Subliminal Talk

So you're saying that calling men bitches who can't handle, or opt out of AM7, is important to you Ben and Shannon? Johannesbrst perceives "bitch" as a gendered insult, and perceives its use to be misogynistic, and instead of clarifying, Ben commits 100% to ad hominem, and Shannon avoids his point all together.

Shannon's post on AM7 reeks of toxic masculinity, but I perceive that to be a marketing schtick to appeal to the target audience (who, quite frankly, would benefit from a healthy dose of real masculinity). As someone who has done AM6 more than I can remember, I have to confess that I'm a little disappointed in the way that both of you are dealing with Johannesbrst's who is entirely valid in his concern.

Stand by "bitch" if you want to, but it is gendered, and it is derogatory, and there's nothing inherently masculine about gendered insults, so defending its use is pointless at best, and alienating at worst, as is the case with Johannesbrst.

(08-25-2025, 10:17 PM)ffaux Wrote: [ -> ]So you're saying that calling men bitches who can't handle, or opt out of AM7, is important to you Ben and Shannon? Johannesbrst perceives "bitch" as a gendered insult, and perceives its use to be misogynistic, and instead of clarifying, Ben commits 100% to ad hominem, and Shannon avoids his point all together.

Shannon's post on AM7 reeks of toxic masculinity, but I perceive that to be a marketing schtick to appeal to the target audience (who, quite frankly, would benefit from a healthy dose of real masculinity). As someone who has done AM6 more than I can remember, I have to confess that I'm a little disappointed in the way that both of you are dealing with Johannesbrst's who is entirely valid in his concern.

Stand by "bitch" if you want to, but it is gendered, and it is derogatory, and there's nothing inherently masculine about gendered insults, so defending its use is pointless at best, and alienating at worst, as is the case with Johannesbrst.

Seriously? It's YOUR issue if you think it's misogonistic and you're creating that out of nowhere exactly like he is. Sounds like AM is not for you either if you're running around calling someone who is talking strongly and directly 'toxic masculine'.

It's funny how common it is that anyone now trying to 'ad hominem' argument is just doing it blindly to the point it means nothing now, and pretending that there's some problem with being direct, all the while turning around and doing the same thing with your nonsense framing of 'toxic masculinity'. Everything I said about these kinds of mindsets is 100% true.

If you're been that brainwashed with this nonsense, no wonder you had issues with AM.. because you're going exactly in the other direction. I'm disappointed for you to bring this nonsense in where it does not apply. You're also using the classic manipulation of pretending to be disappointed to attempt to 'cancel' something that offends you just like the crowd we should be pushing back against. Save your fake disappointment.

Thankyou for perfectly representing the massive amount of brainwashing and nonsense that is needed to be pushed back against in a program that helps with REAL masculinity, not emasculated nonsense running around yelling 'toxic masculinity' or 'gendered insults'.

I'm talking about this whole mindset and how sadly society has gone way too far into this end that you seriously think you're standing for something while standing for your own emasculation. When men are constantly dealing with much, much more derogorory, disrespectful and rude stuff than women ever deal with. Shannon clearly made the point that women were NOT mentioned, and you pretend he didn't even address the point.. which Johannesbrst completely fabricated in the first place since it did not mention women, and now that you are doing.

Shannon's point both times, aswell as his reply to it was spot on. Yet you're attempting to manipulate it as not being so because your delicate sensibilities have been offended.

If this is the case already at a simple post, and if Shannon manages to achieve his intent and vision for AM7 then it's going to be a masterpiece that eats through all of this nonsense and emasculation, and I will celebrate it doing so.

You're welcome to bow down and submit to everyone trying to destroy men and cry about other men who will not do so.. but you'd be better catered for some of the other creators around this other area who offer 'divine masculinity' 'balancing your masculine and feminine' 'worshipping the goddess' and other weak shit.

You are fabricating things and pretending AM7 is going to be some kind of Andrew Tate guy running around calling women 'bitches' and other craziness, when it completely is not in any way whatsoever. But you guys seem so far gone that any mention of actual masculinity sends you down that pathway. I guarantee if the word 'bitch' was not there, you would find the next thing to cry about and accuse us of the same nonsense.

THIS is why Shannon's post in his journal was complete gold... it's already bringing out 'men' who are not in alignment with actual masculinity trying to bring it down and weaken it, and destroy it, water it down, make it weak and emasculated because of their own brainwashing and issues. I look forward to AM7 obliterating that nonsense in myself and other men who choose to take it on. Because i'm not immune from the brainwashing, but I can also quite clearly see through it.

I know with certainty there are massive amounts of other men who are sick of this and completely agree with me, most of who are scared to speak up unlike me. Men on your side happily speak up pretending to be brave yet you are not because you're just telling us what society has brainwashed everyone with and aren't really standing for anything.

So I encourage men who DO side with real masculinity and are sick of all of that to speak up because there's many more of us that do.

Bitch is primarily synonymous with a cowardly weak runt of male devoid of respectability.


There was no reference tying women to that title.

At all.

From what I saw I thought @Johannesbrst was just misinterpreting the connotation of the word bitch since he’s non-native English speaker (if I remember correctly). My read on him is that he’s a thoughtful guy. I thought he was just making sure that the impression he was getting from Shannon’s take on AM7 was congruent to the kind of person he would want to become. It didn’t seem to me like he was being pushy or manipulative regardless of what his true intentions were.

@ffaux I think Shannon’s post about AM7 and his reply to johannesbrst were both fine.

(08-25-2025, 11:52 PM)Darkness Wrote: [ -> ]Bitch is primarily synonymous with a cowardly weak runt of male devoid of respectability.


There was no reference tying women to that title.

At all.

Indeed. And language has history. An alpha dog will stand up to an opponents that far outmatch it; bitches are more likely to run from the challenge.

Of course "bitch" can be used negatively. So can so many other words. The push to ban words is the part that's really got on people's nerves over the past 10 years.

Johannes gave respectful feedback and he wasn’t disrespectful at all, so there’s no need to be rude about it. Instead of clarifying or engaging, the responses have mostly been anger and dismissiveness. That doesn’t disprove his concern, it just proves it..

Aside from that, I personally dont really get what AM7 is supposed to do that something like OGSF and EPHRA cannot. I get that AM is about building men into "alphas". But in my view you build men up, or anyone really, by healing trauma (which everyone have to some degree) and the maladaptive adaptations born from it. If that isn’t addressed then what looks like strength often just ends up being compensation. This constant framing around fighting and opposition just looks like anger without a healthy outlet. It makes strength seem like it always needs an enemy, external or internal, to push against. But that doesn’t unify you, it divides you. Most of the time you just alienate others or you deepen shame and anger within yourself. I’ve lived that way most of my life and it's exhasusting and doesn’t work. It might cater to misplaced anger and appear powerful and "alpha" on the surface, which is why so many fall into it, but it isn’t sustainable and in the end it leads to more suffering, the very thing we’re all trying to free ourselves from

Real strength doesn’t come from defiance or opposition imo. It comes from being so aligned with yourself that you don’t need an opponent to validate it. That’s why the concept of being "alpha" feels less like growth and more like sidestepping real healing to me, reframing inner work as something to conquer rather than something to integrate. At least from Shannon’s latest post in his journal it sounded that way. Personally "ascendant alpha" just sounds to me like a fancy label for what it would mean to be free of internal limitations and maladaptive patterns. But you don’t get there by conquering or suppressing parts of yourself (or others). Perhaps I am misinterpreting the philosophy behind this sub, but I would be genuinenly curious what it can offer in terms of "setting you free" that OGSF and EPHRA supposedly cannot?

@callie I partially disagree.
OGSF and EPHRA is about healing and undoing negative programming. And it is applicable to both sexes. It is about getting you from negative to “zero”, to a neutral state.
By zero, I mean the state in which no negative self beliefs exist, no traumas are present, and no major fears or blockers exist that prevent you to fully expressing yourself. Think of it like “enlightened Buddhist monk” state. They have reached a zen, neutral like state, but you wouldn’t consider them as alphas.

But just by reaching a zero/ neutral state, you don’t achieve alpha or masculine energy or whatever you would call it.
Masculinity should be polarising, it should not be a neutral state/ energy. It should be about conquering, about bending reality to your will.
It is true that some men have that alpha/ masculine energy naturally. But for the others? That’s where AM has it’s place.

This is made me think that I hope "ascendant" means to be above something like this, to not have to ruin my mood and getting all flustered just because someone says something I don't think they "should have". This is the anger stuff that I'm not looking forward to on AM. IMO, the "bitch" thing was not meant like that at all and the appropriate response to the misinterpretation is to tell it wasn't meant like that and move on.

I really like the energy in Shannon "announcement" post because I could feel a commitment to make something great and to take on the work to shift through a lot of complex stuff and come out with a refined program that is the best it can be despite many conflicting demands and unknowns. After that post I'm certain what the vision will actually include - I now know that running it will be difficult but I do not why it will be difficult. I hope its because, for example, it is difficult trust your own judgement it others don't agree because it feels bad. AM5's description has a lot in common with EPRHA, as far as I remember. I hope it won't be difficult because the user needs to fight tooth and nail with everyone.

About the SM lead in. Makes perfect sense that a program that focuses on the user will not try to directly affect others (women) and make them feel attraction or snipe them, etc. But then its down to how this asc. alpha is defined, what qualities would such a person have. If I was [his close friend, his coworked/business contact/enemy/a woman he desires], how would I feel in his presence? If the program is complete then it sounds to me that it should address at least somewhat what kind of vibe or energy he is giving out. But that's me and what comes to my mind, I honestly look forward to reading more about Shannon's vision. And maybe this is "core" program to address [please specify what], and then users can run other programs after depending on what their endgame build looks like. I personally resonated a lot with Maverick because it had independence combined with a sexual tint (from the user's side).

(08-26-2025, 01:37 AM)GreekGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]@callie I partially disagree.
OGSF and EPHRA is about healing and undoing negative programming. And it is applicable to both sexes. It is about getting you from negative to “zero”, to a neutral state.
By zero, I mean the state in which no negative self beliefs exist, no traumas are present, and no major fears or blockers exist that prevent you to fully expressing yourself. Think of it like “enlightened Buddhist monk” state. They have reached a zen, neutral like state, but you wouldn’t consider them as alphas.

But just by reaching a zero/ neutral state, you don’t achieve alpha or masculine energy or whatever you would call it.
Masculinity should be polarising, it should not be a neutral state/ energy. It should be about conquering, about bending reality to your will.
It is true that some men have that alpha/ masculine energy naturally. But for the others? That’s where AM has it’s place.

I think you’re conflating two things here. Getting to "zero" is not about becoming neutral or bland, it’s about removing the distortions of fear, guilt, shame, and other maladaptions so your authentic self can actually come through. When those layers are gone, expression isn’t flat, it becomes clear, intuitive, natural and often strongly masculine in men (and feminine in women). Masculinity is not something you "achieve". It’s not a state you reach by conquering something. Masculinity is an inherent part of every male. You don’t add masculinity on top of zero, rather the full expression of it will naturally be there once you let go of distortions that are born out of trauma in some form. Also, removing your baggage doesn’t automatically make you enlightened either, the two aren’t synonymous. Plenty of so called enlightened people still carry all kinds of dysfunction and trauma

Perhaps its just me that doesn't understand the idea of AM7. But if you try to "add on" polarity or masculinity over unresolved trauma, it risks becoming compensation. That’s why I question the idea of it. Just layering a "masculine" identity over unhealed parts will only create more toxic masculinity and ultimately more suffering to oneself imo

(08-25-2025, 11:07 AM)Shannon Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-25-2025, 09:09 AM)Johannesbrst Wrote: [ -> ]Hi Shannon,

It might just be me being a bit sensitive, but when I read the phrase “like a bitch” in the Alpha Male post in your private journal, the tone felt a little different from what I personally associate with an Ascendent Alpha  (though I realize that’s my own standard). I know everyone carries their own idea of what that ideal looks like, but it left me wondering if the program might lean in a certain direction rather than being fully “neutral,” where each person can find their own version of it.

That might simply mean this program isn’t the right fit for me, and that I’d resonate more with Maverick. I just wanted to share that impression in case it’s helpful feedback.

The idea is simple.  You're going to be challenged running this program, and you're either going to do what it takes to achieve the goal, or you're going to choose to run away instead.

If you're going to run this program, you obviously want to become an ascendant alpha.  If you're going to run away instead of doing what it takes, you're obviously not ready for that.  

"Like a bitch" is a direct statement.  I'm saying that because a man doesn't run away from challenges, even if he's not an alpha.  He may consider the challenge and make the choice not to accept it.  But going in knowing that he's going to be challenged and made to step up and grow, and then stopping afterwards to run away, is ridiculous. It's pathetic. I don't respect that at all.  Just like what they had Luke Skywalker do in the 7th Star Wars movie.  He gave up, and threw in the towel, instead of doing the good that he could have done, for himself and others.  Terrible storytelling.  I would have been laughed out of my Freshmen year of college for handing in that script in my Creative Writing class.

A boy is unwilling to take personal responsibility.  A girl (and lately, plenty of little girls in adult female bodies) are unwilling to take personal responsibility for themselves. But a man does take personal responsibility.  He knows he has to, because otherwise, he, his family, his community and all of society falls apart.  And as such, he knows that he has the potential - no, the responsibility - to make the world a better place by his actions and his example.  He has the potential to help make the world be the world he wants to see, instead of what laziness, selfishness, greed and corruption are making it.  

A man knows that means that he has the responsibility to himself to grow and improve himself, make himself better than he is now, and always strive to be improving, no matter what he achieves.  And a man knows that life will be difficult for him, because of his natural role, because of his place in the world, because of what his job in a healthy family and society is.  He also knows that that simply is what it is, and he gets on with facing it, doing what it takes and working to achieve his goals anyway.

Whether he only leads himself, or he leads a nation, a man knows that challenges are simply a part of life, and that they are a gift in disguise.  Every challenge holds within it the potential for improvement, if he faces it, and does what it takes to address it and overcome it.  A man cannot be truly happy unless he is expressing his masculine energy, which needs a challenge to make it live.  That challenge may be within him, or outside of him, but masculinity needs a challenge, because that is what masculine energy thrives on:  action, achievement, improvement, success.  That is why society has advanced over the millennia with the contributions men have made, such as roads, wheels, aqueducts, buildings, sanitary sewers, pulleys, engines, motors, electricity, air conditioning, telephones, radio, and on and on and on.  Because men had this energy and drive to do, achieve, overcome, improve and succeed.

So if you know, going in, that this is going to challenge you, it's going to stress you, it's going to put you under pressure and it's going to break you down and build you back up again better, stronger and more valuable, and then you stop in the middle "because you can't handle it", that's acting like a bitch.  That's running away from the challenge instead of making the changes you need to make to achieve the goal.  That's the antithesis of masculinity, when you're running a program designed and intended to enhance, improve and magnify your masculinity.  

If you're not up for that kind of challenge, fine.  There are legitimate reasons why someone might not be.  If you want the goals of the program, though, then you're going to do whatever it takes to get them.  If that means making yourself ready and able to run that program, then that's what you do.  If that means you face the harsh facts and truths about yourself as you are that have made you what you are, which is not the Ascendant Alpha you want to be, then that's what you do.  But it's downright pathetic to go in knowing what's going to be required of you, and then giving up and running away after you start.  

In simpler terms, don't start running an Alpha Male Training subliminal and then give up when the going gets tough and do the complete reverse of what an Alpha Male would do if you want anyone to take you seriously.  "Like a bitch" is an expression of scorn and lack of respect for that course of action.

 Agreed!! Right there..... DEEP Fire!!

(08-26-2025, 12:30 AM)thectexperience1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-25-2025, 11:52 PM)Darkness Wrote: [ -> ]Bitch is primarily synonymous with a cowardly weak runt of male devoid of respectability.





There was no reference tying women to that title.



At all.

Indeed. And language has history. An alpha dog will stand up to an opponents that far outmatch it; bitches are more likely to run from the challenge.



Of course "bitch" can be used negatively. So can so many other words. The push to ban words is the part that's really got on people's nerves over the past 10 years.

A "bitch" originally refers to not a female dog, but a dog who has or has had puppies. It refers partially to the difference in her temperament after the effects pregnancy has on her.  I would posit that a "bitch", in this sense of the word, would not run from a challenge that involved her puppies.  A bitch here would face down, and likely tear to shreds, even a more dominant male dog, if her puppies were threatened.  The protective instinct of a mother for her children (as it is true for a father and his children) is extreme where it presents itself.  She would likely destroy the more dominant male dog because her instincts make it a life or death struggle for her, whereas for him, it is just a matter of dominance.  Let us not forget nuance.

And in the interest of nuance, for those to whom this needs to be said: the word "bitch", as I have used it, relies on a colloquial definition and connotation that is a derogatory term to the person or group it is directed against, basically an accusation of scorn worthy weakness and deep lack of respect, but the group is not specified by the term itself.  That is done through context.  In other words... women have nothing to do with it for anyone who is a native English speaker.

(08-26-2025, 04:13 AM)LionKing Wrote: [ -> ]This is made me think that I hope "ascendant" means to be above something like this, to not have to ruin my mood and getting all flustered just because someone says something I don't think they "should have". This is the anger stuff that I'm not looking forward to on AM. IMO, the "bitch" thing was not meant like that at all and the appropriate response to the misinterpretation is to tell it wasn't meant like that and move on.

I really like the energy in Shannon "announcement" post because I could feel a commitment to make something great and to take on the work to shift through a lot of complex stuff and come out with a refined program that is the best it can be despite many conflicting demands and unknowns. After that post I'm certain what the vision will actually include - I now know that running it will be difficult but I do not why it will be difficult. I hope its because, for example, it is difficult trust your own judgement it others don't agree because it feels bad. AM5's description has a lot in common with EPRHA, as far as I remember. I hope it won't be difficult because the user needs to fight tooth and nail with everyone.

About the SM lead in. Makes perfect sense that a program that focuses on the user will not try to directly affect others (women) and make them feel attraction or snipe them, etc. But then its down to how this asc. alpha is defined, what qualities would such a person have. If I was [his close friend, his coworked/business contact/enemy/a woman he desires], how would I feel in his presence? If the program is complete then it sounds to me that it should address at least somewhat what kind of vibe or energy he is giving out. But that's me and what comes to my mind, I honestly look forward to reading more about Shannon's vision. And maybe this is "core" program to address [please specify what], and then users can run other programs after depending on what their endgame build looks like. I personally resonated a lot with Maverick because it had independence combined with a sexual tint (from the user's side).

An "ascendant alpha" is very different from what is commonly understood to be an "alpha male".

(08-26-2025, 04:46 AM)callie Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-26-2025, 01:37 AM)GreekGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]@callie I partially disagree.
OGSF and EPHRA is about healing and undoing negative programming. And it is applicable to both sexes. It is about getting you from negative to “zero”, to a neutral state.
By zero, I mean the state in which no negative self beliefs exist, no traumas are present, and no major fears or blockers exist that prevent you to fully expressing yourself. Think of it like “enlightened Buddhist monk” state. They have reached a zen, neutral like state, but you wouldn’t consider them as alphas.

But just by reaching a zero/ neutral state, you don’t achieve alpha or masculine energy or whatever you would call it.
Masculinity should be polarising, it should not be a neutral state/ energy. It should be about conquering, about bending reality to your will.
It is true that some men have that alpha/ masculine energy naturally. But for the others? That’s where AM has it’s place.

I think you’re conflating two things here. Getting to "zero" is not about becoming neutral or bland, it’s about removing the distortions of fear, guilt, shame, and other maladaptions so your authentic self can actually come through. When those layers are gone, expression isn’t flat, it becomes clear, intuitive, natural and often strongly masculine in men (and feminine in women). Masculinity is not something you "achieve". It’s not a state you reach by conquering something. Masculinity is an inherent part of every male. You don’t add masculinity on top of zero, rather the full expression of it will naturally be there once you let go of distortions that are born out of trauma in some form. Also, removing your baggage doesn’t automatically make you enlightened either, the two aren’t synonymous. Plenty of so called enlightened people still carry all kinds of dysfunction and trauma

Perhaps its just me that doesn't understand the idea of AM7. But if you try to "add on" polarity or masculinity over unresolved trauma, it risks becoming compensation. That’s why I question the idea of it. Just layering a "masculine" identity over unhealed parts will only create more toxic masculinity and ultimately more suffering to oneself imo

Your understanding is not correct here, Callie.  Removing the chains does not make a slave into a captain of industry.

As a man who has been a man for many decades, I can speak confidently that masculinity is both an inherent state and something that you achieve.  Masculinity is partly biological, and partly something that is learned from role models and environment.  If you remove the false and faulty teachings that attack and minimize a male's masculinity, he is left free to advance, but does not inherently or automatically become some magical expression of his natural potential for masculinity.  He must understand himself, and his potential, and work towards developing that part of himself.  It is often through challenge and difficulty that a boy (or an adult male) becomes a man in the sense of what I am referring to here.  

The point of Alpha Male training is to take a male from where he is when he starts, be that at 0 or somewhere along the lines past that on the scale of his potential for his own masculinity, and advance him to becoming an "acendant alpha male", which definition can be found here: 

https://subliminal-talk.com/Thread-What-...dant-Alpha

https://subliminal-talk.com/Thread-Shann...#pid269466

Shannon Wrote:I am currently in the design phase for AM 7. I am also working on DMSI v5.1, which was only the addition of the DRS, and workingon the instructions for that. Since AM will take me months, I will be working on other titles in the mean time.

Next up is Optimal Physical Healing, because it's one of the runners up, and because I need it myself.

I'll be publishing DMSI v5.1 as soon as I get the instructions done.

Speaking of that, modeling reveals that DMSI and DMSI v5.0 and 5.1 actually need not two, but three sets of instructions: Normal, Hard Case and Extreme Hard Case, for everyone to get the best out of these programs. I'll be updating the instructions for v5.0 when I have the information.