+- Subliminal Talk (https://subliminal-talk.com)
+-- Forum: Men's Journals (18+ NSFW) (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals-18-NSFW)
+--- Forum: Men's Journals (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals)
+--- Thread: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal (/Thread-Shannon-s-DMSI-V2-2-Journal)
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - bits - 08-10-2016
@
Yes same here, when I'm have a shitty day/week and I'm pissed as hell I go straight to the bar/club and just sit there with my angry face on. It's not long before women will come up and ask me whats wrong and try to cheer me up. In that moment I'm brooding but as the saying goes, "the true self is always coming through" and although I probably look like I just murdered somebody they still get a good vibe off me regardless of what my face says. If I actually was a murderer they probably wouldn't approach.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Sickologist - 08-10-2016
Depends on the woman. Some women write love letters to rapist/serial killers on death row so you never really know what you're in for, hehe.
Basically, there's a few different scenarios.
"aww, is there anything I can do to cheer you up" I'm saying "no, leave me alone". She acts more silly, I act more brooding and we keep dancing like this until the magnets pull us together.
She dumps her personal crap onto you, that's worst case scenario. She mistakes you for a "mental penpal"
She has low self esteem and wants emotional punishment
She wants to "feel out" and connect with the negativivty of a man. Plain narcessitic behavior
She thinks it's romantic, which means she's a special kind of freak.
At best, she's just a caring girl with no alterior motives or feelings towards you. Still pretentious, but best case scenario nonetheless.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - K-Train - 08-10-2016
This post is moreso aimed at Rayhon and Chaosvrgn but shout out to Bits for the great post.
Anyway, I believe one of the principle issues faced now which Rayhon and Chaos indirectly showcased, is that the term misogyny has been incorrectly applied so much that its true definition has been perverted. Due to the fact that certain groups of people (both male and female) have attempted to use the term in an effort to attack and invalidate their opponents the term's true meaning has been lost. This is leading to more people incorrectly applying the term to individuals who are willing to disagree with, challenge, and criticize women.
chaosvrgn Wrote:Yes, they've expanded the definition so society can vilify every man as a "misogynist" if he points out bad female behavior. Seriously, look at that definition and critically analyze it. Who in their right minds believes that "hatred" and "mistrust" are mutually exclusive? If I'm suspicious of something, that means I automatically hate it?
HAHAHAHAHA, I totally agree man. I don't understand that at all. There are people in my life that I love but I don't trust them to do certain things not out of hate but because of the knowledge I possess either out of experience or intuition that leads me to believe that when it comes to a particular situation or action that I lack faith in their ability to accomplish said action or perform in that particular situation.
chaosvrgn Wrote:But there's a universal law called the principle of rhythm. The pendulum swing manifests in everything, and it's about to explode in the global elite's faces.
Once again on point. I've warned people about this before.
Quote:The phenomenon you're incorrectly calling "misogyny" is basically men realizing that this system is not worth investing in and as a result, they're rebelling in droves. Completely rejecting the system and checking out. They have no desire to be honorable, or zen, or whatever, because THOSE are character traits that would benefit the system. Honor means nothing for the man who lives for himself and himself alone. They aren't "attracting bad women." They're going for "bad women" (if such a thing exists) because, in their current state of being, a woman serves no purpose to them other than satiating their sexual thirsts.
I want to state right now that there are individuals in this group who do fit the bill for a misogynist but its definitely (IMO) not all of them or a majority. Otherwise I agree with most of this. I remember Alan Roger Currie stating (paraphrasing of course) that "beta males" help stimulate the economy. If more guys thought the way Shannon, CV, Sick, Rayhon, Bits, and some of the other guys on here thought...the economy (or specific parts of it) would crash. So for some of these companies they need males to think a certain way. But this is encroaching upon a different discussion.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Raykon - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 11:31 AM)Sickologist Wrote: @ Rayhon
You remind me a lot of a good friend of mine. Definitely born in late feb, march. I'm betting late feb because you're extremely idealistic. Maybe you'll pull off that Don Juan vibe you're working on, it could be doable. Women also give you the benefit of the doubt because of your looks and benevolent nature. Other guys here will be percieved in a different way by women. When a guy looks really hardcore (Dzemoo), women will see him as that guy who will pull her hair and slap her around. That's just the reality, we all live different lives here. Similar to what Bits said, you have to walk a mile in somebody's shoes before you understand them.
@ Bits
I agree with most of what you're saying, execpt "like attracts like". It's always fluctuating, that's one thing. I often find I have more success with women when I'm in a bad or brooding mood. They sense it and try to soothen me with homecooked meals and shit. Not that it's gonna work of course. You'd think that's caring and sweet, that's part of it, but nothing is given free in this world. There's always a price to pay, which is why I'm extremely leery of this "feel good movement" crap.
Edit: "codependency". That's the word I was looking for. Many people, men and women seek codependency. I don't, that's why women think I'm a different species and they don't see me as a long term candidate. Pays off to know this shit.
I'm on the cusp of Sagittarius and Capricorn. December 26. But my Venus is in scorpio which explains how i'm influenced/feel in relationships with people. And you're right I am very idealistic. Although I am very unconventional as well in the way I live life and the choices I've made / make in the past.
Lot's of good points everyone. Very good discussion.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Sickologist - 08-10-2016
Dammit, I'm almost always right about these things. At least you have Jupiter in common. The resemblence in attitude is crazy though, it's like reading something he would tell me face to face.
Venus in scorpio would make you a one woman kind of guy, at least in theory. I'm a scorpio sun, libra moon, scorpio rising, libra venus and I'm terrified to commit to anyone.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Raykon - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 12:19 PM)Sickologist Wrote: Dammit, I'm almost always right about these things. At least you have Jupiter in common. The resemblence in attitude is crazy though, it's like reading something he would tell me face to face.
Venus in scorpio would make you a one woman kind of guy, at least in theory. I'm a scorpio sun, libra moon, scorpio rising, libra venus and I'm terrified to commit to anyone.
Venus in Scorpio was a curse for me when I had low self esteem and was extremely needy in the past. I lost allot of friends & women because I was so emotional & intense that it repelled them.
It wasn't until I got older and found out about astrology that I realized why I was the way I am and realized that not everyone is as emotional as me in regards to relationships.
And yes I am a one woman kind of guy. Since using subliminal s though my neediness is gone and romantic nature has diminished dramatically. That being said though if I go on a date with someone and we have an amazing time I start getting romantic and it brings that side out of me again.
My best friend is also Venus in Scorpio and he's the same as me. He's the most loyal, faithful and committed guy I know. He isn't a player and he never was. I never really was a player either although I've always LOVED women and enjoyed spending time with women more then men. I used to hook up with allot of chicks when I partied allot a few years ago & on the outside I appeared as a player. But deep down I'm actually not a player at all.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Raykon - 08-10-2016
Just out of curiosity what type of venus is the best chemistry with a venus in scorpio like myself? I'm not an expert at astrology just know basics.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Raykon - 08-10-2016
I think we can all learn something from these discussions. Were all men & we all have the same underlying sexual & primal instincts from evolutionary biology/psychology.
However some of us are WAY different than each other & have completely different personality's & some of us are very similar.
Women too have the same biological processes but can vary in personality exactly like us & in terms of loyalty, faithfulness etc.
I know allot of guys who cheat & I know allot of guys who would NEVER cheat (like myself). There is too many variables in human personality to classify all women in one way.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 08:10 AM)Rayhon Wrote: d(08-09-2016, 08:08 PM)Shannon Wrote:(08-09-2016, 03:13 PM)RTBoss Wrote: Shannon, have you considered stopping DMSI and having your girlfriend run it to see what it's like being on the receiving end? Would that perhaps give you any more insight on any change you think needs to be made?
RTBoss, what would you do if I suggested you stop using it and have your wife use it instead?
I have had her use it under controlled circumstances, and I have observed what you're talking about but I'm not about to have her use it for very long for the following two reasons:
1. I don't care to make her prone to "meeting half way" on approaches of other guys who want to **** her, and even without the aura she gets approached daily, even though she is not physically impressive compared to the sort of women I usually date. I have not had an easy time finding this "faithfulness" thing in a woman. Why would I encourage the only one I have found who has been faithful to go **** someone else?
2. She is using, and very much needs, E2. When we got sick and she stopped using it, took a week for her to flip out because she wasn't done processing some of her insecurities and fears based on past traumas, and the program wasn't masking them from her conscious mind anymore. I nearly walked away from the relationship over it.
So, nice try.
Shannon, I value your opinion more then anyone else's on the board based on the fact that your the most experienced, one of the oldest ( i think?) and came from a place of social anxiety.
Thank you.
Quote:What do you think is the nature of women and faithfulness. I notice some guys on this board have a very misogynistic and negative outlook on women and I want to know what your beliefs are.
I believe that the nature of a human animal is primarily that of the animal species and not the gender. Gender plays a large part, but ultimately it is more accurate to ask what the nature of the human is, not the female or the male.
The nature of the human animal is to reproduce. That is why we are only outnumbered on this planet by insects, who have hundreds and thousands of offspring at a time. We are not even the most sexual animals on earth, but we are second only to insects in number.
That tells me that even with social and religious controls on sexuality, and birth control,we as humans are still having reproductive sex like crazy.
It is the nature of the beast to seek out the expression of it's genes, and the First Purpose of all physical life is to reproduce.
Faithfulness is not an inherent human trait. That is why you see society and religion trying so hard to enforce it, and constantly and continually failing. And they will always fail, because the truth will always win out. And the truth is, we are basically complicated meat bags expressing genetic needs to reproduce.
The nature of this expression is aimed at producing survival of the species. Survival requires that the strength and adaptability of the species exceed the challenges of the environment, and the greater that strength and adaptability exceeds the environmental challenges presented, the stronger the chance of survival for the species.
To have the strongest children, a man must seek out the most reproductively fit females (who he instinctually perceives to be the most sexually desirable, i.e. "hottest"), and a woman must do the same.
But a man has very little effort to produce the seed, while the woman must carry, gestate, care for and generally raise the child no matter what the male chooses to do.
The result is that he has very little energy and time investment required of him, but the reverse is true for her. He has nearly unlimited "bullets", but she has only a very small number of rounds she can "fire" during her lifetime in comparison. He can potentially impregnate hundreds of thousands of women in his lifetime, she can have a maximum of what, 25 kids?
Therefore, the drive to achieve the best possible children is strong. If she has a maximum of 20 potential children, or in today's day and age 5 or less is more realistic, it is in her nature to maximize those eggs to be fertilized by the best possible male. To do this, her genetic/instinctual side will do whatever it takes. Her conscious side will restrict this behavior, but it is not easily stopped.
On his side, if he has a girlfriend who is a 5/10 but who gives him unlimited sex in exchange for faithfulness, and he comes across a one time only offer from a 10/10 but he knows he will get caught, what will he do? 9 times out of 10, he will go ahead and jump on that 10, regardless of the consequences, because it is the best possible reproductive scenario, and that is the First Purpose of all physical life!
Both genders will do virtually anything to achieve this goal. It's not just men or women. "Faithfulness" is an artificial construct by society and religion that is used to control people. The natural course of action is for humans to have sex with whomever is the most reproductively fit, who they can have sex with, regardless of whatever pair bonding they may have achieved. That, we have been taught, is wrong, bad, etc. and now it is deeply ingrained in society and our "social hypnosis" on the subject is incredibly powerful.
Of course this does not take into account various practical factors, like taking care of the resulting offspring, STDs, etc. I am simply presenting the point of view of the "selfish gene".
Ultimately, it is in our nature to express our genetic instructions. We can consciously choose to resist or override, but all you have to do is look at the activities of the whole to see what is what.
Quote:I got really misogynistic when I spent years learning PUA information that always implies women are unfaithful, will cheat on the first guy that they have attraction signals for and that you can never trust them to not cheat.
What is your first hand experience and beliefs on the subject.
PUA tends to think in very limited ways. You can never say that all members of any group will always share anything in common other than they are members of said group. So "all women" is automatically wrong unless you finish the statement by saying "are women". A = A. That's it.
Women, like men, come in a variety of personality and physiology types, and some are being expressed positively and some negatively. If you have a man and a woman meet, then, they may be either matched or mismatched based on pole of expression and personality type. One must also consider maturity and experience level.
Not every woman is going to match every man, therefore, and vice versa. It is also true that what you are, you express in ways that attune the reality around you to in such a way that you achieve the interaction with others of that same attunement. So when you believe (Sarge) that you only get positive results when you are hateful, negative etc. you will only experience females who match that attunement, and if you are not really aware of that fact, it will become a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts.
When PUA say that about women, what they are really saying is, "When I treat women in this way, it is because I believe X about women, and I therefore am attuned to Channel X and I only meet those women who are attuned to Channel X, and all such women respond to me and men in way Y."
That doesn't make all women like that. It just means that within the limits of that person's understanding of reality, he only encounters those women who are at the same level of attunement.
Quote:Not only do they have a misogynistic view but they are treating women disrespectfully and apparently getting good results. And I don't want to sink that low to get pussy.
Am I right in thinking these guys are just immature and misogynistic and they are attracting poor women because they themselves are on the same frequency as these bad quality / unfaithful women.
You attract, and experience, what you are and express. We don't need to worry about labels.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 12:10 PM)Rayhon Wrote:(08-10-2016, 11:31 AM)Sickologist Wrote: @ Rayhon
You remind me a lot of a good friend of mine. Definitely born in late feb, march. I'm betting late feb because you're extremely idealistic. Maybe you'll pull off that Don Juan vibe you're working on, it could be doable. Women also give you the benefit of the doubt because of your looks and benevolent nature. Other guys here will be percieved in a different way by women. When a guy looks really hardcore (Dzemoo), women will see him as that guy who will pull her hair and slap her around. That's just the reality, we all live different lives here. Similar to what Bits said, you have to walk a mile in somebody's shoes before you understand them.
@ Bits
I agree with most of what you're saying, execpt "like attracts like". It's always fluctuating, that's one thing. I often find I have more success with women when I'm in a bad or brooding mood. They sense it and try to soothen me with homecooked meals and shit. Not that it's gonna work of course. You'd think that's caring and sweet, that's part of it, but nothing is given free in this world. There's always a price to pay, which is why I'm extremely leery of this "feel good movement" crap.
Edit: "codependency". That's the word I was looking for. Many people, men and women seek codependency. I don't, that's why women think I'm a different species and they don't see me as a long term candidate. Pays off to know this shit.
I'm on the cusp of Sagittarius and Capricorn. December 26. But my Venus is in scorpio which explains how i'm influenced/feel in relationships with people. And you're right I am very idealistic. Although I am very unconventional as well in the way I live life and the choices I've made / make in the past.
Lot's of good points everyone. Very good discussion.
Gentlemen, this is breaking Rule 4. Post it where it's supposed to be.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Sickologist - 08-10-2016
Let's not break rule 4 anymore, Rayhon. You can read about that all over the net, the problem is that people have tendency to make up stuff just to make quick buck.
The point I'm making here, I took my time to get to know you. Although I already knew enough from reading a couple of posts in your thread. At no point did I or anyone else come onto your thread to diss you or try to educate you on how one's mentality should be.
It's been a constructive discussion and you're a smart guy. Nobody's perfect, that includes me. But let's not label other members "misogynists" etc. People have the right to choose their own path.
Running DMSI will not suddenly turn you into some lunatic, your life experiences however, will. I'll check out your thread for the future, for sure.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - maxx55 - 08-10-2016
Question, Shannon. When DMSI 3.0 releases, will it be the same price as the current DMSI 2.x series?
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 02:33 PM)maxx55 Wrote: Question, Shannon. When DMSI 3.0 releases, will it be the same price as the current DMSI 2.x series?
Until and unless I see that it works extraordinarily well - yes. Once the results exceed the value of the price, if that ever happens, the price will rise to match it. But unless and until that happens, the price remains the same.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - K-Train - 08-10-2016
Shannon based off the current level of scripting technology at your disposal how powerful do you believe you can make the disinhibitor and based off that power level, what have the models said would be the effects of introducing that "maxed out" disinhibitor into DMSI? Thanks for your time.