Today I was thinking on the way home from the library.
I was thinking about what made alcohol so appealing to me.
I came to the conclusion that it removed my inhibitions.
It helped me feel uninhibited, but it also impaired my judgment.
Now the interesting question...
Did I feel uninhibited due to the fact that my judgment was impaired?
I was thinking this because I found it so appealing
that I became an alcoholic. I became addicted to it.
And I know it wasn't to the alcohol itself, it was to the effect it had on me.
Someone showed me something.
They 'swooned' (his word) over me in a drunken state.
First of all, I'm not used to that,
secondly, I knew it was only because he was drunk.
I said something to the effect that guys have to be drunk
to 'swoon' over me because they don't do it when they are sober.
Then he said that being drunk just makes it easier to say things
at the wrong time and feel like an idiot.
Made me think about that. About what makes it make it easier?
What's that liquid courage all about?
It's a state of being uninhibited,
however, we can't use this state to its potential
because our judgment is impaired,
but maybe that state is BECAUSE our judgment is impaired.
Maybe our inhibitions are due to our judgments.
Furthermore, our prejudices.
Our prejudicial judge - mentality.
It kind of brings me back to an 'arguement' that I had.
Only in this argument, I wasn't defending myself.
Because there is no use in defending myself, my stance, my beliefs
or any of that to someone who believes they are right
to the point that they cut off all openness to any potential
that they are wrong.
If they have a judgmental attitude, they are convinced
that their judgments and only their judgments are correct.
So nothing to the contrary even exists in their frame of reference.
So there is no point defending anything.
My points, stance, beliefs etc are already 'correct' in my mind
so they don't really need any defense.
People can have their opinions, I can have mine.
Why it brings me back to that is that those judgmental attitudes
are inhibitions. They are inner blocks.
Blocking views and perceptions that they are refusing to be open to.
It's not even really about being able as much as it is about being willing
to be open to something that is completely different and separate
from our own line of thinking and believing and feeling.
We feel so strongly about one thing compared to another thing,
especially when we get so emotionally invested in our beliefs etc.
And it is because of that emotional investment,
it makes it hard to be open to anything else.
People having reactions to things.... It's interesting
because they don't realize that their reactions are largely emotional.
The thought comes first, so they think it's just the thought...
Or maybe they aren't even THAT aware
that they are actually reacting to their own thoughts ABOUT
whatever they are reacting TO.
But it's not just reacting to thoughts, it's emotions, too.
Like reacting to thoughts that evoke the feeling of disgust.
When you get good at detaching... From someone's need to think and feel
whatever they feel the need to think and feel,
you no longer get that urge to defend your need to think and feel.
BUT this ONLY comes after you stop automatically reacting.
This is a state of acceptance that is hard to achieve, but entirely possible.
It comes from detaching. It's detachment.
Most people know how to attach and they know attachment. To a degree.
They may not understand it. It has to do with identification.
So when they attach to their emotional investment in their judgments,
they are identifying with it to some extent.
This is what makes the investment an investment.
But.. On the other side... Detachment is the realization,
the recognition, and the acknowledgement that their need to think and feel
whatever they feel the need to think and feel
has nothing to do with you. At all. Whatsoever.
(Non identification & non attachment)
To me, that is the purest form of acceptance.
When you argue with someone about their need to think and feel
whatever and however they feel the need to think and feel,
it's just two egos arguing with each other.
It's an argument that has no 'winners' unless one side stops arguing first.
And that doesn't make the person who outlasted them 'right.'
I'll bring up an argument I was in that I still remember...
It was with two guys about sexual assault.
They thought porn stars should basically expect to get sexually assaulted
because their 'profession' is sexual in nature.
Their argument was this:
"Being a porn star and expecting not to get sexually assaulted
is like going swimming and getting mad that your hair got wet."
And yeah, they used these exact words.
Which offended me, naturally, being a female. Who has a right to say NO.
NO MATTER WHAT, I have that RIGHT. So do men. Not just females.
Everyone has the right to say NO. It shouldn't just be expected.
So this stance triggered my emotional reaction.
And I was trying to drive home the point that it's a bullsh*t stance.
Based on bullsh*t thoughts and beliefs. That are skewed and deluded.
But... As I soon realized, arguing with people who are deluded goes nowhere.
Can't 'educated' people who are in denial that they need 'education.'
I'd seen one of these guys post other comments
that seemed like he is intelligent in other regards.
Consent is a REAL thing, regardless of being a porn star or even a prostitute.
Porn stars and prostitutes are people too,
who (contrary to some people's beliefs) don't actually want to have sex 24/7/365.
And they don't have to want that, either.
Anyway, this fired me up so much because I got emotionally invested
in my own stance and defending it even though it's fruitless
to defend something to someone who obviously is oblivious
to anything outside their own stance.
But for days, weeks, even months, I was livid.
How dare they think that way? How dare they be so ignorant?
And it wasn't just about them being ignorant,
it was them being indignantly ignorant.
Which just strengthened my emotional investment in it.
I couldn't just let it go. For a long time.
Because it does matter that people actually think this way.
"This is how they are perceived, so I can treat them however I want."
Whole cultures are being built on bullsh*t beliefs like this.
All because people are f*cking so unaware of how f*cking unaware they are.
Anyway, this comes to mind when I think of strong emotional investments
in arguments that go absolutely nowhere.
People have to be OPEN to CONSIDERING another view.
If they aren't and can't allow themselves to be,
they won't consider a damn thing. Nothing.
They'll keep operating in the world with their views.
But, they'll also spread them with their bullsh*t beliefs.
Then we get clusters of fools who believe in foolishness.
All at the expense of those who KNOW it's bullsh*t.
But that's just my stance on that, my view. My thoughts and beliefs.
I never once told anyone to believe what I do.
People will and can believe whatever they want to.
If I can just state my beliefs to people who are OPEN to CONSIDER
something other than what they think and believe,
That's the best 'argument.' That doesn't 'need' any 'winners.'
"Winning" is when you decide what to believe.
When you think and believe for yourself.
Regardless of what anyone thinks and believes.
But... Yeah.... There's nothing 'sexy' about guys who think like that. Nothing.
Or anyone who thinks like that. For that matter.
I know someone who doesn't understand the term 'toxic masculinity.'
Well if that stance in that example doesn't describe it, I don't know what does.
Then we have groups like Incel (Involuntarily Celibate).
And they have a lot of very toxic beliefs concerning women.
Which women can sense and are naturally turned off by. Even repulsed by.
Yet, they wonder why women don't want to have sex with them....
As a woman, I'll tell you right now... Certain attitudes are extremely sexy.
And certain attitudes have the opposite effect.
It's not all about what a dude looks like, it's the energy they emit.
Flat out, disgusting attitudes based on disgusting belief systems are disgusting.
I was thinking about what made alcohol so appealing to me.
I came to the conclusion that it removed my inhibitions.
It helped me feel uninhibited, but it also impaired my judgment.
Now the interesting question...
Did I feel uninhibited due to the fact that my judgment was impaired?
I was thinking this because I found it so appealing
that I became an alcoholic. I became addicted to it.
And I know it wasn't to the alcohol itself, it was to the effect it had on me.
Someone showed me something.
They 'swooned' (his word) over me in a drunken state.
First of all, I'm not used to that,
secondly, I knew it was only because he was drunk.
I said something to the effect that guys have to be drunk
to 'swoon' over me because they don't do it when they are sober.
Then he said that being drunk just makes it easier to say things
at the wrong time and feel like an idiot.
Made me think about that. About what makes it make it easier?
What's that liquid courage all about?
It's a state of being uninhibited,
however, we can't use this state to its potential
because our judgment is impaired,
but maybe that state is BECAUSE our judgment is impaired.
Maybe our inhibitions are due to our judgments.
Furthermore, our prejudices.
Our prejudicial judge - mentality.
It kind of brings me back to an 'arguement' that I had.
Only in this argument, I wasn't defending myself.
Because there is no use in defending myself, my stance, my beliefs
or any of that to someone who believes they are right
to the point that they cut off all openness to any potential
that they are wrong.
If they have a judgmental attitude, they are convinced
that their judgments and only their judgments are correct.
So nothing to the contrary even exists in their frame of reference.
So there is no point defending anything.
My points, stance, beliefs etc are already 'correct' in my mind
so they don't really need any defense.
People can have their opinions, I can have mine.
Why it brings me back to that is that those judgmental attitudes
are inhibitions. They are inner blocks.
Blocking views and perceptions that they are refusing to be open to.
It's not even really about being able as much as it is about being willing
to be open to something that is completely different and separate
from our own line of thinking and believing and feeling.
We feel so strongly about one thing compared to another thing,
especially when we get so emotionally invested in our beliefs etc.
And it is because of that emotional investment,
it makes it hard to be open to anything else.
People having reactions to things.... It's interesting
because they don't realize that their reactions are largely emotional.
The thought comes first, so they think it's just the thought...
Or maybe they aren't even THAT aware
that they are actually reacting to their own thoughts ABOUT
whatever they are reacting TO.
But it's not just reacting to thoughts, it's emotions, too.
Like reacting to thoughts that evoke the feeling of disgust.
When you get good at detaching... From someone's need to think and feel
whatever they feel the need to think and feel,
you no longer get that urge to defend your need to think and feel.
BUT this ONLY comes after you stop automatically reacting.
This is a state of acceptance that is hard to achieve, but entirely possible.
It comes from detaching. It's detachment.
Most people know how to attach and they know attachment. To a degree.
They may not understand it. It has to do with identification.
So when they attach to their emotional investment in their judgments,
they are identifying with it to some extent.
This is what makes the investment an investment.
But.. On the other side... Detachment is the realization,
the recognition, and the acknowledgement that their need to think and feel
whatever they feel the need to think and feel
has nothing to do with you. At all. Whatsoever.
(Non identification & non attachment)
To me, that is the purest form of acceptance.
When you argue with someone about their need to think and feel
whatever and however they feel the need to think and feel,
it's just two egos arguing with each other.
It's an argument that has no 'winners' unless one side stops arguing first.
And that doesn't make the person who outlasted them 'right.'
I'll bring up an argument I was in that I still remember...
It was with two guys about sexual assault.
They thought porn stars should basically expect to get sexually assaulted
because their 'profession' is sexual in nature.
Their argument was this:
"Being a porn star and expecting not to get sexually assaulted
is like going swimming and getting mad that your hair got wet."
And yeah, they used these exact words.
Which offended me, naturally, being a female. Who has a right to say NO.
NO MATTER WHAT, I have that RIGHT. So do men. Not just females.
Everyone has the right to say NO. It shouldn't just be expected.
So this stance triggered my emotional reaction.
And I was trying to drive home the point that it's a bullsh*t stance.
Based on bullsh*t thoughts and beliefs. That are skewed and deluded.
But... As I soon realized, arguing with people who are deluded goes nowhere.
Can't 'educated' people who are in denial that they need 'education.'
I'd seen one of these guys post other comments
that seemed like he is intelligent in other regards.
Consent is a REAL thing, regardless of being a porn star or even a prostitute.
Porn stars and prostitutes are people too,
who (contrary to some people's beliefs) don't actually want to have sex 24/7/365.
And they don't have to want that, either.
Anyway, this fired me up so much because I got emotionally invested
in my own stance and defending it even though it's fruitless
to defend something to someone who obviously is oblivious
to anything outside their own stance.
But for days, weeks, even months, I was livid.
How dare they think that way? How dare they be so ignorant?
And it wasn't just about them being ignorant,
it was them being indignantly ignorant.
Which just strengthened my emotional investment in it.
I couldn't just let it go. For a long time.
Because it does matter that people actually think this way.
"This is how they are perceived, so I can treat them however I want."
Whole cultures are being built on bullsh*t beliefs like this.
All because people are f*cking so unaware of how f*cking unaware they are.
Anyway, this comes to mind when I think of strong emotional investments
in arguments that go absolutely nowhere.
People have to be OPEN to CONSIDERING another view.
If they aren't and can't allow themselves to be,
they won't consider a damn thing. Nothing.
They'll keep operating in the world with their views.
But, they'll also spread them with their bullsh*t beliefs.
Then we get clusters of fools who believe in foolishness.
All at the expense of those who KNOW it's bullsh*t.
But that's just my stance on that, my view. My thoughts and beliefs.
I never once told anyone to believe what I do.
People will and can believe whatever they want to.
If I can just state my beliefs to people who are OPEN to CONSIDER
something other than what they think and believe,
That's the best 'argument.' That doesn't 'need' any 'winners.'
"Winning" is when you decide what to believe.
When you think and believe for yourself.
Regardless of what anyone thinks and believes.
But... Yeah.... There's nothing 'sexy' about guys who think like that. Nothing.
Or anyone who thinks like that. For that matter.
I know someone who doesn't understand the term 'toxic masculinity.'
Well if that stance in that example doesn't describe it, I don't know what does.
Then we have groups like Incel (Involuntarily Celibate).
And they have a lot of very toxic beliefs concerning women.
Which women can sense and are naturally turned off by. Even repulsed by.
Yet, they wonder why women don't want to have sex with them....
As a woman, I'll tell you right now... Certain attitudes are extremely sexy.
And certain attitudes have the opposite effect.
It's not all about what a dude looks like, it's the energy they emit.
Flat out, disgusting attitudes based on disgusting belief systems are disgusting.
No comments:
Post a Comment