Lol I do not know what the results from that would be.
But anyway I am not with her for 5 years now, I am sure calling her to tell her that she was not tight might not be the best thing 
1 Like
I got two phones but not her number, what can you do life is a b1tch
1 Like
you canât see my edit it before deleting.
It sounded funny as an experiment to see her reaction, but then I realized it would just be mean to call her just to tell her she wasnât tight enough, like wtf ?
Even if you could, you shouldnât man
Lol
1 Like
lol man I wouldnât, it would backfire telling me I am little, extreme self confidence+become whole+unconditional love wouldnât fix that
1 Like
Meh
2 Likes
meh 
I gave this video a shot to see if there was any wisdom here. As usual, he has a few good points but always loses me by the end.
First things first is that when you are a person of status, you are going to attract women that seek that sort of status. And women that do, are rather superficial. Truth is, Tate can come off as superficial with his flaunting of wealth and all that. Beautiful women who take more value on the superficial side of life are drawn to men who do. So heâs attracting the kind of crowd that his personality appeals to.
I keep hearing of men like him generalizing all women like they are all the same way. Like they all want the same things. In my head, Iâm just thinking that these men are attracting a specific subset of women. The beautiful women these guys find on Instagram and whatnot are typically going to be women that are drawn to the more superficial side of things. Women that have lived off of validation for their looks tends to come with a sort of personality that can be offputting to men like Tate.
Oftentimes, these women will try to match their status to a person like Tate. They will talk about the things theyâve done or even make things up to seem like theyâre on his level. In a way, itâs their way of trying to seem like they live interesting lives, have high status/value and are about âthat life.â I agree that doing such a thing tends to not be attractive. It feels like showing off that these high status things you do, makes you a high status person as well.
But this is not only unattractive to men⌠but also women. Men do this all the time around women as well and itâs not attractive to most women. Itâs tacky and comes off as âlook at me and what I do. Iâm valuable. You should be with me cause of that.â But⌠it is attractive to superficial women, which tends to be the women these guys attract and keep complaining about.
I think guys are too fixated on the women they see flaunting their beauty online as the entire demographic of women. There are so many women out there that are not superficial and have genuine personalities and so much to offer in their own way. I mean, just the women in this forum alone are proof enough of that. Yes, there are many superficial women that are fixated on what they can get from men. But there are also many superficial men who are more fixated on what they can get from a women. But more than anything, there are just people who grew into their own person and seek for someone genuine that blends well with their personality. Someone they fully accept, embrace and love and that does the same for them.
So I donât believe that women should follow his advice. Even the superficial women who went on a date with a guy like Tate. I donât think anyone should restrict their thoughts and personality to be with someone. Tate is literally telling women to shut up or lie to get into a fulfilling relationship with someone. There is no fulfilment in hiding yourself. Only postponing of exposing your true self to the other person and when they donât accept these things about you, itâs going to hurt so much more.
Heâs even saying that women shouldnât dance in clubs⌠Do some of you guys even realize that women donât just dance in clubs to attract men? They dance cause itâs really fun. Hell, I love to dance when Iâm in a club and itâs not to attract anyone. Getting into a flow with the music feels amazing. But now women should restrict how much fun they have so they can be more attractive?
His advice to women is to act like a blank slate so that men can fill it with things he thinks are interesting are cool or to grant her all she wants. It sounds all so self centered. Sometimes, women want to show they are their own person too with their own experiences, thoughts and ideas because they want to bring something to the table. They want to give to a man as well. But according to Tate, he thinks women should just shut the **** up and let the man provide.
Also, this guy is generalizing what men want. I donât want a woman to shut up and just listen to me. I want her to tell me where sheâs been and what sheâs done. Heck, I wouldnât mind if a women told me she has a lot of friends or whatnot. I am not so insecure that I am going to be thinking about how many men sheâs been with. I want honesty. I want someone and something genuine. I donât want anyone to act a certain way just to attract me. This is all the way the wrong kind of advice. I would urge women not to listen to advice or youâre just going to attract men like Tate, that believes the relationship revolves around him.
I really hope thereâs some other guys out there giving better advice than this. If this is what men think is sound advice, then it seems we are taking some steps back into primitive thinking.
17 Likes
Hi Sammy,
Thanks for your feedback.
I agree. People are not all the same.
Again, I fully agree.
Men who position themselves, through bragging and flaunting as âresource providersâ instead as âsexual loversâ, will only attract those women who will seem them as resource providers and walking ATMs.
If you look at Tateâs girlsfriends, from what I can see, they are exactly like that.
But then also, I think this applies to most males on the planet who act in the very same way, who rather act âunsexualâ and instead are positiniong themselves as âprovidersâ instead of as âloversâ.
The root of this is a âtransactional mindsetâ and I blame mostly men for this.
If men would stop flaunting with their achievements in order to get women, then women would not see them as just providers.
Nothing wrong with flaunting and bragging, but if a man does it to get women, then it will always backfire at the man himself.
As like in marketing and sales, it is always a question of how one positions himself.
Unfortunately, most men operate within this transactional mindset.
Even Tate still does this.
And if a man has this transactional thinking in the back of his head where he believes that âif I demonstrate this amount of external value then I will be entitled to her sexualityâ, then he will always be treated like this by women â as a transactional materialistically superficial partner.
It will all be transactional.
Not love based and not sexual.
So called ânice guysâ do it all the time.
They believe that âjust by being niceâ they are entitled to something.
And women see through this manipulation and hate this.
Being nice should be part of general human behavior, just like brushing teeth, and not something that earns one special priviliges.
In their hearts, women want a lover and a f*cker, not a provider.
In modern times, in most countries, women can provide for themselves or the government does it with tax payerâs money.
Thatâs what the Red Pill gets wrong in my opinion.
A man who is trying to demonstrate status and dominance through external means, always acts transactional.
A transactional self-posititioning will always lead to a transactional superficial relationship.
The Red Pill tells men that their sexual market value as a man increases with the amount of their external possessions and status symbols, but nothing can be further from the truth.
What determines a manâs true sexual market value is his INTERNAL ability to be dominant and sexual.
The Red Pill almost always only thinks about the external (transactional) factors â which is delusional and the opposite of positioning yourself as a lover.
In the end, the Red Pill turns out to be same toxic transactional mindset as a blue pilled dudeâs ânice guy behaviorâ.
PS:
I think men should only ever flaunt and brag to other men in order to them show what is possible and how successful they are â but men should never flaunt to women.
I understand why you donât like his authoritarian tone.
I understand that Tateâs way of bringing a point across is not optimal and it is very easy to misunderstand him.
I think what many misunderstand about Tateâs advice and videos is that most of this advice is not intended to be taken literally and word by word.
It is more like reading the bible.
Stories and metaphors to get the point across.
Reading the bible word by word and taking it literally will only create religious fanatics on the other side, and bible haters on the other side.
Same with Tate.
When he says âto do Xâ or ânot do Yâ or âsay XYZâ, then this is intended as a verbal means to communicate his general point â not to be taken literally as fixed rules word by word.
The mass media is taking Tate quotes out of context, putting them into headlines, then people who read those headlines take everything literally and of course get a totally wrong picture.
Same thing if I would take a quote from the bible, thora, koran etc. out of its context story and put it into a headline â people would simply read âkill all disbelieversâ and get a totally wrong impression of the actual message.
I think a lot of people get this wrong and it is due to Tateâs special communcation style.
If you look at many of his videos, in many of them he is extremely exaggerating, insulting, sarcactic and overly pushful.
All clear signs that it is not to be indended to be taken literally word by word, but with a big grain of salt.
This style of communication is the opposite of a snow flake communication style.
Thatâs why he is so polarizing.
But also some people sometimes need to hear it in this harsh way to wake up from their trances.
Thatâs why tens of thousands of men who have watched his videos, have started working out, hustling and working on improving their lives after watching his videos.
Tateâs communication style is specifically aimed at men between 15 and 40 â in order to wake them up from their collective trance of being passive, numb and drugged.
In order to stop jerking off in their Momâs basement and man up and do something with their lives.
The general message in the posted video above was simply that âmen want to be the gateway for their beloved women to discover and explore the worldâ.
Everything else around is just verbal packaging.
I agree with that message that I want to be âher firstâ to see the smile and astonishment on her face when we discover the world together.
Thatâs what I get out of this video.
The rest is just a verbal construction around this message.
But yeah, I see that it is very easy to misunderstand it, lose sight of the actual trees in a forest and perceive him as some âauthoritarian rule enforcerâ.
2 Likes
I agree and see this far too often. Itâs partly instinctual I think because back when humans were in survival mode, women would typically be more drawn to a man that can provide for them. Although there was love, relationships between men and women tended to be a bit more transactional âI protect and provide for you, you have sex with me and nurture my home and children.â So itâs just ingrained in us still I guess.
Another great point. I donât know where this sort of behavior derived from. But I think it is innate too. I thought the same thing when I was boy and began feeling attracted to girls. I would just be nice and sweet to girls and think it would get me places. I learned through some hard rejections that⌠this definitely will get me nowhere 
Yessir
I try not to take anyone too literally. I can also read in between the lines. Iâve given Tate honest chances but like I said, he always loses me. Even if he intends well, the way you communicate is just as important as what you communicate. If you throw people off with what you are saying even if it is meant to help people then something is off with your communication.
A lot of people will chalk it up to people being too sensitive these days or taking what he says out of context. But Iâve listened to him talk and itâs so catered to merely the male perspective but can come off ass very demeaning to the womenâs perspective.
If you communicate in the way he does and also post things like in this screenshot rather often, then you are going to send mixed signals to people.
Your intentions are going to be misconstrued. And he has many moments where he crosses that fine line and says some outlandish things. And thing is, a lot of his audience are young teenage boys that take things VERY LITERALLY. They donât quite understand nuance yet and will take a lot of over the top things Tate says as fact.
I grew up on the Opie and Anthony show where those guys crossed that fine line ALL OF THE TIME. Patrice Oâneal was my favorite and Iâm pretty sure Tate parrots a lot of his ideas. As does much of the red pill community. But as I grew older, I realized these guys were talking smack about a specific subset of women and generalizing all of them. I met more than enough women in life to realize that much of that stuff they were saying about women did not apply to all of them at all.
The âsnowflakeâ style is where you communicate respectfully. It is considering opposite points of view while presenting your own. This does not get pushback and is met with more open ears. It is more effective. (Or maybe thatâs not the snowflake style but what I said is just a more effective style in general)
His style is the complete opposite and of course is met with more resistance. Itâs that Trump talk where you âtell it as it is.â Except âtelling it as it isâ is just your opinion but you present it as fact. That will always be met with resistance.
I do my best to always let people know that what I say is just my opinion. Because⌠it is. I donât have all the facts, all the knowledge in the universe to give you 100% facts. Niether does Tate, Trump or anyone that talks with that sort of authority. Like Neil Degrasse Tyson even. Most people are not receptive to people touting their opinions authoritatively. It is forceful and disregarding of someone elseâs perspectives.
Thatâs good. And Iâm glad he is able to motivate men this way. I do believe in tough love. I would look at myself in the mirror and call myself a bum ass piece of &^ when I would be out of shape. I would put myself down to get myself up. Iâm not opposed to that. And I donât disagree with him motivating men agressively in this way. (Not everyone is receptive to this but many men are)
I disagree with his stances on women and the kind of advice he gives about them. Some of it I can certainly agree with. Just like I certainly agree with a good portion of what Patrice Oâneal would say (seriously⌠listen to patriceâs advice on women and youâll see itâs the same stuff Tate is saying)
But only cause you can see through nuance, doesnât mean most guys do. Little kids listen to him and when they hear him saying women should just shut the &*^% up, they will take that literally.
And only because his outlandish way of communicating is effective to you, doesnât mean it is going to sit right with everyone. Iâm not sitting around surprised he has gotten so much backlash online. His way of communicating has a very easy way of being taken the wrong way and thatâs nooneâs fault but his own.
I agree with his statement that âmen want to be the gateway for women to discover and explore the worldâ to an extent. Itâs not a bad message. Personally, I want us both to that gateway for eachother. I want to provide unique experiences just as I want her personality to provide unique experiences to me. I donât wish the relationship to be centered on what I can bring to the table. But I can definitely see many men wanting to be that gateway for women. I think that can generally be true.
So yes, that message is a good one. But his verbal packaging around this message is what constructs the very message itself. It is what that message is built around.
So when heâs touting things like women shouldnât dance, women should lie about what theyâve done or just shut up , it comes off more as women should just be blank slates for men to fill in.
The paragraphs before the main paragraph MATTER. All the paragraphs leading up to the main message can toxify the context of the main message. What could be seen as âmen want to be a gateway for women to discover and explore the worldâ is now taken as â men want women to restrain from being themselves, so that they can be the center of their world.â Itâs not the listeners fault that everything Tate says leading to his main point suggests the 2nd part more than the first.
LikeâŚHow can people be surprised that his material gets taken out of context? He does it to himself.
4 Likes
First time that when I wrote something it needs approval?
I was hesitant for some time to post here, but would like to add my view now.
You make both great points!
JAAJs response was the first time I saw somebody beeing able to remove the communication style and focus on the intel while beeing aware of his selfsabotage.
Tate has some very good points, motivates a lot and is a breath of fresh air in an era of cancel culture.
But he also knows exactly how to persuade, influence, manipulate and use people(s resources) etc.
Brainwashing/advertising etc. is normal. Who doesn´t want to embodie HIS truth and increase the circle of people that agree with him? Let it be for the most altruistic reasons you can imagine.
Shouldn´t we focus on raising individuals that posess critical thinking,self awareness, confidence and (media) literacy so they become able to discern between beneficial and non-beneficial? before we ban content/people?
If I get somebody wrong bc I lack those qualities, are other people at fault for it?
Which is important! Still I see the problem that this honourable trait is beeing weaponized against us.
To the point where people get angry at you just because you dare to persist on your views.
The same with empathy. If I am âwrongâ because I speak âtoo agressivelyâ (not loud just passionate and confident in the things I believe in) and an âassholeâ because I don´t let other people dump their emotional baggage on me than there is something wrong in the way we communicate.
And I say that as somebody who is overall very sensitive and still struggles with those things himself, but imo we have to take accountability for how other people make us feel, because we are the only ones who can give our power away. (and manifested them for some reason in our life in the first place)
I`d prefer somebody who tells me the truth in a rough manner over somebody who is âniceâ and all that but talks bullshit, even if it hurts my feelings, cause I car for growth. Let it be my own or other people.
The people I´ve met that talked the most about âtoleranceâ, âempathyâ, âacceptanceâ etc. where usually the sneakiest and shadiest ones I´ve got to know. Somebody who is tolerant doesn´t need to bring it up every 2 sentences. You will know by his actions.
But isn´t that a problem with all the content on the net? II don´t want to think about what my nephew probably watches on yt, tik tok and whatever there is. Most of it would be accepted, heck even supported by society.
I am not even sure if I would ban all that crap if I could.
Just my thoughts on this.
i really appreciate what you both wrote and do in general here @SammyG @JAAJ.
2 Likes
Thatâa the system automatically making your post pending. It does that for watched words. Idk what the watched word was in your post though lol.
I have also had trouble accessing the flagged posts lately. Itâs acting so strange lately. So I havenât been able to even look at flagged posts recently 
Luckily, your pending post showed a sign in the bottom of this page so all good.
1 Like
I donât think that the people on the other side of the extreme are the best communicators either. The ones who virtue signal and say things like âwhat youâre saying is wrong and disrespectfulâ or getting instantly offended at people. I think these people let words affect them too easily and always feel they have the moral high ground. And because of that, they tend to disregard any perspectives that are not like theirs as well. They can be hypocritical without realizing it.
These people do not regard opposite perspectives. So no, I donât agree with this communication style either. Iâm not a fan of cancel culture.
So thatâs why I wrote in paranthesis that this is probably not the snowflake style that I am speaking of. Actually considering and being open minded to someone elseâs thoughts is not what Iâm seeing from the authoritarian side and the snowflake side. Both sides are close minded and stick to just what they think is right.
I am rarely seeing anyone have nuanced perspectives that consider two sides of the equation. It honestly annoys me. And itâs to the point that I canât look up to people who do.
And Tate, as you guys say, is a breath of fresh air to you all because he just tells it how it is without fear of being cancelled. You want that brutal honesty. Like I said though, his brutal honesty doesnât mean everything he says is true. He is nowhere near Hitler but Hitler said A LOT of things anyone can agree on to the point that when he does say some heinous shit, people would agree with that too.
A persuasian tactic a lot of people forget about is that if you get people to agree with you like 3 to 4 times in a row, you are most likely to agree with the next thing they say, no matter what it is.
I donât mind brutal honesty. I grew up on it as I grew up in a rough neighbrohood where tough love was all there was. Iâm not against that. But there is certainly a way to be brutally honest and tell it how it is without being a complete asshole. And it feels to me like nobody knows how to act within the center, where they are brutally honest but also respectful to the other personâs perspective.
I think Russel Brand used to communicate this way but I donât know if he does anymore (havenât followed him for years). Lex Fridman is probably the best example of being able to communicate this way as you can see from his Kanye West interview. Itâs a matter of keeping your ground while still being empathetic.
The examples you mentioned of people saying they were tolerant and emapthetic, obviously werenât if they were sneaky lil bastards. Only because they say these things or believe in them, doesnât mean it reflects in their communication. They are just as unempathetic as the authortiarians/assholes that they judge so harshly.
So yes, I have an issue with people who communicate in either sides of the spectrum this way and can personally not hold them in high regard. I personally seek for leaders who have evolved past speaking or thinking so dualistically.
So when I see these one sided people leading so many men or women, I see that humanity is just continually digging itself deeper into the hole of duality where we are only empathetic to people we agree with and open to ideas that allign with our beliefs.
Humanity has finally opened itself to all of itself. We are all aware of eachother to a degree we have never been before. And for us to evolve, we must learn to be open and understanding of one another, otherwise we will always be at conflict and never reach the highest potential humanity can reach. (As seen on star trek)
Iâm not talking about kids, kids. Iâm talking about his audience which is teenage boys and young adults and obviously older as well. Teenage boys are super⌠super gullible. Our brains are not developed enough to see nuance. If I was listening to Tate back then, I woulda ate all that up tremendously and probably wouldnât have developed the level of respect I have for women at this point in my life.
His rants can easily come off as demeaning to women and men just being men and having the upper hand. Iâd just laugh listening to his rants and thinking these guys are gonna have a bad wake up call when they get into serious relationships and apply some of this stuff to their releationships.
I was foolish when I was young as well and took some of Patrice Oânealâs advice in a relaationship (which Iâm telling you⌠is basicallly all Tates advice) and that⌠did not go well lmao. It might be appplicable to women you donât take seriously but certainly not to women you love or want a serious rellationship with.
Do I think all his material should have been deleted? Nah. I donât agree with that. There is so much worse stuff out there. I think that went overboard.
Like I said, I donât disagree with him on everything. I do like how he motivates men and brings to find value in themselves. But as Iâve aalways said, I donât find his views on women to create more balance between the male and female dynamic. I feel his views and advice on women can improve menâs perception of themselves and their role in relationships with women. But these views donât seem to quite put womens happiness and their needs and wants in perspective. Relationships are two way streets and his perspective is too singular for me to take to heart.
5 Likes
Thx @SammyG for addressing this when I wouldnât want to spend hours on typing out this stuff :)
From a womanâs point of viewâŚ
As you said, a certain type of woman will be drawn to him. Many people donât like what he is saying but itâs true that there are groups of women who would fall to his feet any day.
Especially if someone has daddy issues and wants to prove themselves, wants validation (thatâs impossible to provide because itâs lacking inside), they can seek out this type of guy.
He also has a lot of experience with women who work in the adult industry, who also also often share certain personality traits.
I disagree with a lot of what he says about women but the thing is, itâs obvious to me that when he talks about women, he talks about women who are not like me. So I dont really care in that sense, his stance doesnât anger me, but I do think itâs a bad influence on young people who are just figuring out the world and take his words like gospel.
Personally I can afford to travel the world and buy whatever bag I want on my own expense. So I just feel like a lot of what he says is not relevant lol.
I would never try and mold myself into some ideal in order to appeal to someone.
When I had a dating profile, I also had pictures up without wearing any make up and no filter anywhere - probably a different and smaller set of men became interested in me Vs. If I had amazing edited pictures on, but I was much happier with the pool :D
Anyway, long story short, I think most women want to feel respected by their partner and treated as an equal human being instead of a commodity (= pretty face + nice body + other services provided), and thatâs the most important thing lacking when he discusses relationships imo.
7 Likes
Thatâs been my issue. He generalizes all women to be like the women he encounters⌠who all tend to have a very specific personality as youâve described. If he was specifically talking to these instagram girls in this youtube video, I donât think I wouldâve batted an eye or paid any mind. But he generalized as he usually does and that will definitely get into the heads of many young guys that are listening to him.
And then when you believe all women to be that way, you are going to attract these kinds of girls. Your subconscious will also clasify certain behaviors women project to reflect the things Tate would say, even when they donât apply.
We should not underestimate how dumb and gullible we are when we are young. I am still dumbfounded at some of my beliefs and actions from when I was younger. I was DUMB. But I grew up.
Unfortunately, many men get stuck with these weird beliefs and behaviors and never grow up. And when you are taking Tates or even patrice onealâs wisdom biblically, youâre in for a lifetime of beliefs that will keep getting in the way of you ever having a fulfilling relationship.
3 Likes
So in talking about cancel culture, I just remembered a long text I wrote in regards to it recently. Itâs a long post and you donât have to read as it doesnât fully connect to the male/female dynamic or andrew tate.
So context is that I was arguing with my cousins about Transexuals and cancel culture in a group chat. And I ended up remembering something someone in this forum said about cancel culture and wrote a lonnnng text in regards to that.
Iâll share here since I believe it offers a bit of perspective of cancel culture in general.
Iâm not a fan of cancel culture. Iâm not a fan of how sensitive the world has become. But the world has changed in ways that we will not be able to come back from. The internet has opened up every individual to the rest of the world. It has given everyone a voice.
And everyone wants to be accepted. Higher tolerance and empathy are what people hope for. But the thing is that the internet is a massive collective and group think has a ripple effect on the world. When a lot of people publicly disagree with something, that thing is collectively rejected. Corporations pull away (people lose jobs), people get ostracized by the public, people⌠get shunned. Sound familiar?
Thatâs cause it is. Cancel culture has always existed in human society. When we were in tribes, everyone knew who everyone was or what they did. If you said or did anything outside the norm, you were shunned. Might have been publicly humiliated, imprisoned, executed or outcasted. As the world grew, tribes became countries and it became a bit harder to keep track of what everyone does or says around you. Even still, you could get burned at the stake for having different beliefs from the people around you.
The internet has changed that and now the world is one tribe in the internet. Weâre all interconnected in cyberspace. You could say one thing that is seen by the whole world. And so weâre just reverting back to normal human behavior and collectively shunning what is considered unacceptable. Because you guys forget somethingâŚ
Transexuals and homosexuals were not accepted at all til the past 10 years. You could call them faggot. You could jump them in the street. You could do whatever you wanted to them. It was acceptable by society to mistreat them. They were the outcasts of society. They were all shunned for as long as they could remember.
But now that they are accepted by the wider public, intolerance of them has become unacceptable. And now you get shunned for doing that publicly. Tables have turned but human behavior has not changed.
Cancel culture has always been there. Lgbt was âcancelledâ til very recent. It was also always okay to say disrespectful things to minorities (muslims, blacks, latinos) because their voice did not matter. Minorities were the lesser people of society and it was okay to talk down on them and so it seemed like we could be so much more loose with our words back then. It was okay to talk down to mentally handicapped people even because they were âlesserâ. You wouldnât get shunned for any of that.
I agree that it is annoying to now feel like we have to watch what we say as words now have consequences. Opinions can be taken out of context and ruin peoples careers. But it has always been this way. Itâs just that now the morals of society have changed and the collective is forcing them on the rest the world. Itâs forceful change but at the root of it, is human nature. That is the root of the problem.
We still think primitively without knowing it. We still think hierarchally (im above you, youre below me). We still have perverse desires of all sorts that result in chatoic tendancies (rape, wars, murder). We still assert power at every chance we get (cancel culture is a power move from a collective of people online). And we are still extremely close minded.
We are programmed by our internal biases of what is right and wrong. This means our minds automatically rejects anything that our beliefs disagree with. This is what cancel culture stems from. Our inability to accept contradictions. People that are different or have other beliefs are âthreateningâ to our personal perceptions of reality. Thatâs just how our minds work.
Itâs a very limited perspective to only be able to percieve the world based on our biases. It reduces our ability to empathize with people, open our minds to new possibilities and have control over how we think and what we do. So as long we continue thinking this way, humanity will likely never grow and always be at conflict.
5 Likes
the programming and workings on dopamin are same in social media, porn stream sites and all publicly known stream channels. the censorship on mainstream channels is grotesque to exstend that you dont recieve any value of watching what is allowed. What is allowed is sad, dry and superficialâŚeven the so called funny videos are under observation and censorship for âinsultsâ. when you go to a mall you recieve same dopamin rushesâŚ
and yes all this influences the energy and behaviour.
the enviroment influences a woman more than a man.
what happens to our earth now influences women primarily.
we men only take this information from them.
distorted and poisoned information.
i wouldnot try to loose any energy in analysing dynamics that are in now way natural and are being strictly orchestrated. it is boring. almost as the news.
i hope this once my post on this matter will be understood with the heart.
take care all!
ps. it would be very pleasing to find that i am wrong in the open world.
i am retaining my hope.
1 Like
Wooo very meaningful advice. I also have seen that men but i donât know why before. After i read Sammyâs lecture, i realize why they are. Thank you Sammy G for great knowledge.
1 Like