Results 131 to 140 of 646
01-06-2008, 07:44 PM #1Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
After some initial doubt, I've for several reasons decided to start this topic. Most likely it will die a silent and unmourned death. We shall see.
First I want myself and the closet-sextourists to get out of each others' hair. I can't abide the fourletter words, the bad spelling, braggings and "I almost made it" stories, spiced with expressions like "hot babes" etc. On the other hand the !!!!WOW!!! types do not like words with many syl-lab-les, so here such is concentrated in one place, which they can avoid. In other words, the contributers to this topic can, without interference, bore each other to death, if we wish to.
Next: Having a soft spot for conspiracy theories I'm convinced, that not only anti-scammers read anti-scam sites, a lot of other groups do it also. The scammers themselves, agency representatives, ultrafeminists (just-hating-men-on-general-principles), chatters (having nothing to say, but doing it with many words) and those just curious. The possibilty of disinformation is real, but maybe it's possible to suppress it by being longwinded and circumstantial.
And last, the most important. Internet-dating is after all only one aspect of the the eternal "war of the sexes". To understand net-dating, I believe it's necessary to paint a broader background canvas. Say, are we just a bunch of grumpy querulants or is there really a difference between not being able to get along with your next-door childhood love and a FSUW? Where and what is the difference? Even without a computer, a different cultural background or alcoholism, Sue-Ellen could still be a conartist or pro-dater. Especially if she's good-looking.
I'm not completely sceptical about FSU dating (internet or not). In the last app. 18 years I've had three longer relationships (in the biblical sense) with SFUW, lasting alltogether 14 years. These relationships broke up for the same personal reasons, as any other relationships do. And I've had my share of scandinavian psychos. For me the question is the PROBABILITY of meeting "straights" or "bends" in each group.
So I invite for wievs on this. And I have a few proposals for background-basics:
I believe, that we like all other animals fundamentally are biological robots. We have a digestive system with two openings, a need to reproduce and to fight for a place in a predatory system. That's our startingpoint. But compared to other animals, we also have rather complex emotions and intellect. We have a possibility, individually or culturally, to be more than just reptile-brained. And different individuals/cultures/subcultures use this possibility in various degrees.
And I also suggest to sort out the differences between women and men. For the present bunch of probably half-machos it's maybe an idiotic question. But believe me, in this time of unisex, feminism, equal opportunities and so on, the issue has seriously, repeatedly and heatedly been raised, if there IS any difference (in spite of different plumbing and men's inability to get pregnant). I strongly support the idea, that women and men are almost different species, and as in any other contact with ETs, we need a lot of diplomacy to establish peaceful contact.
02-03-2008, 10:04 PM #131Senior Member
quote:abnormal psychology is really fascinating.
- Join Date
- Sep 2007
It would be interesting to here Sigmund Freud's take on why Barney, Pedro, Jamal and Wong would tell such lies to an FSUW, if they have any real intention to actually meet the girl. It's a self-destructive thing, which to me is reminiscent of my EX's self-destructive lying.
Do these people not realize that such lies as, "I'm the CEO of a muli-million dollar corporation", when reality is he's 40 yo and working in the mailroom, will be very easy to figure out sooner or later?
Maybe they think that their FSU sweetheart will fall madly in love with them when they meet and not care that she was lied to from the very beginning?
The reason for lying is a topic that in itself could fill several pages here. As I've said, there can be good lies, such as things not to hurt the feelings of a loved one, or to protect them from harm, but most lies ARE harmful eventually.
quote:We have both seen guys on various anti-scam sites, who first report that they have been scammed either at a one-to-one basis or by a dating agency. And then go on: "But I've found THIS girl, agency or whatever, and it looks more straight or promising, so I'll give it a try".
What needs to be examined is what motivates these FSUW "hunters".
quote: But the mating-need is still the same, and it's gratification is maybe even more difficult now, than it used to be.
swede, thanks for the update about the beeps. I was just a bit scared to p!ss-off the union guys![)]
02-04-2008, 12:16 AM #132Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
As the only person I really can see from the inside is myself, I will (as un-egocentric as possible) talk about my own experiences with females.
Without being stinking rich (but with a stable economy) and also not being especially handsome, I have nonetheless had quite a few relationships with much younger, goodlooking women. The reason is, that I let people have the benefit of doubt and don't tell them to ..beeb.. off, just because they show potential for being parasitic. I let them demonstrate the parasitism, before I tell them to get lost.
I listen when they come to me with their problems (ofcourse I do this with men also) and for a while I'm uncle-psychotherapist Swede. The outcome, that I'm for the duration is paid back in the only currency such women know, half-baked emotions and sex, isn't anything I'm proud or ashamed of.
So the reason to bring up this, is to demonstrate something very typical of such women. There is a deep inner emptiness in them, and in spite of all the chances their good looks give them, they seem to be the more dysfunctional, the better they look. It can be compared with the really rich. They are just as unhappy as everybody else, always worrying about where the next zillion comes from.
It's surprising how big a part of the beautiful women there are, who are alcoholics, junkies, strongly neurotic or extremely hard hit by status-seeking in its most obnoxious forms. These women are not always sheepwalkers, because they often move in circles, where the real power exists. They don't need to make soap-opera fantasies about swimmingpools, furcoats or expensive cars. They HAVE them; at least for a while, if they play their cards well.
This example shows something very deep in human character. We need meaning in life. Those living in miserable circumstances have enough meaning by trying to survive. They don't have time or energy for existential reflextions, but as soon as you're on the sunny side, the emptiness, the inner black hole, will start spooking. It's typical, that some of the richest nations on the planet also have the highest suicide percentage. "The diseases of the rich".
So whether you live inside the soap-opera or stand outside it and look at it, it's the same. The defense against meaninglessness.
If you're not convinced, then take a look at organised religion. Not matter how idiotic, brutal or unsympathetic, people buy it, because it gives promises of meaning.
I know, that I'm almost like a terrier. I don't loosen my grip easily, and I'm stubbornly hanging on to the deeper why of human willingness to be fooled. The last couple or more posts have been about individual psychology, and we all have put our "why's" in them. My suggestion here is, that as long as we as individuals can't find something to live on or by, something being an integrated and true part of our own characters, we buy all kind of lies from the outside.
PeopleS, I'm sure you only mention Freud to tease me. You can take Freud and stuff him somewhere the sun doesn't shine, ..beeb.. him. Why don't you listen to your own forefathers, THEY had something sensible to say. But if you can forgive me my bike, I can forgive you Freud.
"What needs to be examined is what motivates these FSUW "hunters"."
Both the physical need for sex, but probably even more for psychological "drive" reasons. They want to show, that they are "a ..beeb.. of a man". I'm not here talking about the more romantic disposed types, who are not trophyhunters.
02-04-2008, 09:56 AM #133Senior Member
quote: I let people have the benefit of doubt and don't tell them to ..beeb.. off, just because they show potential for being parasitic. I let them demonstrate the parasitism, before I tell them to get lost.
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
-...- The outcome, that I'm for the duration is paid back in the only currency such women know, half-baked emotions and sex, isn't anything I'm proud or ashamed of.
"revenge of the nerd" or something i guess...
I no longer believe such nonsense... ok, perhaps one in a million aces it, but it's not going to be me anyways.
Men feel the need to be loved as they are, not as they pay...which is what happens most of the time anyways, in direct or indirect form.
Does Sarkozy truly believe Carla Bruni is attracted ONLY or mainly to his mesmerizing personality or sex appeal? Or wasn't she rather a forgotten aging fashion celebrity who now is offered again contracts she hadn't been in years because of the gossip surrounding her 19th "serious relationship" with a head of state?
As a spin doctor himself, Sarkozy should know he is a walking food stamp, but i bet that deep inside he surprises himself believing that he truly is a super-stud or a mesmerizing personality, whatever.
For him too, this "serious relationship N+1" is going to be the real one... as if...
We may hire the belle of the brothel, but while we are working on her nether regions we realize she's gazing the ceiling and probably thinking about her grocery list. A MOB seeker who on a forum attacked me from the mountain (or mole) top of his wonderful & moral self, was a sore loser who had accidentally overheard his newly brokered FSU-MOB confiding in a friend she did NOT love him (they had 2 children already ), but he was determined to keep the fire burning and hold the fort until she would eventually start loving him, which she had TOLD him to get married anyways.
quote:why Barney, Pedro, Jamal and Wong would tell such lies to an FSUW, if they have any real intention to actually meet the girl. It's a self-destructive thing, which to me is reminiscent of my EX's self-destructive lying.
Media & ads foster this "lie&misrepresent" mentality. Here there is this ad "I earn $1.000 AN HOUR. Find out how" [image of man with pockets stuffed with cash].
quote:What needs to be examined is what motivates these FSUW "hunters".
The FSU is the last reservoir of white meat, where we average men can still hope one of these nordic beauty queens will talk to us.
02-04-2008, 07:15 PM #134Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
the following is not a digression from our ongoing exchange of opinions, even if it may look so at first sight.
No answers/conclusions have a higher value of truth, than the parameters creating them. That is, the basic assumptions (axioms) you start from and the methods for processing these assumptions. Most, if not all, methods for finding truth are fundamentally belief-systems. Even science with its many intrinsic controlmechanisms is a beliefsystem.
Personally I am as disillusioned as you are, but it doesn't stop me from seeking answers anyway. I've just had to expand my area of search outside the generally accepted methods. I'm not denying the "truths" found f.ex. in science, they are functional inside the frame put up, and present-time science has actually been so graceful as to admit its own limitations and admit possibilities outside the socalled natural laws. E.g. what is the state of non-space/time or non-matter/energy? What is chaos as opposed to cosmos?
Translated to daily language: Does anything exist outside the normal, physical world we usually operate in?
This is a serious and accepted discussion going on in scientific circles, and even if no conclusive anwers have been agreed on yet, it's by now clear, that we have to redefine our approach to existence.
Ham, correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel, that you use a rather strict (philosophical) materialism as your base, avoiding the implications arising from an extension of this base. When I talk about "meaning" you answers give me the impression, that you consider all possible human activities as a result of a complex set of bio-chemical reactions, with some social fine-tuning finishing the process off. I'm just asking politely, not trying to insinuate anything.
Some arguments for or against materialism wouldn't be such a bad thing, but it's not my main purpose here. What I really want is to pin down our respective world wievs. If we do this, we can understand each other better, and readers of this topic won't get lost in the arguments being put out. You being a student of diplomacy, makes it reasonable to believe, that you more than most people understand the importance of understanding the basics of other people.
02-04-2008, 09:50 PM #135Senior Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2007
Greetings and salutations!
quote:Some arguments for or against materialism wouldn't be such a bad thing, but it's not my main purpose here.
Once the basic necessity of survival is satisfied, what next? "I want more. I want better." Maybe a bigger chunk of today's kill? Maybe a better place to sleep? Maybe a better looking woman??? (As women were more or less possessions then and still are to the modern day caveman. We all know there are a few around.)
So, as I see it, materialism is another of those deep rooted primal instincts that mankind can thank the caveman for. More and better are the drivinf force behind the industrialized world, as generally, survival can be taken for granted. Aside from a very few altruistic individuals, most of our science is driven by money one way or another.
quote:Translated to daily language: Does anything exist outside the normal, physical world we usually operate in?
As I do possess spiritual beliefs, although not dictated by organized religions, I tend to lean toward the unknowable as being a possible answer, but am always open to new possibilities.
02-04-2008, 11:46 PM #136Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
"Actually, materialism could be said to be the desire to have just a little more than one already has, and finds it's roots with the good ole caveman."
I meant materialism as a philosophical school (not as in consuming), saying that matter/energy is the basis of existence and that everything else are derivates from that.
I know, that Hawkins tried to get around some of the problems connected with quantum physic's implications. He wanted to "skip" certain questions connected with causality (cause/effect) being part of the creation of the universe, by postulating that the universe so to speak created itself. This way the possibility of an architect (god?) could be left out of the equation. He later took back the theory of selfgenerating universes.
Chaos just means that which is not cosmos, and very few scientists deny the existence of chaos. The interesting thing is, what chaos is like, because anything not ordered by the natural laws governing cosmos, would look like "magic" seen from a "normal" point of wiev.
Magic can ofcourse be used to describe a lot of phenomena, and some people would like to use it to justifify all kinds of spectacular theories or religions. This is not my intention.
I just try to point out, that there are more dimensional aspects to existence than those we are used to, and that maybe SOME of the answers to life is to be sought there. It's rather obvious, that ordinary existence as we know it, is unable to answer the big life-questions alone.
Philosophical materialism is very difficult to defend nowadays. It simply doesn't fit with what we know.
I share your beliefs, PeopleS. Also without being organised religious.
I only abstain from using the word "spiritual" because it like the word "god" has so many unwanted associations. And I deeply believe, that a culture which has given up this extra possible dimension of existence, is not truly functional. So we have f.ex. the growing problem of scamming in all its varieties.
It is important to emphasize, that I do not deny the value of ordinary
physical information, such as we use in our daily lives. I only want to add something extra to this.
It's there the question of meaning in life comes in. This question is not something academic/intellectual. It is a state of being. Something which it is possible to experience.
But as long as we have a set of sheepwalker filters telling us this or that, we are unable to experience this state. There's absolutely nothing mystical about it, but it's anti-dogmatic to a very high degree, so it looks very strange when described.
02-08-2008, 02:01 AM #137Senior Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2007
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Well, in a cosmic sense, I will once again make one of my famous (or infamous) Star Trek references... It has been said that Gene Roddenbury may have been one of them, meaning an ET because of so many of the "of the wall" concepts (social issues aside) that he proposed in that 1960s TV series, from flip phone style communicators to desktop computers to ion drive interplanetary engines (which have also become reality).
Multi dimensions and time travel were nothing new, but I personally know of no reference to "anti-matter", which is one of the things used to propel the Starship Enterprise through space at factors of the speed of light, prior to Star Trek.
"Anti-matter" is now something being talked about in scientific communities as a possible answer for one of their major dilemmas right now, which is that if you measure the mass of EVERYTHING in the currently known universe and add it all up, it simply doesn't explain all the space between objects. There aren't enough atoms to go around.
It's a simple fact that 99% of all cosmology is purely theory and speculation, since we are at present incapable of touching and/ or physically analyzing the cosmos, let alone what you refer to as chaos. Maybe, "anti-matter" is chaos as you describe it?
From Hawking's blackhole theory (which he himself later dismissed) to quantum physics, theory after theory is unleash on the world in a vain attempt to explain EVERYTHING, and nothing quite fits. So science tries to reason exception after exception to the rule they just made up until there are simply too many exceptions for the general rule to make sense anymore, so they make up another and another.
Spiritual is what you want it to be. It doesn't HAVE to mean an almighty and all knowing God. Ghosts are sometimes refered to as spirits. In Native American beliefs, trees, animals, the sun and the moon, the water, the sky, the clouds in the sky, fire, wind, all things of the natural world contain spirits. No one said anything about God. Sure, reference to "The Great Spirit", can be looked at as a God like reference, true, but at the same time, I see it as a reference to the spirit of the universe itself.
Spirits can exist in any one dimension or in all at the same time. The number of possible dimensions, of course, being infinite by our present understanding. No, I didn't recently get my hands on some really good paote.
Again, as I see the scientific world's attitude toward everything as being black and white... It's the known, and the not known YET. I simply think there's a third and fourth possibility which may be one in the same, which are the "unknowable", and the more philosophic, "not meant to be known until you are able to truly accept what reality is".
Is this "sheepwalking"? I don't think so. I see it as simply being open to other possibilities. Maybe evrything really can be explained in a mathematical equation as yet to be formulated... maybe it can't?
quote:But as long as we have a set of sheepwalker filters telling us this or that, we are unable to experience this state. There's absolutely nothing mystical about it, but it's anti-dogmatic to a very high degree, so it looks very strange when described.
Are you happy? See what happens when I think tooooooooooooo much? So, how's our favorite FSU/MOB scamming trollip Elena doing? And what of Bjorn?[)]
02-08-2008, 07:04 AM #138Senior Member
quote:to ion drive interplanetary engines (which have also become reality).
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
quote:From Hawking's blackhole theory (which he himself later dismissed)
he quibbled for decades with Susskind, another physicist, over the so-called "paradox of information" and his idea black holes would at one point disappear.
I think he took notice of Susskind's idea about information never being lost, but somewhat dilating at the level of the event horizon ( black hole's margin ) and came up with a weird counterargument about multiple universes being in balance between those that have black holes and those that don't...
Most speculate already at that point how functional Hawking might have been, due to his crippling disease.
02-08-2008, 09:52 AM #139Senior Member
quote:the credit goes to Nazis, who invented "electric rockets", later perfected into modern ionic propulsion such as the deep space automated probe.
- Join Date
- Sep 2007
quote:he quibbled for decades with Susskind, another physicist, over the so-called "paradox of information" and his idea black holes would at one point disappear.
quote:multiple universes being in balance between those that have black holes and those that don't...
02-08-2008, 02:49 PM #140Senior Member
quote:He didn't say black holes disappeared.
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
The problem about "information disappearing" was triggered by his idea a black hole eventually disappears...IF it disappears, then information it swallowed (and became "something else" inside, quantum froth whatever )is at that point lost.
from the horse's mouth:
quote:With black holes, however, the situation is rather different. One will end up with the same state outside the hole, whatever one threw in, provided it has the same mass. Thus there is not a one to one correspondence between the initial state, and the final state outside the black hole. There will be a one to one correspondence between the initial state, and the final state both outside, and inside, the black hole. But the important point is that the emission of particles, and radiation by the black hole, will cause the hole to lose mass, and get smaller. Eventually, it seems the black hole will get down to zero mass, and will disappear altogether. What then will happen to all the objects that fell into the hole, and all the people that either jumped in, or were pushed? They can't come out again, because there isn't enough mass or energy left in the black hole, to send them out again. They may pass into another universe, but that is not something that will make any difference, to those of us prudent enough not to jump into a black hole. Even the information, about what fell into the hole, could not come out again when the hole finally disappears. Information can not be carried free, as those of you with phone bills will know. Information requires energy to carry it, and there won't be enough energy left when the black hole disappears.
quote:But the name "ion drive" was coined by Roddenbury as far as I know.
I only learnt who pioneered the scientific method of propulsion.