclusion of that aside, to denote the return to the previous statement. There were a couple of these, nothing catastrophic. =) Your post was FAR from illegible, and generally I always tend to find errors in ANY posts I read (including my own, frequently), I just thought I'd whimsically target you just cause it happened to coincide with the point I was making, and I didn't want to EXCLUDE you from my comment at all... but like I said, you aren't necessarily the subject of this thread, so I didn't want to make it all about you, either. That being said, this post was entirely about you (kinda), so I should probably stop. XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) 14 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: It's all in good spirits, of course! ^^ I can just throw out a couple off the top of my head, cause it's not just you, but anyone can learn from these. I'll be specific, but I don't want to cite and quote exact examples. We've each written A LOT at this point, and needless padding just seems excessive. For one thing, there are differences in idioms and phrases from country to country, so shared language does not mean shared customs or shared phrases. "Blood is thicker than water" is the way one culture says it, and "blood isn't water" is the way another says it, for example. That being said, I'm not aware of ANYONE who says "clench thirst". The proper phrase would be to "quench thirst", as quenching is specifically defined as satisfying ones thirst. There were a few other curious instances of phrasing that I think likewise spawn from writing homonyms in place of the words they should have been, similar to how people these days will incorrectly write "would of" instead of "would've". Next, syntax is everything. If a sentence has all the structure of going from setup to revelation to conclusion, only to lack the final piece of the puzzle. <- That just looks all WRONG, wouldn't you agree? Likewise, an aside- either denoted by pause through commas, or by separation through hyphens, or by segmentation through brackets/parentheses, or by emphasis through quotes -needs to be held to the same flow of the sentence. (I find hyphen separation is best when the side thought itself requires a few commas to pause and collect your thoughts, and parentheses seem most appropriate to serve as examples, as seen with this very explanation!) If your thoughtful aside interrupts a thought, at the end of the aside, you finish your thought. I noticed you had a slip of misreading this exact thing when you thought Sieg said that the "retarded" uncle had 3 kids; the structure of the statements actually made clear that he was back to talking about the favored uncle. (Granted that came after the end of a LONG parenthesized section, so it's easy to make that mistake, cause one can lose sight of where he's going when an aside keeps going... and going...) And finally on the topic of syntax, place your commas and your periods where they belong. Periods end the sentence, commas denote where you pause. Your pause may come before you make an aside, but it should also come after the conclusion of that aside, to denote the return to the previous statement. There were a couple of these, nothing catastrophic. =) Your post was FAR from illegible, and generally I always tend to find errors in ANY posts I read (including my own, frequently), I just thought I'd whimsically target you just cause it happened to coincide with the point I was making, and I didn't want to EXCLUDE you from my comment at all... but like I said, you aren't necessarily the subject of this thread, so I didn't want to make it all about you, either. That being said, this post was entirely about you (kinda), so I should probably stop. XD I had a lot of fun reading all this! Please, feel free to pick and quote me for examples of where I go well and where I go wrong. Unless I'm writing professionally, I tend not to think about my syntax because I just do it naturally well (I think). I type how I speak, generally. Like I type what I hear myself currently saying in my head. Which, of course, works and doesn't work depending on whether I lose my train of thought. And I DO make very long asides from time to time, which occasionally requires restructuring, because I am prone to tangents and explaining them at the detriment of the original point. I don't restructure too much in informal text such as this, because I know it's legible and not too hard a read--you can probably imagine this as me speaking directly at you, which is the point. In fact, I have given plenty of examples of syntax in this short reply. Please pick apart and praise, pound, and promote! That's to say: tell me what you see right, wrong, and where I could do better--at least if you were writing it. ADDED: I actually found some minor errors in your original post! They're minor because they didn't break my mental procession of your voice in my head nor did it distort your intent. At least, I assume it didn't, otherwise you're a terrible writer! :-P Edited March 23, 2018 by Siegfried von Walheim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barn Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Hello @SnapSlav I hope you got my fake upset and didn't take my first remark seriously, at all. ('daring devil' stuff... wasn't serious at all.) Your suggestions are very much appreciated, I'll do my best to see to them being implemented. ° "clench" vs. "quench" - you're right, I was lazy to properly look it up. How embarrassing for me. ° misreading - yes, I did misread that. (Sorry, Siegfried von Walheim.) ° commas, periods - Occasionally, that's a hard one for me. I'm still not sure, how about you send me some more recommendations in pm. (So that the thread isn't further cluttered, unless I'm asking too much of an effort...pretty please? , a few examples would be nice. ) ° So that you know, as a general rule of thumb I prefer to leave a few typos unchanged, given they don't stand in the way of grasping stuff. (Gently shaking the tree after having raked below it. Japanese style.) Occasionally I also mix formal and informal language, to not sound/be too 'square'. i.e. 'wok' vs work, 'waz' vs. was... but this is a silly thing to do overall, I might change it in the future. Don't imagine I'd do it in official papers. Thanks SnapSlav, your input and TONE is/was much appreciated! Barnsley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 14 hours ago, barn said: I hope you got my fake upset and didn't take my first remark seriously, at all. ('daring devil' stuff... wasn't serious at all.) Of course I did. Hence the anime eyes. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elizbaeth Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 Hey @Siegfried von Walheim! I read your post and had to reply. I have so appreciated your posts and always love to read what you have to say. I find your posts to be so thoughtful and meaningful, and I value them a lot. I wanted to drop in here and give you a little boost of encouragement. You say you're mainly concerned with women and building your future family. I think that is a wonderful thing to work towards, and if your posts are any sort of true reflection of who you are, then I sincerely wish that you end up with the woman of your dreams, with all the happiness and children and domestic bliss you could imagine. I think very highly of what you have said and what you say you are working towards, and I want to see you get the good justice you deserve. So, if you want to catch a woman, I have a few pieces of insight to offer. You seem a little too neurotic to sustain a relationship, to be frank. Red Pill theories are true. Yes, of course, women are completely capable of cold logic and reason and yada yada yada, but if a woman is operating primarily in those realms she is diminishing her own power. Women get bashed on a lot for being emotional, but in a way, emotion is one of the biggest gifts we can offer. A woman can't bring her gifts to you if you're already occupying the majority of the emotional territory. You'll attract a masculine woman, aka someone who acts like a feminist. Feminists are women who are too angry or afraid or goal-oriented to relax and ease into their emotions and vulnerabilities. Keep working on yourself, and give it time. It may take an older woman (by older I mean 25-32) to recognize some of the good things you have to offer. I would suggest that you might not even want to look at settling down until you are around 30 years old. I think most men are much happier waiting until then. You may be different. I don't know. I do know that most men stave off the loneliness with either strings of 2-3 year relationships or just follow the hook up culture and satiate their need for affection and ego with one night stands, and neither seem to be what you're willing to do. I think that's good, but you're going to have to go out and be around women and make relationships with them, even if the relationships are friendships or maybe something like a mother-son relationship, too. Just being around more women should help you. And get yourself some more men to be around, too. Gotta know what being an attractive man looks like so you can emulate it. Women like verbal banter. A woman will tease you or engage in some witticism according to her own level of intelligence and values, and it is a good way for her and for you to suss each other out and see if there is any chemistry or matching interests, and it lets her see how you react to her. I've seen a lot of smart guys suck miserably at getting girls simply because they think teasing and small talk are beneath them. These guys tend to think that conversation is for necessity only, and they don't understand why a woman would want to talk for the pleasure of talking. Women offload their anxieties through talking, and it's very soothing to feel connected through conversation. Just make friends with women you might be interested in, and enjoy having conversations with them. And it might be helpful to ask your therapist for suggestions on what type of woman - to hatch out a profile for you - would be beneficial for you to try to spend time with and get to know. Again, it is important that you work through what seems to be a kind of womanly neurosis if you are looking to attract a good woman. And a good woman is a feminine woman, among other things. Honestly I tend to be quite neurotic myself, and really have to work to not feed my anxieties until they're a giant demon in my mind. If my husband were also like this, I don't know what we would do. Probably sit around and obsess over pending dooms and current failures until we were paralyzed with doubt and negativity. That's just not a good recipe. I tend to worry a lot less about life in general when he's in good form, so really, it would help you to be more confident and shake off the self-doubt and impassioned, volatile emotions (sorry if I have assumed wrong - I'm just going off of inferences and guessing at your flaws). The rest is just going to be trial and error and your own journey of growth and maturity. I believe, though, that you will get there in the end. So sorry to hear about everything with your family. That is tough, and I'm very glad you're working to get away from it. - Elizabeth 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 24, 2018 Author Share Posted March 24, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Elizbaeth said: Hey @Siegfried von Walheim! I read your post and had to reply. Thank you very much. Quote I have so appreciated your posts and always love to read what you have to say. I find your posts to be so thoughtful and meaningful, and I value them a lot. I wanted to drop in here and give you a little boost of encouragement. I'm glad to see returns on investment! Quote You say you're mainly concerned with women and building your future family. I think that is a wonderful thing to work towards, and if your posts are any sort of true reflection of who you are, then I sincerely wish that you end up with the woman of your dreams, with all the happiness and children and domestic bliss you could imagine. I think very highly of what you have said and what you say you are working towards, and I want to see you get the good justice you deserve. So, if you want to catch a woman, I have a few pieces of insight to offer. You seem a little too neurotic to sustain a relationship, to be frank. Red Pill theories are true. Yes, of course, women are completely capable of cold logic and reason and yada yada yada, but if a woman is operating primarily in those realms she is diminishing her own power. Women get bashed on a lot for being emotional, but in a way, emotion is one of the biggest gifts we can offer. A woman can't bring her gifts to you if you're already occupying the majority of the emotional territory. You'll attract a masculine woman, aka someone who acts like a feminist. Feminists are women who are too angry or afraid or goal-oriented to relax and ease into their emotions and vulnerabilities. Here is a big "I'm not sure". On one hand: it's not like men are totally logical without emotion nor are women totally emotional without logic (though I'm sure some are and vice versa). On the other, I don't really know the value of "emotionality". I mean I know the value of individual emotions. Happiness breeds more happiness and pleasure (but can weaken one's guard against evil); anger breeds resilience against adversity (but can open up new adversity if left unchecked); sadness breeds sympathy and passion; passion (that is emotional drive for something) breeds action; etc. etc. etc. I think my problem is most particularly my inclination to self-doubt and self-attack. I have definitely taken on some of the bad womanly traits, I think calling me a bit neurotic is accurate. Assuming you mean "prone to fear for the future and those around them". However... I think I've got it largely in check relative to back when I was a kid. I still worry about politics and executing my life plans, but I think I've resolved myself with the former and the latter helps push me towards continual re-evaluations and development--so long as I ensure I'm not only re-evaluating and "developing", since obvious too much of that equals inaction. But... I am not really sure whether I'm "ready" or not emotionally. I mean I am pretty sure I cannot sustain a relationship with a woman who is frequently worrying and needs me to assuage her. I regularly bicker with my mother whenever she does that to me. However I would be attracted to a "masculine" woman because frankly I find male traits attractive. If Stefpai were a woman he'd be perfect. The big question is whether or not that's healthy and attainable; can I continue to discipline myself and "masculinize" myself while turning towards women with masculine thought processes or... what? Do I simply not appreciate femininity enough? What's unique to women that I ought to appreciate (besides biology)? I don't know. I sometimes wish I was gay (and could impregnate another man) or was a woman because I think I'd make a great woman. The best woman, possibly. But then I am either thinking too highly of myself ("as a hypothetical woman") or too lowly of women. Or I am not understanding women. Like a woman that speaks softly and serenely; one that is well put together and generally calm and sincere, that is a woman I find most highly desirable. I am turned off (emotionally not sexually which is different) from highly emotional and neurotic women. I just find them... Well, frankly I think they reduce themselves to mere sexual objects for value. Again though... either I simply do not understand the value of a woman, or I am "right" insofar I am better off taking the woman's role in the emotion versus logic regard entirely because I strongly prefer the philosophical to the solipsistic. I am not exaggerating in saying if Stefan were a woman he'd be the hottest thing on the planet (so long as "she" wasn't bald, manly looking, and butch of course). Quote Keep working on yourself, and give it time. It may take an older woman (by older I mean 25-32) to recognize some of the good things you have to offer. I would suggest that you might not even want to look at settling down until you are around 30 years old. I think most men are much happier waiting until then. You may be different. I don't know. I do know that most men stave off the loneliness with either strings of 2-3 year relationships or just follow the hook up culture and satiate their need for affection and ego with one night stands, and neither seem to be what you're willing to do. I think that's good, but you're going to have to go out and be around women and make relationships with them, even if the relationships are friendships or maybe something like a mother-son relationship, too. Just being around more women should help you. And get yourself some more men to be around, too. Gotta know what being an attractive man looks like so you can emulate it. I am (as far as keeping attractive men around to emulate), if I count my therapist since I am inclined to emulate his extremely masculine level of emotional self control and logical mind. He's big, physically well built, and regularly exercises even as a late forties' guy. You're right in that I'd rather stay a virgin than willing date without plans for marriage or pump and dump. I've got plenty of drive but I can satisfy that without a real woman. And I'd rather not perpetuate that society-destroying cycle anyway. Frankly I'd rather return to arranged marriages, but then I'm sure I'd change my mind fairly quickly and am admittedly finding it attractive as a sort of cheat code (which naturally "breaks the game" anyway, but I think this shows where my mind can go and I don't like it). I already intend to wait till around 25. More precisely, until I am wealthy enough to move out to the Midwest and settle down. So waiting for the serious stuff is certainly already on my plan. I just don't know why I'd want female friends unless they are unicorns (that is to say, logical, rational, and moral creatures) and if they were unicorns I'd be inclined to put a ring on one of them rather than simply remain friends. Quote Women like verbal banter. A woman will tease you or engage in some witticism according to her own level of intelligence and values, and it is a good way for her and for you to suss each other out and see if there is any chemistry or matching interests, and it lets her see how you react to her. I've seen a lot of smart guys suck miserably at getting girls simply because they think teasing and small talk are beneath them. These guys tend to think that conversation is for necessity only, and they don't understand why a woman would want to talk for the pleasure of talking. Women offload their anxieties through talking, and it's very soothing to feel connected through conversation. Just make friends with women you might be interested in, and enjoy having conversations with them. Oh I get that. Even as a man I appreciate talking to sooth inner anxieties and fears. That's why I don't think I can be Mr. Logic and Resilience for a similar woman. But I think a difference might be is that I tend to find my own solutions and my own weaknesses as I express them (i.e. my own self-contradictions and catch 22's). I haven't tried to get a girl since my beta days in early high school (and you know I failed because I aimed high and shot very poorly). I don't plan to until I'm "ready". The question is how to get there. I know exposure and acclimatization is one way, but I think I need more than that because I don't want to make peace with the average woman but rather find a special one that fits my unique character. EDIT: As a guy, I actually like to tease and pick. In fact I regularly "pick on" people I'm close to as both an unconscious test and as a means feeling close with someone. I don't think I'm incompatible with female teasing and "verbal playing". Quote And it might be helpful to ask your therapist for suggestions on what type of woman - to hatch out a profile for you - would be beneficial for you to try to spend time with and get to know. I will do so for sure. Last time we mentioned this, he agreed with Stefpai's approach of treating it like a series of job interviews and cycling through. He also mentioned I'm likely to do best with older, wiser, and more experienced women since I am interested in maturity and level-headedness. However the context of that was different and months ago, so I do think this is a topic worth revisiting since it's a bit more prescient than politics, Stalin (he defends him somewhat, not saying he's a good guy but that he did some good things and some of the bad was highly exaggerated),etc. Quote Again, it is important that you work through what seems to be a kind of womanly neurosis if you are looking to attract a good woman. And a good woman is a feminine woman, among other things. Honestly I tend to be quite neurotic myself, and really have to work to not feed my anxieties until they're a giant demon in my mind. If my husband were also like this, I don't know what we would do. Probably sit around and obsess over pending dooms and current failures until we were paralyzed with doubt and negativity. That's just not a good recipe. I tend to worry a lot less about life in general when he's in good form, so really, it would help you to be more confident and shake off the self-doubt and impassioned, volatile emotions (sorry if I have assumed wrong - I'm just going off of inferences and guessing at your flaws). You may be off from 100% accuracy but I think you're on target. Obviously i can't expect you to know me as well as someone who interacts with me regularly and in person. But I think you have a lot of major points I have to work with. For now my plan is to keep "taming" myself and building myself up so I can be more masculine as far as emotions go. However I am still more attracted to "manly" women than "feminine" women. I mean that in terms of personality, of course. Obviously I am into all kinds of 36-24-36, six feet tall, hip-length hair, etc. etc. Quote The rest is just going to be trial and error and your own journey of growth and maturity. I believe, though, that you will get there in the end. So sorry to hear about everything with your family. That is tough, and I'm very glad you're working to get away from it. - Elizabeth Thank you. I take what you say very seriously since I'm still a kid inside as far as the adult world of marriage and gender relations go. I think I understand it plenty in the abstract and in terms of "other people" but I am very much the newbie as far it goes for me, myself, and I. I'd appreciate feedback aimed at my desired preference for women and whether I'm undervaluing femininity relative to myself and my own logic versus emotion balance. Or in general. I think this is, along with topics brought up by barn and Snapslav, is a key issue to be solved. EDIT: Perhaps a better question: what is "feminine" and what does that have to offer a "masculine" man? Perhaps I am really undervaluing women outside utility and therefore am undervaluing (if not totally misunderstanding) what femininity means and why it's of value. I am pretty sure I understand fully well the romantic virtues of masculinity because... Men are awesome! At least manly men are. Every time I see something, I have a man to thank for it. I think if I understood better what women as womanly and feminine have to offer I'd have a motive to fit a more traditional role and would not fear something that either isn't there or would only be there in extreme circumstances (or with bad women). Also it might help me figure out where I am on the spectrum of ultra-masculine versus ultra-feminine in both the good and the bad. Like I am very masculine. I know I am. But with one (big) caveat: I want my emotions to be tended to more than I want to tend to others' emotions (maybe? Honestly I'm not even sure of that. I do not feel anger or contempt if I am giving comfort and advice to even a man in need. It's just my idea of comfort is to drag his ass out and slap him with a wet fish and give him practical steps to solve his dilemma. I'd also treat a woman the same way. Perhaps the problem is less me being too feminine but not understanding things? I don't know). However, at the same time, while I value the wet fish slapping against myself, I also value the maternal comfort only a good woman can provide. I find that infinitely attractive, alongside rationality and all that. The big thing is that I don't want to have to "manage" a woman like a child. I want her to be self-sufficient as a woman and only need me in regards to building a family and supporting each other in our gender roles as provider (me) and steward (her). I think I might be confused or misunderstanding more than anything. I'd appreciate your take based on what I'd added in the "EDIT". To be clear my biggest fear with women is being exploited and not loved as well as being owned and abused. I don't want to become my father or grandfather (on either side). And to stress it: I think my issue is lack of understanding more than anything. I have never seen a good woman modeled to me outside fiction. I can imagine a great and wonderful woman but I have never seen any woman like her, just in pieces (i.e. parts of that great woman I have seen in normal or "met" women). ADDED: I did a cursory internet search on "what makes a woman great" and "what does a woman offer a man". I hate to say it but for the former there was nothing direct and for the latter the answer was universally "nothing" or "sex". I don't think that's true... But I fear that being true. It may be true for most women since feminism though. I really don't know. But I want you to understand why I am attracted to masculine traits over feminine ones in women because whenever I research the topic (rather than rely on my imagination) I never find anything good. Hopefully the majority is just deluded and good women actually have something to offer. Maybe femininity actually has good traits. The first that comes to my mind is protectiveness and then caring-ness. However... Is that uniquely feminine? I don't know. Frankly I think I might have to drop "masculine traits versus feminine traits" because... All the good traits wind up being labeled "masculine" and all the luxury (i.e. unneeded but might be fun) and bad traits are "feminine". So either I am totally lost among the world of MGTOW... or... Well, maybe... it's less a matter of uniquely gendered traits but rather how they manifest and their priority. I don't know. ... Like Ann Coulter and Margaret Thatcher. If either of these women were young, I'd totally go for them (based on what I know of them). So perhaps I have answered my own question? Or are Ann Coulter and Thatcher "masculine"? As far as I know Coulter is a straight forward, genius, honest, and wise woman. Thatcher was a bit more soft spoken but otherwise smart, wise, and heroic (in a very true sense). I really like Ayn Rand as well, in spite of her major faults. Perhaps I ought to seek the next Coulter/Thatcher/Rand? Edited March 24, 2018 by Siegfried von Walheim Had to add in some stuff for development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elizbaeth Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 @Siegfried von Walheim I wanted to add something else. You remind me a lot of a guy I knew back in college. He and I sang in our university’s chorus and we both took a lot of theology classes, and we were amazing friends for all four years. I adored him and had a very big affection for him. He was very much into philosophy and we had fantastic discussions, and we also did a lot of charity work together. We tried dating after I graduated, and I was hopeful about how things would turn out, but it really didn’t work out well (I’m sharing this because I imagine a lot of similarities between you and him. It might also entertain you). For one, he got really into Zizek and Peter Rollins and turned down getting his PhD because it was too elitist, and he instead began leading a soup kitchen in inner city Atlanta, and began going nuts over the marginalized populations. I didn’t have a problem with that in itself. I think charity and helping the poor is very good, and felt proud of him for working for something like that. However, I started pulling away when he began showing hate for anyone who had even been financially successful. For another, I once asked him for career advice. I felt doubtful that his advice was correct but went with it anyways, and ended up losing the job. It was a big disappointment for me, as it would have been a dream job and the opportunity was a once in a lifetime sort of thing. After that he really appeared to be incapable of handling the real world, and was only good at “book knowledge.” And lastly, he couldn’t kiss me without apologizing or waxing theoretical about love or being too cautious. We were both wanting to take things nice and slow, but he was so gentlemanly that I wondered if he even felt attraction for me at all, and if he did, why was he seemed so hesitant to leave the platform of philosophy and just be a man and let me be a woman. I found it exhausting and confining and weak. According to Facebook, he is now living on a hippy commune, has dreadlocks, still works for the poor, does weekly protests against Trump, guns, and White Supremacy, and clothes that aren’t strictly secondhand or homemade. He says he is an anarchist, and may be, but I kinda think he’s the kind of anarchist that wears black and hates capitalism and whites. That kind of anarchist. You seem to be the kind of guy who has probably thought all this through, but be careful that you don’t get stuck in thoughts. Thoughts are useful inasmuch as they inform correct action. This guy was way too locked in his own head. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S1988 Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 @Siegfried von Walheim Since you're planning to have a family, I have one question to ask. What if your kids wanted to adopt a puppy? Because you have a fear of dogs, that'd create a conflict of interest. Perhaps before you have children, you can get some type of therapy to overcome your fear. Or if you never overcome your fear (and some fears are never conquered, which is okay because there are some things some people will always be afraid of regardless) you'd have to choose between risking disappointing your kids or tolerating the puppy. When I was a kid, my sister and I adopted an alley cat, then got another cat two years later from a pet shop. Years later, I learned that our mother never liked cats, but tolerated them because of us. (I guess this is part of the few "good" sides she had since we no longer have a relationship.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 25, 2018 Author Share Posted March 25, 2018 21 minutes ago, S1988 said: @Siegfried von Walheim Since you're planning to have a family, I have one question to ask. What if your kids wanted to adopt a puppy? Because you have a fear of dogs, that'd create a conflict of interest. Perhaps before you have children, you can get some type of therapy to overcome your fear. Or if you never overcome your fear (and some fears are never conquered, which is okay because there are some things some people will always be afraid of regardless) you'd have to choose between risking disappointing your kids or tolerating the puppy. When I was a kid, my sister and I adopted an alley cat, then got another cat two years later from a pet shop. Years later, I learned that our mother never liked cats, but tolerated them because of us. (I guess this is part of the few "good" sides she had since we no longer have a relationship.) I'd gradually expose myself to dogs until I got over my fear, which is somewhat what Im doing. That being said I'd probably say "Hell no!" even if I had no fear of dogs because I don't want animals running around my expensive (hypothetical) house!! But if it's big enough I'm sure a compromise of some kind can be made. Especially if one of my boys or girls can truly demonstrate aptitude for raising an animal and actual love for the animal. Plus if the animal's genes make it tame and generally kind, I will have less and less reason to resist. And I'd want to mimic Stefpai and raise my kids to be good negotiators, so that of course means me relenting to good arguments and all that. In short I'd probably relent unless it's a clearly dangerous and untamed animal and/or my kids are unable to care for an animal (or there's a conflict of interest among my kids). However I think a compromise might simply be (assuming my kids aren't uniform) to have my children that want a dog to visit the dog elsewhere from the main place of living. I think cats I'd be more amenable to because I actually find them cute even if they make me a bit nervous. I think gradual exposure is everything. I'm not as fearful as I used to be but I'm no animal lover either. I think (jokingly but maybe part-seriously) animal-love is another "White Man's Disease". But I'm a White Man and I have a few White Men's Diseases... (to stretch the Asian saying) :-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 27, 2018 Author Share Posted March 27, 2018 On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: (... a day or so later, apparently I needed another break. For the better.) I already replied to the above privately so I'm not going to re-type it all here nor copy-paste since I think a lot of it was more about mutual figuring out rather than actually going anywhere. I think readers in a similar spot might benefit from here on out though. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: Isn't this something of an 'orc-skin, paper-thin' excuse? I'm not saying you should get in touch with him, I'm saying how easy it would be to give it a try. Obviously you know better your family and your thinking must be reflecting that. There's a good reason behind it I'd theorise. Even so. Why not tick this box and get it over with? It might surprise you what you'll find. I don't want to. I'd rather not try. Especially if he circumcized his boys. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: No, and yes. [...] Thank you. If I properly grasped you, this is about 'ideologues vs. people lost in the woods possibly, temporarily'...right? Sounded a bit too polarised but perhaps you were just trying to give a general idea of it. I particularly liked that you'd remembered to include the 'good conclusion vs. wrong methodology' example. Well, my conclusions have changed greatly over the past 5 years. If I choose people based on conclusions I'll be bound by them if I want to keep the people. I know from experience and others' wisdom that methodology beats conclusions when looking for people. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: (Nothing of an importance, really.) When I looked at my responses at that section it drew a smirk on my face... As in: agreeing , then the next paragraph disagreeing... Like I was a binary minded person responding there. Coincidentally. Confused. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: Illusions of grandeur? Don't think so. From what I've seen from you in other threads, you are keeping a regular work routine... It helps if you visualise and work towards such chosen objectives. In my experience, it is a wise thing to keep such goals to yourself and not speak them publicly until you've made it an unshakeable conviction. The reason behind it, (besides me supporting you regarding it, more power to you) is that there are a great deal of vicious soul-crushers out there. People who can't stand you becoming more than them; realising your dreams in a powerful manner and they must minimise/fizzle out your flame. Not to mention the 'Person from Porlock' types. Lol I'm not some snowflake. I am very open about my ambitions and welcome any naysayers. If they have something worth listening to, I take it to heart. If they're just petty people, then I can recognize them in the future as such. In a way, being open about my ambition is a shit test. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: If your own cage, built by your own hands pleases you more, so be it. Or You could build one, that you can open and secure when necessary(a castle :-P). I remembered vaguely a quote that was something along the lines of locking a door to keep insane people out, instead of holding good people locked up in their homes... Well the "biological cage" is currently for the best. Children don't choose their parents but that often beats being cast out into the wilderness. The best we can do is make that cage one our children would choose willfully rather than be forced into. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: I'm sorry, no it wasn't my focus. Like, I know the reason why I'm not spending as much time in a 'constructivity mode' is something that has clear reasons behind it. I was curious if you'd thought about to assess a usual day of yours to see, what proportions of your time is spent on thinking/visualising the things you want/comes next vs. the things that are worrisome in your estimation. (40, 60% or 70, 20%...etc.) Sounds like a chore. But I look at the clock frequently enough to tell. I am almost always thinking at least in the back of my mind about the future and getting things done. I'm rarely totally divorced from that. However only for an hour a day give or take do I dedicate to critical thinking. Often when I exercise since I get bored doing that and figure I might as well do my planning/worrying/self-reassuring while I'm exercising since it sends a positive loop into my head that I'm being productive rather than inert. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: Those are some brave words in my eyes. Yes, one must be on guard constantly. I have verified it, there's a curious phenomenon happening with attention and how the brain splits up the available resources. It occurs once the brain is actively being engaged/stimulated ... it can't allocate as efficiently to other parts. I use it for banishing unproductive thoughts, when I'm aware it's happening. Use it. (I'm reminding myself too.) I don't know what you mean. Do you mean to ask myself in a given moment whether a certain fixation is actually helping and productive to me or if it's merely wasting time and hurting me? My therapist told me to ask myself 3 questions. 1: Is what I am thinking true? 2: Is what I am thinking productive? 3: Is what I am thinking making me happy? If the answer to any of these is no, he says I ought to drop it and think differently. In practice it helps quite a bit to filter out what I cannot control or cannot do yet and instead focus on what I can achieve and rejoice in. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: If that's trully what you want/have decided, go for it. I don't think it is wise or something I would agree with. (I mean, not getting to know more people for the reasons you put.) Not because I don't think there are people who don't need as large quantity of social interactions... i.e. introvert vs. extrovert and the scale... No, I get it. Philly kids... sure, I get that too. Just an idea but thought you might be willing to answer it, and it's quite personal so don't worry if you don't want to reply... What if the reason you don't want to get to know more people is because you don't trust your skills at evaluating? I don't know. I have no reason to assume I'm a bad judge of character but I really just don't want to be pushed into making friends with random strangers. I'd rather befriend people of common values as I find them. I do know in my case it helps to be pro-active since, as Stefpai points out, when we need something from someone we cease to see that someone as an equal and that someone may be prone to abuse of power. As a novelist I plan on building a network come late Summer so that by the time I'm finished I have people I can plausibly rely upon for this, that, and the other thing as well as be reliable so that I can have a good reputation among other positive loops. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: (Kindly mocking 'yer...) You're right. People only start having real friends after their mid 20s. Until then, they are just preparing, preparing some more and then starting to aim, aiming...aiming some more...keep aiming...ai... What contradiction? Can't you buy the coat for the buttons? Simple: if being a success story means having friends and I say I wouldn't want to seek friends until I'm a success... Come on, it's obvious when I put it this way, right? Therefore I quickly realized I'd be best off making friends based on shared methodology (when possible) and values (otherwise) so that when we (or some of we) become successes it won't be like we were mutual gold-diggers, rather we had/will-have genuine connection and therefore trust. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: This is a 'pillar' looking topic from where I stand. And, I could be wrong or projecting some of my own ideas. But I doubt it. Do you think I'm way off? I honestly don't know what your trying to ask. Or what you're way off or on about. That I'm planning and doing while I'm young rather than head-long going into friendships with hobby-centric values? I guess. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: Well, like modern women, I do feel the stress to be a whore. However I guess I'm better at resisting it. Like that's really an accomplishment. I didn't like this part. It seemed as you were putting yourself down unjustly and ridiculing your true desires, painting with too broad of a brush. It's not a put down if it's correct. I'm as internally slutty as any man but it's no accomplishment to be virginal. Anyone can do it, and often the less desirable the easier it is. I'm a fairly handsome guy but I'm no hunk or Donald Trump (i.e. wealthy + good looking. Speaking of him when he was in his 30's) so it's rather easy to be a virgin since no one's throwing herself at me. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: It isn't particularly what I normally read. Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised to pick up some stuff you wrote out of curiosity. Sounds like a deep look into how dynasties 'work' amongst many other things, seeing it from within. Am I roughly in the same ball-park with my very broad generalisation? It's really hard to say. In short it's an epic about great champions of differing ideals colliding with the world as it exist and eventually with each other, but in detail it's hard to describe in short. I suppose dynasty-building is a part of it but not the focus. Equally parts but not entire focuses are friendship, brotherhood, fatherhood, motherhood, sisterhood, apprenticeship, business, politics, games, hobbies, and more. Bigger parts would be war, love, hatred, religion, atheism, monarchism, republicanism, etc. A whole lot is going on and it's hard to generalize like it's about this thing or that thing. Rather flatteringly, Jordan Peterson refers to such confusion about creation as a sign of true artistry. If it is such, it will be such. If not, I will learn why not. But I intend to really make this my early life's best and most glorious immortal work, as I believe it is very unique to both Western Civilization and modern times. I have the summary of the premise without delving into pre-history or themes, so that's where the reader can expect to start. However where it goes from there I can only say for the first book (which I'm half way done the whole process but close to finishing the story-content) or two of the series, the ending and the events between now and then are still foggy and ever-changing in my mind. I think it'll be one of, if the, best books written in my generation but I cannot say ultimately whether it'll be a force of good, evil, good against evil, or something more subtle and earthly. If you want I'll email you the current draft. On 3/22/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said: Have a great one at whatever you're doing, Barnsley That's "extra polite" lol we don't do signatures though false endings are annoyingly common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted March 27, 2018 Author Share Posted March 27, 2018 On 3/24/2018 at 1:03 PM, Elizbaeth said: @Siegfried von Walheim I wanted to add something else. You remind me a lot of a guy I knew back in college. He and I sang in our university’s chorus and we both took a lot of theology classes, and we were amazing friends for all four years. I adored him and had a very big affection for him. He was very much into philosophy and we had fantastic discussions, and we also did a lot of charity work together. We tried dating after I graduated, and I was hopeful about how things would turn out, but it really didn’t work out well (I’m sharing this because I imagine a lot of similarities between you and him. It might also entertain you). For one, he got really into Zizek and Peter Rollins and turned down getting his PhD because it was too elitist, and he instead began leading a soup kitchen in inner city Atlanta, and began going nuts over the marginalized populations. I didn’t have a problem with that in itself. I think charity and helping the poor is very good, and felt proud of him for working for something like that. However, I started pulling away when he began showing hate for anyone who had even been financially successful. For another, I once asked him for career advice. I felt doubtful that his advice was correct but went with it anyways, and ended up losing the job. It was a big disappointment for me, as it would have been a dream job and the opportunity was a once in a lifetime sort of thing. After that he really appeared to be incapable of handling the real world, and was only good at “book knowledge.” And lastly, he couldn’t kiss me without apologizing or waxing theoretical about love or being too cautious. We were both wanting to take things nice and slow, but he was so gentlemanly that I wondered if he even felt attraction for me at all, and if he did, why was he seemed so hesitant to leave the platform of philosophy and just be a man and let me be a woman. I found it exhausting and confining and weak. So far the only possible similarity he and I might have is being book smarts without being real-world smarts. Otherwise he couldn't possibly be more different than me if he tried! Seriously his whole story stinks of deadbeat loser. What did you see in him?! I mean I may be highly conservative and speaking totally in theory right now, but I sure as heck wouldn't be shy to kiss to death my hypothetical woman and stick it in there once we're married. I may be a gentleman consciously but I have a beast within! :-P On 3/24/2018 at 1:03 PM, Elizbaeth said: According to Facebook, he is now living on a hippy commune, has dreadlocks, still works for the poor, does weekly protests against Trump, guns, and White Supremacy, and clothes that aren’t strictly secondhand or homemade. He says he is an anarchist, and may be, but I kinda think he’s the kind of anarchist that wears black and hates capitalism and whites. That kind of anarchist. You seem to be the kind of guy who has probably thought all this through, but be careful that you don’t get stuck in thoughts. Thoughts are useful inasmuch as they inform correct action. This guy was way too locked in his own head. That being said, I understand what you're saying and I think lots of people like myself who are prone to caution and critical thinking may be tempted by inertia, inaction, or ideological self-destruction. That's why I'm writing and doing things as compared to just talking about it or thinking about it. And also why I'm open to ideological, moral, etc. criticism because I don't want to be the blind man walking off a cliff. Thank you for the anecdote--though I seriously wonder what kind of girl you were because it sounds like you had really terrible taste in men until your husband came along. I am basing this off of this story plus in which I think you said you dated briefly a polygamist Muslim while you worked at a daycare center. I might be misremembering because I know a Swedish woman with a far worse track record as one of the callers as well as a Russian woman so I might be misremembering some stuff. I apologize if that's the case but assuming I am remembering right I think you ought to... I don't know, for your sons and potential daughters at least, teach them and prepare them for crazy women/men so they don't repeat your mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elizbaeth Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 23 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: So far the only possible similarity he and I might have is being book smarts without being real-world smarts. Otherwise he couldn't possibly be more different than me if he tried! Seriously his whole story stinks of deadbeat loser. What did you see in him?! I mean I may be highly conservative and speaking totally in theory right now, but I sure as heck wouldn't be shy to kiss to death my hypothetical woman and stick it in there once we're married. I may be a gentleman consciously but I have a beast within! :-P Hahah I’m sure you do! He was a loser out in the real world, but most of our relationship was conducted while we were in college. He and I were really good friends and got to know each other when all we had to do to be responsible was do well in class. We tried a romantic relationship after graduation, when the demands of life were also finally a reality. We had both been coddled and were living in a bubble of theoretical castles in the sky. Basically, I saw in him someone who enjoyed the same fantasies and pasttimes as me, and it was only sustainable as long as we were both sheltered and immature and not having to make decisions in the real world. 23 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: Thank you for the anecdote--though I seriously wonder what kind of girl you were because it sounds like you had really terrible taste in men until your husband came along. I am basing this off of this story plus in which I think you said you dated briefly a polygamist Muslim while you worked at a daycare center. I might be misremembering because I know a Swedish woman with a far worse track record as one of the callers as well as a Russian woman so I might be misremembering some stuff. I apologize if that's the case but assuming I am remembering right I think you ought to... I don't know, for your sons and potential daughters at least, teach them and prepare them for crazy women/men so they don't repeat your mistakes. Oh, I was lost in a lot of chaos, had horrible self-worth and no idea who or what I should listen to. I had spent my entire life pretending to be something I was innately incapable of being because I thought that was what good people did, and I had come very close to losing my ability to tell anyone no, or hold my own desires with any force. And when I asked for help I got a whole bunch of noise and rX drugs that only seemed to make things less solid, less secure, and more like a cloying fog of nothingness. I had liked the Muslim guy because he talked as though he knew what he wanted and what was right, and he had told me from the beginning that he was dating me with a prospect of marriage. I had tried intellectual guys and “smart” guys and caring guys, and they were always, in the end, too passive. The Muslim was my first attempt at finding a Manly Man. I did not suspect that he was hiding things, much less hiding wives. What I did do, fully aware, was tolerate a lot of very cruel, controlling, jerkish behavior from him. Honestly, red pill theories have helped me a lot in trying to figure out why I would do things that I knew would not make me happy or bring me love. I feel pretty grateful for all the sexual strategy theories, because it shed light on things about myself that were manifesting in my actions, but I also did not know why I did it. It’s also nice to know that my inherent female drives are neither good nor bad on their own, but it’s the quality of my own character and integrity that will make my life good or not. I was behind in learning - or even asking the questions - about all of this, and I think it’s because I spent my life focused on getting through school and thorn college, where, if I began to think for myself and dig into things, my grades would suffer. I spent 20 years actively not thinking. It’s taken me a little while to unlearn things and then clumsily rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barn Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 On 27/03/2018 at 8:14 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: benefit from here on out though. PM inbound, got parachute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 My oh my! I was curious if days had gone by without reply because your posts were being put into Hidden mode (I still don't get why that happens to SOME of my posts, and not others...) but THIS? Damn, what a flood! On account of my need to do some other things with my time at this moment, and the sheer volume of responses I must cover, I'm gonna have to do that "I'll touch on just a few points" thing again, though I promise I won't delay for several months this time! XD On 3/22/2018 at 7:07 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Good to see you too old man! :-P Hey, I'm JUST a bit more than a decade your senior. I ain't THAT old! =P On 3/22/2018 at 7:07 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Well, I am hugely skeptical of writing advice since most writing advisors make their money primarily from advising about writing rather than from their novels. That being said, I could always use feedback from a reader's perspective because ultimately the job is to please the reader not other writers. If you want I'll email you my current draft of it. Email me and I'll know who you are. Of course I'll probably have to state I have little memory for what "active language" and other terms mean anymore since literacy class bored me to tears all my life. I'm guessing... I dunno, using actions rather than descriptions of actions? Like instead of saying Johnny Johnson is smart, demonstrate how he's smart? Well, no. Active language deliberately avoids (and achieves the polar opposite of) "passive language", so-called because it simply describes things as "in a state of being" rather than in a moment of achieving something. You might notice this when you read articles by leftist journalists describing antifa riots as "violence breaking out" rather than explaining that parties are responsible for actions. Passive language makes frequent use of past-tense and relies heavily upon variations of states of being. Active language, by contrast, makes HEAVY use of verbs and often creates very colorful phrases to add an extra bit of flair to otherwise drab language. As a demonstration, that ENTIRE short paragraph above was structured using active language (and this sentence is not). Examples of active vs passive: He's still breathing vs he yet draws breath. The mountains were taller than the eye could see vs the peaks of the mountains reached far into the heavens beyond conceivable vision. Obviously mountains don't reach, they're inanimate rocks. So active language tends to describe static objects as agents of some kind of action. I'm often reminded of Steinbeck's work when I think about this element of active language, not necessarily because he never uses passive language, but because he spends entire CHAPTERS dedicated to describing scenery (like the first several of East of Eden) before he gets around to his story. The simple way to reformat ones writing into an active sort is to go line by line and seek out and eliminate ANY of the following words or phrases, or they variants: is, am, were, goes, does, be, was, "is ___ing", and so on. It's a very simple concept to grasp, but quite difficult to master, because of how endemic passive language is to how we communicate. We are creatures in a state of flux of being, so we describe ourselves and the world around us as "being" this or that. I can understand the hesitancy to take writing advice from someone who does not make a living off of their writing. "Those who can, do; those who cannot, teach" and all that. XD That's like listening to an electrician give you tax advice; he could have very good advice, but it's not his job, so he could very well be wasting your time, too. I only know that my adoration of One Piece is a mixture of appreciation for a finely crafted story, and of FIERCE displeasure at reading the wikia dedicated to the series, because every new development is described in as much detail as the evidence can support, but ALWAYS using the phrase "as seen in" over and over and over and over again... It's AGONY reading fan-made article after fan-made article written in passive language, because they just don't know any better! T_T On 3/22/2018 at 9:30 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: ADDED: I actually found some minor errors in your original post! They're minor because they didn't break my mental procession of your voice in my head nor did it distort your intent. At least, I assume it didn't, otherwise you're a terrible writer! :-P I call BS. I re-read my original post and see no such errors of which you speak! What hast thou spotted that which I dost not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted April 4, 2018 Author Share Posted April 4, 2018 15 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: My oh my! I was curious if days had gone by without reply because your posts were being put into Hidden mode (I still don't get why that happens to SOME of my posts, and not others...) but THIS? Damn, what a flood! On account of my need to do some other things with my time at this moment, and the sheer volume of responses I must cover, I'm gonna have to do that "I'll touch on just a few points" thing again, though I promise I won't delay for several months this time! XD' Since virtually everything I post is moderated, it is normally around every Wednesday/Thursday that they're passed for public reading/response. Like now is Tuesday so I suspect you won't have to wait long to see this, but you might have to wait a week and a day otherwise. 15 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Hey, I'm JUST a bit more than a decade your senior. I ain't THAT old! =P Hey man, being old enough to own your own home, be married, and a father is "OLD" relative to a young buck like myself still stomping about trying to find his way forwards. 15 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Well, no. Active language deliberately avoids (and achieves the polar opposite of) "passive language", so-called because it simply describes things as "in a state of being" rather than in a moment of achieving something. You might notice this when you read articles by leftist journalists describing antifa riots as "violence breaking out" rather than explaining that parties are responsible for actions. Passive language makes frequent use of past-tense and relies heavily upon variations of states of being. Active language, by contrast, makes HEAVY use of verbs and often creates very colorful phrases to add an extra bit of flair to otherwise drab language. As a demonstration, that ENTIRE short paragraph above was structured using active language (and this sentence is not). Examples of active vs passive: He's still breathing vs he yet draws breath. The mountains were taller than the eye could see vs the peaks of the mountains reached far into the heavens beyond conceivable vision. I more or less figured this out when I researched it but you explain it better than most. I think it's a bit pedantic to look for because context is everything. I typically prefer the first person in the past tenses across multiple different characters and thus different personalities and ways of thinking/feeling/describing. I don't know if you plan to email me at [email protected] for a copy of my current draft or not but either way I think I can use two characters who may or may not embody a preference for active versus passive voice. Alois is a generally confident and outgoing young boy (later man) who generally prefers to resolve things in the here and now and hates to delay and hates those that either sell themselves short overmuch. Therefore his language style is generally active and about doing things in the moment rather than meekly describing things as "having happened", rather he's "doing them". To use an example off my head but not in text (because I don't feel like combing hundreds of pages for a simple example): if he for some reason decides to box someone, he will describe the situation as it happens and with himself as an active agent in creating (or at least reacting) to it rather than passive act like it just happened to him as if he was some sort of meek little determinist. In contrast, initially at least, Lia who is just a month younger than Alois, tends to be herself a passive agent in situations and therefore tends to describe things as having happened to her rather than her causing them to happen. However she might not be the best example of passive voice in my memory because (as it is written from the perspective of presumably much later in life) she has a somewhat different personality and mindset as a narrator of herself than she did in the moment as a kid. ...Honestly I assume I use active voice a lot simply because when I read passive voices I just feel a different personality talking to me than when I read examples of active voice. Since most of my characters are speaking in the past tense from the first person (and therefore are generally wiser and better than when they were younger) they tend to speak in active voice. I think. I don't look pedantically at things like this because I tend to evaluate the quality of a paragraph, sentence, and chapter based on whether it "sounds right" especially relative to the narrator's personality and whether or not the "flow" of the words and sentences are easily digestible or drawn out too much (or in contrast too little as to be too ambiguous). Unless I deliberately intend for them to be in such a way. Like I said: context is everything. 15 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: Obviously mountains don't reach, they're inanimate rocks. So active language tends to describe static objects as agents of some kind of action. I'm often reminded of Steinbeck's work when I think about this element of active language, not necessarily because he never uses passive language, but because he spends entire CHAPTERS dedicated to describing scenery (like the first several of East of Eden) before he gets around to his story. I'd hate to read him lol. I tend to do very little describing of anything beyond actions and dialogue as I am a firm believer of "Chekov's Shotgun"; if it doesn't have a purpose, either in the long run or in the moment, don't bother describing it. Like if Alois passes by a castle I don't think much description beyond bare bones (like it's big, well-fortified, and mighty or the opposite of that) is necessary (or warranted/desired) UNLESS that particular castle is going to be explored more later as either a seat of residence or as a bulwark in a "documented" (i.e. someone's going to talk/recall/describe actions from there) defensive/offensive siege. 15 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: The simple way to reformat ones writing into an active sort is to go line by line and seek out and eliminate ANY of the following words or phrases, or they variants: is, am, were, goes, does, be, was, "is ___ing", and so on. It's a very simple concept to grasp, but quite difficult to master, because of how endemic passive language is to how we communicate. We are creatures in a state of flux of being, so we describe ourselves and the world around us as "being" this or that. I don't know. When I read myself typing, I think I am prone to active voice by default because I like to speak straightly and concisely unless I think description or qualifying is necessary to either avoid confusion or predictable questions. For example: if you asked me how Johan Johnson is doing; I wouldn't just say "not well" because you'd probably ask me to elaborate on that. Therefore I'd say "not well; he's got food poisoning from that rancid meat he ate from the back of the fridge that he didn't want to waste". Thus I am answering 3 plausible questions at once. How is Johan doing? Why is he unwell? Why did he eat rancid meat? ... Get me? 15 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: I can understand the hesitancy to take writing advice from someone who does not make a living off of their writing. "Those who can, do; those who cannot, teach" and all that. XD That's like listening to an electrician give you tax advice; he could have very good advice, but it's not his job, so he could very well be wasting your time, too. I only know that my adoration of One Piece is a mixture of appreciation for a finely crafted story, and of FIERCE displeasure at reading the wikia dedicated to the series, because every new development is described in as much detail as the evidence can support, but ALWAYS using the phrase "as seen in" over and over and over again... It's like AGONY readying fan-made article after fan-made article written in passive language, because they just don't know any better! T_T I know what you mean! I can usually overcome it if the content is interesting (btw I found you on a few Steam forums as an anonymous reader (since I myself don't own any Steam games but like to read what people have to say about games I like that are playable on Steam)!). However I do take reader reviews seriously because they're ultimately my potential/existing buyers. Not only that but I think many "writing advice/techniques" are either unintended/intended traps to professional success (i.e. to keep people from actually finishing and publishing their books) AND/OR the only way to really get good at writing is either from natural talent or that plus experience. Like I know I was a far worse writer as a pre-teen/tween than now as a young man. However the part I was far worse in was not in creativity but in execution. That's to say I had a much smaller vocabulary (and thus either had to explain peculiar things in a long and drawn out matter OR not describe things because I couldn't as well as have the problem of repeated phrases and lines across characters and chapters. Getting to hear more people, dialects, and getting more exposure to the written word has enable me to say basically the same things a dozen different ways to represent different types of people. I mean, shouldn't a pretty woman sound different than a gruff but ugly man? Or a gentleman from a prostitute? Etc. etc.?). Also I was much more naive and misinformed, thus while I might have won over contemporary Leftists I wouldn't have convinced critical thinkers or grounded people of anything about my fiction. I essentially had a lot of good clay and decent ideas but little skill in actually enacting them. Now, at least by comparison, I have great/good ideas and perhaps good or great skill in executing them. Whether I actually do or not I cannot say for sure because the people that read me never complain about my style or verbiage but rather certain plot points (or in one case the genre) while I am generally given props for my characterizations, world-building, sense of realism, and ability to give emotion and taste to words on paper. 15 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: I call BS. I re-read my original post and see no such errors of which you speak! What hast thou spotted that which I dost not? I think it was a period placed into a "(())" rather than "...)." but re-reading it now the context for "...) ..." makes sense. Either you fixed it already or I was simply too sleepy or energized to read it properly. I saw something that wasn't there, I think. I forget; it was weeks ago, wasn't it? Anyway I'd be glad for you to email me since I trust you will make a good judge of my quality and I need as many judges as possible since, though I am still fairly far, I am drawing close to completion and therefore want someone to let me know if I'm doing good, doing bad, or a mix at different points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I think it was a period placed into a "(())" rather than "...)." but re-reading it now the context for "...) ..." makes sense. As a general rule, end sentences that have begun, and sentences that have not begun you need not end. What could "sentences that have not begun" POSSIBLY mean? Well, asides are a perfect example. An aside is either a fully-fledged statement, or a brief (and incomplete) statement. The incomplete aside need not have grammatically correct punctuation, so long as the complete statement that incorporates it does have the correct punctuation. For instance, that "and incomplete" aside was not a fully-formed statement, so it need not necessitate a period with the parentheses. But if the parentheses blocked-in a self-contained thought within a full-statement, then both might need their own separate punctuation. This can get complicated, especially if you think/speak in a constantly-streaming series of tangents and offshoots like I do, myself. This is why I prefer certain methods of denoting such side-commentary depending on the given aside. Hyphen breaks for next-to-full statements, parentheses for full-statements that do not conclude when the full statement concludes, semicolon and colon where appropriate, and so on and so on. On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Either you fixed it already or I was simply too sleepy or energized to read it properly. I saw something that wasn't there, I think. I forget; it was weeks ago, wasn't it? We may never know. I don't recall editing that post, and it's been weeks, so I honestly couldn't tell you if I fixed an error that you spotted before the fix, or if you indeed spotted something in your delirium that wasn't really there. Or... perhaps PROJECTING your own errors onto perfect-and-flawless me? But... you wouldn't do that, would you? =3 On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I don't know. When I read myself typing, I think I am prone to active voice by default because I like to speak straightly and concisely unless I think description or qualifying is necessary to either avoid confusion or predictable questions. For example: if you asked me how Johan Johnson is doing; I wouldn't just say "not well" because you'd probably ask me to elaborate on that. Therefore I'd say "not well; he's got food poisoning from that rancid meat he ate from the back of the fridge that he didn't want to waste". Thus I am answering 3 plausible questions at once. How is Johan doing? Why is he unwell? Why did he eat rancid meat? ... Get me? To be brutally blunt, I do think you don't know. Your example was riddled with passive language! "Therefore I'd say 'not well; he's got food poisoning from that rancid meat he ate from the back of the fridge that he didn't want to waste'" "Wanting to" is another version of "going to", which is a huge passive language faux pas. The slang "I'd" implies the passive "would", and the slang "he's got" implies the passive "has received", which is VERY passive- on top of past-tense! Like I said, active-language is hard to master. It's easy to slip into passive language... like I just did. And did again. And again! >_< On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: btw I found you on a few Steam forums as an anonymous reader (since I myself don't own any Steam games but like to read what people have to say about games I like that are playable on Steam Which game? I had a recent stint of verbal-schoolings (the easiest to boast about, and the least worthwhile to matter) on some boards a few months back. But for all I know, there might just be quite an old backlog of things I've said that I don't even remember talking about! On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I'd hate to read him lol. I tend to do very little describing of anything beyond actions and dialogue as I am a firm believer of "Chekov's Shotgun"; if it doesn't have a purpose, either in the long run or in the moment, don't bother describing it. Like if Alois passes by a castle I don't think much description beyond bare bones (like it's big, well-fortified, and mighty or the opposite of that) is necessary (or warranted/desired) UNLESS that particular castle is going to be explored more later as either a seat of residence or as a bulwark in a "documented" (i.e. someone's going to talk/recall/describe actions from there) defensive/offensive siege. I think that rule of thumb is easily torn apart by the same principle as avoiding spoiler by not mentioning something at all. You hear the logic behind spoiler alerts A LOT when Game of Thrones is the topic of conversation, but I believe the same thing happens when people discuss other major works of fiction, like Marvel movies, TWD, etc. I'm in agreement with those that state that saying ANYTHING can constitute spoilers, particularly in a series such as GOT where death happens to many characters, and so unpredictably that those alive in the books still find their way dead in the show; because simply mentioning a character can spoil the fact that they make it out of a particularly dramatic scrape alive, should you notice that they're in this scrape, but you don't recall them having done said mundane activity that the spoiler talked about. In context to your comment, not describing the castle unless it has a purpose clearly gives away that the object will serve an intended purpose. By contrast, those paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs of Steinbeck describing rivers and streams and forests and mountains that the two rival families would COME to live in (They hadn't even settled there yet!) served to settle the reader into the setting itself, but it also served to ground the story in its pace and give you a future sense of urgency. When several chapters are dedicated to telling you about a valley, multiple series of events involving a blood feud going on in a single chapter will feel like events are rapidly spiraling out of control! It REALLY took me out of the book to have to slog through all that scenery description, but it was very ingenious on his part. Meanwhile, if all he'd done in Of Mice and Men was to describe Lenny's predilection for soft things and bad habit of breaking those soft things, and only described Curly's Wife as having soft hair, you would've seen the tragedy coming a mile away, because you knew those two details were the only thing that mattered. Sometimes, you gotta toss out extra details, if only to serve as a distraction. Did my mentioning of the peculiarity of a character's pendant (an absolutely trivial detail, it would seem) matter to story in the long-run? Oh, absolutely! But did my description of another character being a dog and sleeping with several women have much impact on the story? No, not really; it simply served to tell you a little bit about that character. Him being a dog didn't have any major impact on the story at all... even if the things those actions happened around DID matter. Was fucking that babe in a hot spring really what mattered, or was the fact that she used her body to manipulate him what really mattered? Since the latter detail is implied, you could figure it out while reading the event, or you could find out when it is clearly revealed to you. Because it's couched in minutia, you don't really know what's important and what's tangential, so the story can still surprise you. Again, ASoIaF is DAMN good at this! TONS of minutia, but much of it both informs the world, as well as foreshadow major events to come. (Incidentally, if I just spoiled OMAM for you, the irony is not lost on me... >_<) On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Since virtually everything I post is moderated, it is normally around every Wednesday/Thursday that they're passed for public reading/response. The hell for? O.o On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: However I do take reader reviews seriously because they're ultimately my potential/existing buyers. Not only that but I think many "writing advice/techniques" are either unintended/intended traps to professional success (i.e. to keep people from actually finishing and publishing their books) AND/OR the only way to really get good at writing is either from natural talent or that plus experience. Well a perfect example was my uncovering of a TYPO in Stef's latest book! Yes, he missed something in proofing-stage of The Art of the Argument, so now the book is flawed! But really, should that have stopped him from printing it? I knew what he meant, and if I wasn't so ornery about writing (e.g. a "typical" person) would I have even noticed this typo? Probably not. "Perfection is the enemy of good." Teaching techniques meant to improve a skill is just that, skills to help improve. If they are used to delay, they can work against you. If you would rather make a book that you look back on in 20 years and think to yourself "Oh GOD I can't believe I ever let this see the light of day!" but the printing/sale of which propelled you to make better books, that's perfectly fine. Even random internet squabbles from years ago that I find bother me on a writing-style level, to say nothing of those novels I wrote. I still love the stories I made, even if the language I used in those stories makes me cringe... ~_~ On 4/3/2018 at 6:08 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Hey man, being old enough to own your own home, be married, and a father is "OLD" relative to a young buck like myself still stomping about trying to find his way forwards. "So what you're saying is..." 19 is too young to be married, or be a father, or own property? =P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted May 3, 2018 Author Share Posted May 3, 2018 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: As a general rule, end sentences that have begun, and sentences that have not begun you need not end. What could "sentences that have not begun" POSSIBLY mean? Well, asides are a perfect example. An aside is either a fully-fledged statement, or a brief (and incomplete) statement. The incomplete aside need not have grammatically correct punctuation, so long as the complete statement that incorporates it does have the correct punctuation. For instance, that "and incomplete" aside was not a fully-formed statement, so it need not necessitate a period with the parentheses. But if the parentheses blocked-in a self-contained thought within a full-statement, then both might need their own separate punctuation. This can get complicated, especially if you think/speak in a constantly-streaming series of tangents and offshoots like I do, myself. This is why I prefer certain methods of denoting such side-commentary depending on the given aside. Hyphen breaks for next-to-full statements, parentheses for full-statements that do not conclude when the full statement concludes, semicolon and colon where appropriate, and so on and so on. We may never know. I don't recall editing that post, and it's been weeks, so I honestly couldn't tell you if I fixed an error that you spotted before the fix, or if you indeed spotted something in your delirium that wasn't really there. Or... perhaps PROJECTING your own errors onto perfect-and-flawless me? But... you wouldn't do that, would you? =3 :-P 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: To be brutally blunt, I do think you don't know. Your example was riddled with passive language! "Therefore I'd say 'not well; he's got food poisoning from that rancid meat he ate from the back of the fridge that he didn't want to waste'" "Wanting to" is another version of "going to", which is a huge passive language faux pas. The slang "I'd" implies the passive "would", and the slang "he's got" implies the passive "has received", which is VERY passive- on top of past-tense! Like I said, active-language is hard to master. It's easy to slip into passive language... like I just did. And did again. And again! >_< Maybe, but context is everything. I'd have to show you my work for your comments to have real weight with me; because you could be diagnosing me based solely on me right here and now and not me when I have temporary schizophrenia writing as several different characters. Also, I think, given the context, it wouldn't have matter what voice I said that little sentence in because it would be equally uninteresting and mundane. Ultimately: if it is interesting, it is interesting. If it is good, it is good. If it is both interesting and good, I would spend more money on it. If it is neither, then I am not interested regardless of the details. 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: Which game? I had a recent stint of verbal-schoolings (the easiest to boast about, and the least worthwhile to matter) on some boards a few months back. But for all I know, there might just be quite an old backlog of things I've said that I don't even remember talking about! Fallout New Vegas, I think. Very long ago; as a console peasant I mainly read the Steam forums because some of my games have active discussion there for when I feel bored eating something or want something to wake my attention up to (like early morning). 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: I think that rule of thumb is easily torn apart by the same principle as avoiding spoiler by not mentioning something at all. You hear the logic behind spoiler alerts A LOT when Game of Thrones is the topic of conversation, but I believe the same thing happens when people discuss other major works of fiction, like Marvel movies, TWD, etc. I'm in agreement with those that state that saying ANYTHING can constitute spoilers, particularly in a series such as GOT where death happens to many characters, and so unpredictably that those alive in the books still find their way dead in the show; because simply mentioning a character can spoil the fact that they make it out of a particularly dramatic scrape alive, should you notice that they're in this scrape, but you don't recall them having done said mundane activity that the spoiler talked about. I think as a rule of thumb, context is everything. What spoiler is worth covering for isn't always clear; like would it be a major deal if "we" returned to that castle later to defend it? Maybe, maybe not. If there's a war going on and Alois needs a place to command from safely, then it's obvious he's going to find a castle sooner or later unless an enemy army appears to disrupt his plans. Now by focusing on real-estate to sit in, the reader might have forgotten about the enemy army that is hopping around while Alois is making house calls! Or, perhaps, figuring there would be danger, the reader was anticipating it and wondering whether Alois would be able to respond correctly to the danger or if the saga will meet a premature end. For him, at least. 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: In context to your comment, not describing the castle unless it has a purpose clearly gives away that the object will serve an intended purpose. By contrast, those paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs of Steinbeck describing rivers and streams and forests and mountains that the two rival families would COME to live in (They hadn't even settled there yet!) served to settle the reader into the setting itself, but it also served to ground the story in its pace and give you a future sense of urgency. When several chapters are dedicated to telling you about a valley, multiple series of events involving a blood feud going on in a single chapter will feel like events are rapidly spiraling out of control! It REALLY took me out of the book to have to slog through all that scenery description, but it was very ingenious on his part. Meanwhile, if all he'd done in Of Mice and Men was to describe Lenny's predilection for soft things and bad habit of breaking those soft things, and only described Curly's Wife as having soft hair, you would've seen the tragedy coming a mile away, because you knew those two details were the only thing that mattered. Sometimes, you gotta toss out extra details, if only to serve as a distraction. Did my mentioning of the peculiarity of a character's pendant (an absolutely trivial detail, it would seem) matter to story in the long-run? Oh, absolutely! But did my description of another character being a dog and sleeping with several women have much impact on the story? No, not really; it simply served to tell you a little bit about that character. Him being a dog didn't have any major impact on the story at all... even if the things those actions happened around DID matter. Was fucking that babe in a hot spring really what mattered, or was the fact that she used her body to manipulate him what really mattered? Since the latter detail is implied, you could figure it out while reading the event, or you could find out when it is clearly revealed to you. Because it's couched in minutia, you don't really know what's important and what's tangential, so the story can still surprise you. Again, ASoIaF is DAMN good at this! TONS of minutia, but much of it both informs the world, as well as foreshadow major events to come. (Incidentally, if I just spoiled OMAM for you, the irony is not lost on me... >_<) Maybe, but context is everything. Like I have a lot of little details in the early part of my book which both describes the world, describes the characters, and what they value (often without directly saying they're into this sort of thing. Other times, very directly and self-admittedly saying they're this way) which may or may not be pivotal in the long run. 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: The hell for? O.o I was a bit heated last Summer and spoke about something I'm glad he moderated because my political opinions have changed since. Being young and radical, while common, is still embarrassing... On the plus side; it gives me the opportunity to re-read what I post before anyone sees it because sometimes I say something I want to retract, clarify, or emphasize. It can be annoying but other times it's like having a guardian angel. I am prone to making mistakes, and so I have to watch myself. Perhaps once I've demonstrated consistent maturity they'll let me do without moderation anymore... 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: Well a perfect example was my uncovering of a TYPO in Stef's latest book! Yes, he missed something in proofing-stage of The Art of the Argument, so now the book is flawed! But really, should that have stopped him from printing it? I knew what he meant, and if I wasn't so ornery about writing (e.g. a "typical" person) would I have even noticed this typo? Probably not. "Perfection is the enemy of good." Teaching techniques meant to improve a skill is just that, skills to help improve. If they are used to delay, they can work against you. If you would rather make a book that you look back on in 20 years and think to yourself "Oh GOD I can't believe I ever let this see the light of day!" but the printing/sale of which propelled you to make better books, that's perfectly fine. Even random internet squabbles from years ago that I find bother me on a writing-style level, to say nothing of those novels I wrote. I still love the stories I made, even if the language I used in those stories makes me cringe... ~_~ Exactly so. I wrote stuff when I was a kid that I am embarrassed to re-read but at the same time and impressed by how far I came and with what fertile soil I came with. Overall what matters is that I create something I want to be remembered by and enough people want to spend money on. My therapist recently finished my current-version (unfinished, but 500,000 words with an ending at the end is judge-able) and he's said he would be willing to buy it as a consumer. I've been speaking with him about what he thinks since reading it last week; in short: he's impressed by my characterizations, plot, and linguistic style with the only flaw being my tendency to focus more on dialogue than description. However he was extremely impressed by the characters, especially the main ones. He was bored by the girls however, as to him they're simply women and support characters without much to do with the main plot. My mother thinks almost the opposite because her tastes are more towards characters while my therapist prefers things happening and characters demonstrating themselves that way. 21 hours ago, SnapSlav said: "So what you're saying is..." 19 is too young to be married, or be a father, or own property? =P No, but few men in today's world are so remarkable. Any man who is I respect by default because he has achieved, what I want to achieve by 30, by my current age of 20. Btw I actually edited the above sentence. Initially it was written "Any man who is, I respect by default because he has achieved what I want to achieve by 30, by my current age of 20." but I changed it to the comma after "achieved" because... well, it seemed to fit better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 On 5/3/2018 at 10:54 AM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Any man who is I respect by default because he has achieved, what I want to achieve by 30, by my current age of 20. Btw I actually edited the above sentence. Initially it was written "Any man who is, I respect by default because he has achieved what I want to achieve by 30, by my current age of 20." but I changed it to the comma after "achieved" because... well, it seemed to fit better. Hmmmmmm, still needs improvement. "Any man who is, I respect by default, because he has achieved by my current age of 20 what I want to achieve by 30." This hits all the right marks. Proper placement of commas to denote proper moments of pause and emphasis, a bit of tweaking to make the sentence flow better, and it all means exactly the same thing using exactly the same words, the only changes being the added/removed commas and rearrangement of the component sentiments. Like I've been saying, I know my shit. =P On 5/3/2018 at 10:54 AM, Siegfried von Walheim said: No, but few men in today's world are so remarkable. It should go without saying that I was kidding, thus the "so what you're saying is..." in quotes and all. I like to jump on the meme train every now and then, but unfortunately for me, I don't have remotely the creativity to invent any of my own... or when I do, I've been long-beaten to the punch. Anyway, I do agree. Few men are remarkable enough to have found their character, and are standing on their own, enough to earn the right to start a family, and have started it. Cause fire and forget is not the same thing as being a young-and-hungry entrepreneur who's got his shit together and started a family while barely out of his teens. That being said, however, we SHOULD be aiming for that, and the fact that it's not so common (in the West) these days... more's the pity. On 5/3/2018 at 10:54 AM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Maybe, but context is everything. [...] Also, I think, given the context[...] I think as a rule of thumb, context is everything. That got a bit irritatingly repetitive. I don't disagree that context is paramount, but I don't see how that single point warranted recounting as a response to the various different things I'd said. Hell, I even STATED how a comment was in context to what you said, but you separated it from the rest- taking it out of context by doing so -then proceeded to comment that context was key. I feel that the irony deserves some acknowledging! On 5/3/2018 at 10:54 AM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Fallout New Vegas, I think. Very long ago Hmm, I don't think that was me. Perhaps you're recalling a previous conversation you and I had on these boards where we got into it about the greatness of FONV? As far as I can recall, I never really said much on the FONV boards. I DID write a review for it, but it was a "Steam review", which is just one of those tiny blurbs that's barely even one paragraph. And if it hasn't become abundantly apparent, less-than-a-paragraph is just not my style. =/ The most recent Steam boards banter I can recall participating in were from a couple months ago, perhaps end of last year, and after I moved onto something else, I stopped bothering with those conversations. Thought it might have been that which you had happened upon... cause I got downright mean a couple of times. XD On 5/3/2018 at 10:54 AM, Siegfried von Walheim said: My therapist recently finished my current-version (unfinished, but 500,000 words with an ending at the end is judge-able) and he's said he would be willing to buy it as a consumer. I've been speaking with him about what he thinks since reading it last week; in short: he's impressed by my characterizations, plot, and linguistic style with the only flaw being my tendency to focus more on dialogue than description. However he was extremely impressed by the characters, especially the main ones. He was bored by the girls however, as to him they're simply women and support characters without much to do with the main plot. My mother thinks almost the opposite because her tastes are more towards characters while my therapist prefers things happening and characters demonstrating themselves that way. That description brings me back to the thought of Steinbeck's works. Cause seriously, East of Eden is a BEAST to read (no pun intended), as are most of Steinbeck's real "books", in contrast to Of Mice and Men being a shorter novella rather than a full novel. His shorter works, which still considered full books by most, are quite small and easy reads compared to the mainstay of his career. Obviously I can't comment until I've seen the work myself, but the way you described the reactions is interesting. At least based on how you characterized their tastes, I may lean towards how your therapist feels, because sometimes characters aren't everything, as sometimes they're swept up in a series of events they simply CANNOT control or alter, and so you see what they're really made of by how they handle this situation. The flip-side, seeing characters in and of themselves, is very "girly". Sometimes, the things going on in a character's head all the time are NOT that interesting. Sometimes they are. The titular Old Man of The Old Man and the Sea was a great case of a character's thoughts being worth exploring, but it was ALSO a story where the character had no control over his circumstances, and so his response to the situation informed what he was really made of. So that book sorta touched on both of those different "tastes" simultaneously. Perhaps your work does this too, or perhaps it leans heavy one way and not the other, or perhaps something completely different than what you described? I wouldn't know until I read it, myself. (Yes, I know, email or bust. I'm getting around to it...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted May 5, 2018 Author Share Posted May 5, 2018 15 hours ago, SnapSlav said: Hmmmmmm, still needs improvement. "Any man who is, I respect by default, because he has achieved by my current age of 20 what I want to achieve by 30." This hits all the right marks. Proper placement of commas to denote proper moments of pause and emphasis, a bit of tweaking to make the sentence flow better, and it all means exactly the same thing using exactly the same words, the only changes being the added/removed commas and rearrangement of the component sentiments. Like I've been saying, I know my shit. =P Except I didn't pause until "achieved", so in terms of actually portraying my mouth sounds on text, it was accurate. 15 hours ago, SnapSlav said: It should go without saying that I was kidding, thus the "so what you're saying is..." in quotes any all. I like to jump on the meme train every now and then, but unfortunately for me, I don't have remotely the creativity to invent any of my own... or when I do, I've been long-beaten to the punch. Anyway, I do agree. Few men are remarkable enough to have found their character, and are standing on their own, enough to earn the right to start a family, and have started it. Cause fire and forget is not the same thing as being a young-and-hungry entrepreneur who's got his shit together and started a family while barely out of his teens. That being said, however, we SHOULD be aiming for that, and the fact that it's not so common (in the West) these days... more's the pity. Yeah but I am not one for joking too far in text as humor is not a skill of mine while taking it literally is more interesting. 15 hours ago, SnapSlav said: That got a bit irritatingly repetitive. I don't disagree that context is paramount, but I don't see how that single point warranted recounting as a response to the various different things I'd said. Hell, I even STATED how a comment was in context to what you said, but you separated it from the rest- taking it out of context by doing so -then proceeded to comment that context was key. I feel that the irony deserves some acknowledging! Context is everything, bro. 15 hours ago, SnapSlav said: Hmm, I don't think that was me. Perhaps you're recalling a previous conversation you and I had on these boards where we got into it about the greatness of FONV? As far as I can recall, I never really said much on the FONV boards. I DID write a review for it, but it was a "Steam review", which is just one of those tiny blurbs that's barely even one paragraph. And if it hasn't become abundantly apparent, less-than-a-paragraph is just not my style. =/ The most recent Steam boards banter I can recall participating in were from a couple months ago, perhaps end of last year, and after I moved onto something else, I stopped bothering with those conversations. Thought it might have been that which you had happened upon... cause I got downright mean a couple of times. XD I can't remember but I recognized the avatar and SnapSlav moniker and, at the time, wondered where and why I recognized Artorias of the Abyss as an avatar and the the name "SnapSlav"... and then I recalled FDR. 15 hours ago, SnapSlav said: That description brings me back to the thought of Steinbeck's works. Cause seriously, East of Eden is a BEAST to read (no pun intended), as are most of Steinbeck's real "books", in contrast to Of Mice and Men being a shorter novella rather than a full novel. His shorter works, which still considered full books by most, are quite small and easy reads compared to the mainstay of his career. Obviously I can't comment until I've seen the work myself, but the way you described the reactions is interesting. At least based on how you characterized their tastes, I may lean towards how your therapist feels, because sometimes characters aren't everything, as sometimes they're swept up in a series of events they simply CANNOT control or alter, and so you see what they're really made of by how they handle this situation. The flip-side, seeing characters in and of themselves, is very "girly". Sometimes, the things going on in a character's head all the time are NOT that interesting. Sometimes they are. The titular Old Man of The Old Man and the Sea was a great case of a character's thoughts being worth exploring, but it was ALSO a story where the character had no control over his circumstances, and so his response to the situation informed what he was really made of. So that book sorta touched on both of those different "tastes" simultaneously. Perhaps your work does this too, or perhaps it leans heavy one way and not the other, or perhaps something completely different than what you described? I wouldn't know until I read it, myself. I'd say I applied the practice of including junk to conceal the plot-relevant in the mental mind of the characters. It's a first person epic driven by two primary characters and an ensemble cast of secondary characters and the ones that become narrators are the ones you'll get at least a glimpse of the minds of. He said he liked the story, especially later on, but I haven't had the time to ask him for more details. Last time I spoke to him I focused mainly on his opinions of the various characters and as I said he likes the men for the most part because they're doing things and responding to things far more than the women who for the most part have it comparatively easy. I mean generals and knights =/= princesses sitting comfy in an ivory tower in terms of tests of grit and fortitude. 15 hours ago, SnapSlav said: (Yes, I know, email or bust. I'm getting around to it...) Yep. I've repeated my email address enough and if you're interested you know where to check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 4 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: Except I didn't pause until "achieved", so in terms of actually portraying my mouth sounds on text, it was accurate. Well if you wanna be accurate to how you speak, and you speak improperly, then that's how you wish to write. But the "edited" version you gave had a bit of a ramble without any pauses at the start of it, and if you rambled before you paused, then okay, you did it right. But you DID say you edited it, so that kinda infers that you knew you didn't. If you wanna have the best of both worlds, where you represent how you speak in your writing, but you also do so properly, you can. That's the balance I always strive to strike, and I think I manage it pretty well. 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: Context is everything, bro. And you neglect to touch on the fact that in your pursuit of "context", you REMOVED context from a comment. That was kinda the crux of my point... If what you're being repetitive about is justified, the fact that it's repetitive is a moot point. Seeing as I GRAVITATE towards context, I can't imagine that your driving home the point about the importance of context was at all warranted. At. All. Case in point... 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: Yeah but I am not one for joking too far in text as humor is not a skill of mine while taking it literally is more interesting. Here's another example of neglecting the entire point of what I said. The paragraph you quoted was not just me saying "I was joking, deflect, deflect, deflect, deflect." It was opening with a comment, moving on to a point, and concluding on that point. If you took that literally, you would've noted that the majority of that statement was, "Yeah, I agree." 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: I can't remember but I recognized the avatar and SnapSlav moniker and, at the time, wondered where and why I recognized Artorias of the Abyss as an avatar and the the name "SnapSlav"... and then I recalled FDR. Can't have been me, if this is true and I'm being honest. I believe FDR is the only place where I've taken to the Artorias avatar with my nickname being the same. I think I may have used it as a placeholder on some... other... sites, but for the most part I've got Donquixote Doflamingo, Guts, and a few of my own drawings as my avatars. I don't think I've EVER used Artorias as my Steam avatar... Seems to me you're just remembering our earlier conversation in another topic on these boards, and your mind's conflated that with some other instance of you reading some stuff on Steam. Possibly stuff by me, possibly something completely different. The human mind's ability to manufacture memories can be quite outstanding, sometimes... 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: I'd say I applied the practice of including junk to conceal the plot-relevant in the mental mind of the characters. It's a first person epic driven by two primary characters and an ensemble cast of secondary characters and the ones that become narrators are the ones you'll get at least a glimpse of the minds of. First (or second) person perspective presents you a great opportunity to differentiate your characters. For instance, if both of them have the same tendency to wander off in their thoughts and notice the same sorts of mundane details that conceal plot-relevant observations, then they won't feel like different characters. No amount of representing their different ways of speaking will make a difference if the reader picks up on that they both think the same way. This is one of the greatest struggles of many writers, because they have to know how they write, as the author, and they have to convincingly fabricate the way in which their characters would write the story, if they were to author one. The Great Gatsby is a perfect example of a fictional character from the book authoring the book. The various stories of Sherlock Holmes is another. If every story written by these authors had the same manner of exploring different character's thoughts, one could argue that they weren't the most inventive author. But in a book with TWO different narrators, this put that observation directly under the spotlight. It may not make any damn difference in the long-run, but just something to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted May 6, 2018 Author Share Posted May 6, 2018 19 hours ago, SnapSlav said: And you neglect to touch on the fact that in your pursuit of "context", you REMOVED context from a comment. That was kinda the crux of my point... If what you're being repetitive about is justified, the fact that it's repetitive is a moot point. Seeing as I GRAVITATE towards context, I can't imagine that your driving home the point about the importance of context was at all warranted. At. All. What are you talking about? You mention grammar preferences about active vs. passive voice and punctuation. Context really is everything. And I think it's fair to repeat that statement because what's true in one case will always have a time where it isn't in the world of writing. Even proper grammar can find a time where it's sensible to be non-existent (like the mind of a crazy person or an illiterate). 19 hours ago, SnapSlav said: Case in point... Here's another example of neglecting the entire point of what I said. The paragraph you quoted was not just me saying "I was joking, deflect, deflect, deflect, deflect." It was opening with a comment, moving on to a point, and concluding on that point. If you took that literally, you would've noted that the majority of that statement was, "Yeah, I agree." I agreed with everything you said after and didn't think it necessary to say so, as I'd basically be repeating myself as you agreed with a statement I made and thus my agreeing with your agreeing is... masturbatory. The new point was that it was a sort-joke. That's what I responded to. 19 hours ago, SnapSlav said: Can't have been me, if this is true and I'm being honest. I believe FDR is the only place where I've taken to the Artorias avatar with my nickname being the same. I think I may have used it as a placeholder on some... other... sites, but for the most part I've got Donquixote Doflamingo, Guts, and a few of my own drawings as my avatars. I don't think I've EVER used Artorias as my Steam avatar... Seems to me you're just remembering our earlier conversation in another topic on these boards, and your mind's conflated that with some other instance of you reading some stuff on Steam. Possibly stuff by me, possibly something completely different. The human mind's ability to manufacture memories can be quite outstanding, sometimes... Maybe but I'm pretty damn sure I saw it. Unless SnapSlav is just a common moniker (it doesn't count as a typo where Stefan Molynuex's name does) originating from something else, in which case it's probable. 19 hours ago, SnapSlav said: First (or second) person perspective presents you a great opportunity to differentiate your characters. For instance, if both of them have the same tendency to wander off in their thoughts and notice the same sorts of mundane details that conceal plot-relevant observations, then they won't feel like different characters. No amount of representing their different ways of speaking will make a difference if the reader picks up on that they both think the same way. This is one of the greatest struggles of many writers, because they have to know how they write, as the author, and they have to convincingly fabricate the way in which their characters would write the story, if they were to author one. The Great Gatsby is a perfect example of a fictional character from the book authoring the book. The various stories of Sherlock Holmes is another. If every story written by these authors had the same manner of exploring different character's thoughts, one could argue that they weren't the most inventive author. But in a book with TWO different narrators, this put that observation directly under the spotlight. It may not make any damn difference in the long-run, but just something to think about. Something I already know well and exploit quite often. I use the expression "temporary schizophrenia" for a reason; because I am, in the moment of writing from the perspective of any given character, that character with all the mental strengths and warts, desires and repulsions, courage and anxiety, etc. etc. Early on the most obvious example is Alois versus Lia; Alois is very goal-driven and tends to break off only when in transience. On the other hand Lia is far more likely to tangent away from what's going on and visibly clam-up rather than focus on a given thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: What are you talking about? Fine... lead a horse to water and all that. I'm not gonna force this issue any further. 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: I agreed with everything you said after and didn't think it necessary to say so The confusion could have been averted by simply quoting the parts you were responding to, much like what I am doing now. If I quote a block of text, in which you make 3 distinct statements, and I'm only responding to one of the statements and I say that I disagree, that kinda implies that there is disagreement with the block, unless otherwise stated. When I remove sections of particular quotes, this is because I don't want to entangle tertiary comments up in a response. Many have done it before me, and it's practically a necessary staple of forum conduct to avoid such misunderstandings. It really helps conversation along when you do that. 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: Maybe but I'm pretty damn sure I saw it. Unless SnapSlav is just a common moniker (it doesn't count as a typo where Stefan Molynuex's name does) originating from something else, in which case it's probable. Like I said, can't have been me. I don't think I EVER said a word on the FONV boards over on Steam, nor do I believe I EVER used the Artorias avatar on my Steam profile. The second is possible, so I won't rule it out entirely, but we're talking about 5% likelihood, and that's being generous. We'd had a previous discussion about a year ago on these boards where we went off on a tangential gaming conversation, and FONV featured considerably in that conversation. Given what you described, I am positive that this conversation was what you were remembering. Even if your brain was telling you it came from elsewhere, this is where I stemmed from. 5 hours ago, Siegfried von Walheim said: Something I already know well and exploit quite often. I use the expression "temporary schizophrenia" for a reason; because I am, in the moment of writing from the perspective of any given character, that character with all the mental strengths and warts, desires and repulsions, courage and anxiety, etc. etc. Good to know. =) I forgot to include in my comment- but you sorta touched on this idea yourself anyway -that writers share in common that trait that Stefan described in actors where they can be very... non-genuine. Like actors need to inhabit the minds of other people, they can be fundamentally disturbed individuals, writes need to be able to inhabit "multiple minds". The major difference is that the writers are creating the minds that they temporarily inhabit, while the actors rarely have the opportunity to do so. The way I described it, when talking about my own works, was that "every character was a part of me". Meanwhile actors are always playing other people, not simply part of themselves. This is, of course, assuming that the writer in question is actually TRYING to do a convincing/good job. They could just as easily not do ANY of this... and I'd argue that makes for much less compelling reading as a result. Anyway, all rather redundant, at this point, since you already understand that! Might as well try to dig into that considerable backlog I've left for myself... On 3/22/2018 at 7:07 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: Tease! If you want to chat with me, email me using the address above. I think one of my biggest hangups and why I didn't jump on it sooner, was... I have never even HEARD OF "yandex"! If you wrote a yahoo acount- or hell, even one with aol -I would've trusted it without a second thought. But what is yandex? <.< On 3/22/2018 at 7:07 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I'll have to check her out to really know. I mean, who's to say she hasn't arrived at her conclusions simply because she had an initial bias in favor of Rightism? Of course that's probably rare (or maybe not--I mean, how many women can freely admit to being Rightists without being ostracized for it? Or more precisely, while caring about ostracism?). Well I don't think this necessarily applies to Blonde in the Belly of the Beast, because she lives in a VERY liberal environment, and she has many similarities with Lauren Southern in that her ability to not cave to the social pressures of group think was because of wisdom imparted to her at a young age (and a good family life, I'm sure) rather than simply "naturally leaning right". After all, she IS a young woman. EVERYTHING in her biology is screaming at her to be a liberal, and she's very, very conservative, but she admits that she still feels that nurturing tendency attempting to "override" her better judgement. What I find particularly endearing about her perspective is that she often tackles those doubts of hers as a "stupid woman-brain". I adore self-effacing whimsy. X) I highly, highly recommend her work, not just to you, but anyone else reading this. She's bee on Stefan's YouTube show a couple times, which adds to surprise that her co-host for Beauty and the Beta, Matt Christiansen, has YET to be on the show! I love the way he tackles major events that VERY few other outlets even bother to touch upon at all, so I think he really adds a lot of value to the so-called "skeptosphere", that's for sure. On 3/22/2018 at 7:07 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I'm not addressing it at all. It's "only" been an issue once, but I found a way around it (namely stand behind the counter and remember there's a leash) when I was foolishly attempting the rat race. I have plenty of imagination as to how this weakness can go badly. Like, say, if I'm inviting a bunch of friends and friends of friends to an event... and one of them brings a dog... Or if I'm pursuing a woman... and she's a dogf__cker... well, you get the drift. Now I don't like pets in general. I fear them at least a little but dogs in particular. I think you're plenty right in saying I have to find a way to tame my fear of dogs. For now I'm just winging it, figuring I can just kick myself in the shin should I ever get fearful. I do have a way of "easing myself into it" as occasionally there are dog walkers en route to where I'm coming and going. Hypothetically a means of easing myself is simply to walk past them without purposely hiding behind a car or whatever. I'll be sure to do that next time... And I know it's a connected thing. I think this is a pretty huge issue. For one thing, humans and dogs are very hard to separate, because they were bred alongside us for so many centuries, they just "go with" us, for better or for worse. It's one thing if you had a MASSIVE case of arachnophobia and you knew someone with a pet tarantula, because spiders don't really make for the best of pets. Nor do snakes. So in neither case will you really have to face owners with these kinds of unusual pets that really frighten you. But dogs? Dogs are "man's best friend" in true spirit. They were made to be that way. So dogs will be a ubiquitous presence in your life, like it or not, so you gotta be able to handle it. For another matter... ANY weakness will have its moment. Even if it seemed like a particularly rare trigger that you could handle, Murphy will find a way when you least expect it. I had a pretty specific trigger associated with a very personal trauma, so I expected to be able to get away with not conquering that trauma and besting that weakness, and I was very, very wrong. Among friends, at work, it found a way to strike, and I realized that I had to get a handle on this thing. I still don't like the subject of that trauma, and the specific experience that imparted that trauma upon me will still upset me if I dwell on it for long, but at least I won't fall apart at the simple exposure to this trigger anymore. You don't need to conquer it all in one day. It COULD take years! Just start working on it. You don't need to have a dog as a pet for the rest of your life, but preferably you want to be able to feel "okay" around dogs, even if you never come around to liking them. On 3/22/2018 at 7:07 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I don't really see him at all. Like once or twice a year at family events (that I no longer go to). However the last time I spoke with him was Halloween of 2016 or 17. And what we talked about was racial realism and white racism. He claimed there must be white racists in government because marijuana is more highly prosecuted than cocaine, which apparently are drugs favored by blacks and whites respectively. I don't remember much else, but I do remember us being very distant on the political spectrum, and he was too busy to have a real conversation with me (and I chose to do more probing and listening since I wasn't sure where he stood). Frankly I don't want to reach out to get to know him. However I have no reason to believe he's a bad guy. I just don't want to do the work to get to know him. Sounds like you really made up your mind that you don't want to bother with him. So this begs the question, why is this an issue for you? Are you concerned that you could lose out on a meaningful friendship, even if every fiber of your being is telling you "I really don't give a damn"? Or do you see hope in "turning him around", but you'd rather not be the one to do all the work to get him to come around? Or is it his new kid, and you're thinking that if you had a relationship with him, you had the opportunity to make a difference in the kid's life, and prevent another child from being early-indoctrinated into the leftist ranks? Whatever the case may be, he's on your mind. On matters like seeing racism in government because of MJ vs coke... that's a very common red herring. The two drugs are NOT at all comparable. The better example to bring up is the prosecution of meth and crack, as both do roughly the same level of harm to the individual, have similar rates of addiction, similar costs, and one is vastly preferred by whites and the other is vastly preferred by blacks. Because the drugs are so similar, it's no surprise to find that prosecution of these drugs is also very similar. You don't see a difference like with cocaine and marijuana. For another thing, we're in a major cultural shift where more and more states and local jurisdictions are deciding that they don't want to prosecute for MJ offenses, and they'd rather legalize the substance. You won't hear the same case about snow. So you could easily attack such a flimsy argument as the product of bias that it is, if you wanted to. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what excuses he uses, if he wants to see something, he'll see it. If he doesn't know that's what he's doing, then revealing that will help him reconsider. If he DOES want to do that, consciously or unconsciously, then probing will only help you learn that's what he's doing. Because revealing it someone who wants to find excuses will either confound them, and they'll double down because that's their natural inclination, or they'll lie through their teeth knowing that they've been found out, and they'll try to distract... or even come up without another excuse (moving the goal post). Either way, if you're already set on leaving him out of your life, except for those rare times where you see family every now and then, regardless of how well you get along with them or not, then this is all a rather moot point. It only matters if you actually seek to try to do something about this relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegfried von Walheim Posted May 7, 2018 Author Share Posted May 7, 2018 (edited) 50 minutes ago, SnapSlav said: The confusion could have been averted by simply quoting the parts you were responding to, much like what I am doing now. If I quote a block of text, in which you make 3 distinct statements, and I'm only responding to one of the statements and I say that I disagree, that kinda implies that there is disagreement with the block, unless otherwise stated. When I remove sections of particular quotes, this is because I don't want to entangle tertiary comments up in a response. Many have done it before me, and it's practically a necessary staple of forum conduct to avoid such misunderstandings. It really helps conversation along when you do that. Yeah but I haven't done THIS in a while. I've had email conversations which are far different in nature. Also, I guess, a part of me felt I had to? I don't know. I'll keep in mind to be more specific to what I'm responding to, but I think it'd be bad etiquette in itself to over-delete what I'm quoting 'cause... context. Quote We'd had a previous discussion about a year ago on these boards where we went off on a tangential gaming conversation, and FONV featured considerably in that conversation. Given what you described, I am positive that this conversation was what you were remembering. Even if your brain was telling you it came from elsewhere, this is where I stemmed from. I remember that plenty; it was quite fun. I just remembering see your thing on Steam. It might not have been a Bethesda game for all I remember and it might not have been you, specifically (5% is a high chance given the vastness of the player base--assuming you meant potentially 5% know what a SnapSlav is and etc. etc...). Quote Good to know. =) I forgot to include in my comment- but you sorta touched on this idea yourself anyway -that writers share in common that trait that Stefan described in actors where they can be very... non-genuine. Like actors need to inhabit the minds of other people, they can be fundamentally disturbed individuals, writes need to be able to inhabit "multiple minds". The major difference is that the writers are creating the minds that they temporarily inhabit, while the actors rarely have the opportunity to do so. The way I described it, when talking about my own works, was that "every character was a part of me". Meanwhile actors are always playing other people, not simply part of themselves. This is, of course, assuming that the writer in question is actually TRYING to do a convincing/good job. They could just as easily not do ANY of this... and I'd argue that makes for much less compelling reading as a result. Anyway, all rather redundant, at this point, since you already understand that! I'm not even sure how I learned it. I think it had something to do with just "figuring it out" as I've been writing casually since the 6th grade (I was 12 I think) so that's 8 years of experience with millions of words written as my track record. About a dozen books as well (most of which not fit for public consumption. However several of which my peers read and enjoyed). Quote Might as well try to dig into that considerable backlog I've left for myself... I think one of my biggest hangups and why I didn't jump on it sooner, was... I have never even HEARD OF "yandex"! If you wrote a yahoo acount- or hell, even one with aol -I would've trusted it without a second thought. But what is yandex? <.< Yandex is what Amyerki Conservative hipsters who want to be cool and not use gmail use. It's basically Russian gmail. I use the Yandex email and search engine except when looking for videos as Yandex is good at at finding and accumulating many images of attractive women and also for more general use as it isn't as stupidly unintuitive as google/bing. I also use Opera as my web browser since my therapist recommended these things as a way to avoid Google censorship and also (in Opera's case) to default Yandex to English as I speak very little Russian and read about as little. Quote Well I don't think this necessarily applies to Blonde in the Belly of the Beast, because she lives in a VERY liberal environment, and she has many similarities with Lauren Southern in that her ability to not cave to the social pressures of group think was because of wisdom imparted to her at a young age (and a good family life, I'm sure) rather than simply "naturally leaning right". After all, she IS a young woman. EVERYTHING in her biology is screaming at her to be a liberal, and she's very, very conservative, but she admits that she still feels that nurturing tendency attempting to "override" her better judgement. What I find particularly endearing about her perspective is that she often tackles those doubts of hers as a "stupid woman-brain". I might give her a chance, I just find her focus on relationships to be boring for me. Once I got what I wanted to know (at the time), I just felt "enough" and didn't want to come back. Too girly. Quote I adore self-effacing whimsy. X) Meh. I like women who pretend to be arrogant in those situations ("oh, my? Did I say that? I could NEVER have said that! Ahaha!") to be more attractive but that's a matter of kink. Quote You don't need to conquer it all in one day. It COULD take years! Just start working on it. You don't need to have a dog as a pet for the rest of your life, but preferably you want to be able to feel "okay" around dogs, even if you never come around to liking them. Yeah I know. I have been since by not avoiding dogs as I pass them by the street and I've gradually gotten better. I've even practiced maintaining eye contact with attractive women much the same way... Quote Sounds like you really made up your mind that you don't want to bother with him. So this begs the question, why is this an issue for you? Are you concerned that you could lose out on a meaningful friendship, even if every fiber of your being is telling you "I really don't give a damn"? Or do you see hope in "turning him around", but you'd rather not be the one to do all the work to get him to come around? Or is it his new kid, and you're thinking that if you had a relationship with him, you had the opportunity to make a difference in the kid's life, and prevent another child from being early-indoctrinated into the leftist ranks? Whatever the case may be, he's on your mind. It's not really a big deal for me as I haven't thought about it in months. My main issues are this: what if he mutilated his boys? What if he doesn't realize the shit he suffered from his evil mother and beta cuck father? Ultimately I can't reach his children if I can't reach him, and I'd rather cut off that weight and build my own family anyway. Quote On matters like seeing racism in government because of MJ vs coke... that's a very common red herring. The two drugs are NOT at all comparable. The better example to bring up is the prosecution of meth and crack, as both do roughly the same level of harm to the individual, have similar rates of addiction, similar costs, and one is vastly preferred by whites and the other is vastly preferred by blacks. Because the drugs are so similar, it's no surprise to find that prosecution of these drugs is also very similar. You don't see a difference like with cocaine and marijuana. For another thing, we're in a major cultural shift where more and more states and local jurisdictions are deciding that they don't want to prosecute for MJ offenses, and they'd rather legalize the substance. You won't hear the same case about snow. So you could easily attack such a flimsy argument as the product of bias that it is, if you wanted to. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what excuses he uses, if he wants to see something, he'll see it. If he doesn't know that's what he's doing, then revealing that will help him reconsider. If he DOES want to do that, consciously or unconsciously, then probing will only help you learn that's what he's doing. Because revealing it someone who wants to find excuses will either confound them, and they'll double down because that's their natural inclination, or they'll lie through their teeth knowing that they've been found out, and they'll try to distract... or even come up without another excuse (moving the goal post). I think this would have been good to out-argue him last (or the one before that?) Halloween but frankly it's not particularly interesting to me. I consider all drugs to be equally problematic because they're all brain-damaging vices anyway. Of course your point is arrest-rate vs. drug potency vs. ethnic preferences of those drugs, but I have no intention of convincing him that the racism isn't there because... I'm not interested in building a relationship with him. I mean, I never knew him as a kid, I'm not particularly interested in knowing him as a buck. Quote Either way, if you're already set on leaving him out of your life, except for those rare times where you see family every now and then, regardless of how well you get along with them or not, then this is all a rather moot point. It only matters if you actually seek to try to do something about this relationship. Very much agreed. Personally my main and primary focus is my career as a novelist and moving out to the glorious American Midwest where crime is low, culture is high, and conservatives are flourishing in record numbers. P.S.: In the past few days, I've noticed the time it takes for me to get moderated has become FAR less then it used to be. Maybe it's an internal system at work rather than a person reading all my posts once per week to decide whether "Yea" or "Nay" (and 99% of the time it's "Yea" so I don't usually worry about getting modded out of existence). Edited May 7, 2018 by Siegfried von Walheim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapSlav Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 On 5/6/2018 at 7:53 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I remember that plenty; it was quite fun. I just remembering see your thing on Steam. It might not have been a Bethesda game for all I remember and it might not have been you, specifically (5% is a high chance given the vastness of the player base--assuming you meant potentially 5% know what a SnapSlav is and etc. etc...). I DID say 5% was "being generous" though. I only included the possibility because I can't honestly rule it out, for the same reason I argued that you could've mis-remembered this whole affair. Hell, there have been times where the "Yugoslav wars never happened" propaganda has been so stifling that I even momentarily believed that I concocted every one of those memories of bombed-out buildings and sad moments with family ALL in my head! So it goes without saying, that without absolute certainty- a real bitch of a thing to have -I leave room for doubt. Me saying "5% likelihood, which is generous" is about the same thing as saying "never happened, full stop". On 5/6/2018 at 7:53 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: About a dozen books as well (most of which not fit for public consumption. However several of which my peers read and enjoyed). Well, that's more than me, that's for sure! Unless we count the stuff I wrote in a matter of days when I was 8-9... which I don't think is fair, so no... XD On 5/6/2018 at 7:53 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I might give her a chance, I just find her focus on relationships to be boring for me. Once I got what I wanted to know (at the time), I just felt "enough" and didn't want to come back. Too girly. Not sure if we're talking about the same person? Blonde's videos that stick out in my mind are her argument for the failure of civic nationalism, her detailing the genetic history of her lineage and how genes are propagated, and a MULTITUDE of subjects tackling the culture wars. About the only thing "girly" about her channel is that she herself is quite the looker. Oh, and she has a small dog, which is kinda cliche West-Coast Girl, I suppose. But I generally watch her on the Beauty and the Beta podcast (and their weekly live call-in show if I ever get around to it) more than anything else. Since she's the "stop being such a touchy-feely pansy" counterbalance to Matt Christiansen's liberal half of the show, that says a LOT about how forthright she tends to be! There have been VERY few episodes (if any) of that podcast which left me disappointed. I know there was one topic which I was unhappy about their coverage, but I honestly am struggling to remember what it was about. Generally speaking, the podcast goes like this: Summary of the week's crazy shit. If it's at all polarizing between the two, Matt will take a Sargon-esque liberal deference while Blonde points out that we've seen this damn dance several times already. The rest of the time you'd think they agree on just about everything, except cringe videos, which Blonde HATES and that Matt LOVES to make her suffer through. Except that they actually do disagree on most things, but they have strong respect for each other so they don't usually fight about it. On 5/6/2018 at 7:53 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: I think this would have been good to out-argue him last (or the one before that?) Halloween but frankly it's not particularly interesting to me. It's not really about "here's what you coulda said back then, but this is kinda pointless to know about, now". It's more like if you had a cousin who recited the wage gap myth to you in idle conversation, and you'd briefly forgotten all the myriad of ways to shoot that down for the silly superstition that it is, even if you filed them away as someone to part company with, you could be better prepared for the next person that comes along and says the same tired lie that they've been taught to repeat. Sooner or later, it'll be someone that you either take a gamble on, or you already know that they have good wiring but that they've been fed bad data, and it's more than worthwhile to correct them. Sometimes "missed opportunities" with someone else is the reminder to keep yourself brushed up on anti-crazy data/arguments for the next opportunity to come. Like the wage gap, the argument about pot prosecution vs coke prosecution is a COMMON fallacy brought up by lefties. You can't be the expert on 100% of the stupid shit they recite, but seeing 50% of it coming will make you look like an intellectual titan... or they'll start the autistic screeching because they instinctively know that they can't win, but they can't admit it. Either way, you win. The consequence of avoiding the risk of becoming a monster is to let other monsters have their way. Be wary of the abyss staring back, but you have to take that risk to hunt the monsters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts