Session 22 February 2010

[Annette1]

This was a very informative and powerful session and reading the responses was very interesting and informative as well. Thank you, Laura, for having the courage and wisdom to post this session and the background.

Over the years, I've observed the relationships of friends and acquaintances. I've listened to their laments about their spouses or significant others. I've often wondered how and/or why they remain together. When I was about thirteen and involved in a rather heated argument with my mother with regard to my mother's significant other, (he refused to marry her citing his reason had to do with her/our ethnic background), I lashed out at her for admonishing us to "try and get along with him" (there was no "getting along with him"; he would beat the crap out of us for not wanting to play a card game with him). My mother was busy hiding the fact that he was currently in jail for petty larceny and I wanted her to know that I knew precisely where he was, so I flippantly said to her that only animals were put in cages. Whereupon my mother went into her usual pity ploy and began weeping and saying that she loved him. It was a rather strange situation.

I can tell you that at that moment I was thinking to myself, "so what am I? Chopped liver? I'm your kid and it's perfectly fine for him to beat me up, attempt to molest me, and I'm supposed to accept all this because you love him?" But my goal at the time wasn't to force my mother to chose her children over some psychopathic maniac, my goal was to get my mother back, the person I once knew (or more like thought I knew). I was attempting to make her realize that normal human beings don't behave like this. Long story short, nothing I or my siblings said or did ever got through to her and this continued for 10 years.

Sometimes one can learn lessons from observing others and in this case I did have a ringside seat.

I've been married twice; once for 10 years and once for five years. I've been single now for 17 years. I was never quick to jump into a relationship and once in one, I was more comfortable in proceeding slowly. I've met a few people along the way, but generally speaking, early on I could discern that delving into an involved relationship was not going to work based on what I learned about the person and what I knew about myself. Most recently, (within the past five years), the first and foremost criteria for me is, "are you awake?" That old bible admonishment, "do not become unevenly yoked", reverberates in my head. Sure, it would be nice to meet someone on the same page, but I'm not actively seeking someone. And, to be realistic about it, I'm not a real socially active person and rather on the quiet side. However, I prefer being single rather than in some hellish nightmare of a relationship and doing some sort of mental gymnastics to maintain such a relationship. At this point, to become involved in such a relationship would be like knowingly choosing to go back to sleep.

 

[Nathan]

And what if it is because men are always looking for beautiful women because, of course, they believe that is what they deserve? What if men turn their noses up at the women who are really good potential partners because they don't fit some kind of ideal visual image?

I see this reflected in media, particularly in cinema and television. The female actors must be very attractive - it is essential. Not so essential for the male actors. Quite often we will see an average guy paired up with a physically beautiful woman. Perhaps this has distorted the perception of men in the real world to believe they're entitled to the Hollywood actress standard - an extremely high, illusory standard at that.

 

[Brewer]

And what if it is because men are always looking for beautiful women because, of course, they believe that is what they deserve? What if men turn their noses up at the women who are really good potential partners because they don't fit some kind of ideal visual image?

I am reminded of a guy I know who always hankered after high-powered, talented, beautiful. creative, industrious women. However, he had a missing front tooth himself which he didn't get fixed because he was afraid of the dentist (what high-powered woman would want to be with a guy who is afraid of the dentist and not able to get over it?), wore ratty tee-shirts, motorcycle boots and jacket, had greasy hair, and a handlebar mustache a yard wide. He lived with his mother, had no real job, but he could cite literary references all day and he thought that was enough. He never could get it that HE was not attractive to the kind of women that he was attracted to! It was the woman's fault that she "froze up" when he made advances! What was WRONG with her?

I tell ya, there is one thing really worth having in this life: a reasonable estimation of one's own true worth on ALL levels.

Hey! I know this bloke! Doesn't live with his mum but may as well do, however, he attracts many women and often it's instantaneous. His dad and older brother are the same. It's quite amazing to watch!

One of my workplaces is patronized mainly by women, some of whom are, to varying degrees, female versions of the above. They mainly blame men for their divorce, lack of a relationship or the reason they remain unmarried and have no kids. Some of their discussions are rather hateful. Some of seem to channel Dr Phil! I stay right out of it

With me I could be getting along famously with a woman and I'll ask her out and inevitably things fizzle out. I'm not anticipating anything, well consciously at least and before anything else my intentions are friendly, I'm more than happy to be friends. I believe that if you're going to be lovers you have to be friends in the first place. I'm nothing special but I don't lie about myself to them and what you see is what you get. I don't think I set my sights too high and beauty is only skin deep.

On the other hand I've attracted a few of the Sue types with a couple refusing to give up. All curious and very educational.

Cheers

Brewer

 

[Brewer]

And what if it is because men are always looking for beautiful women because, of course, they believe that is what they deserve? What if men turn their noses up at the women who are really good potential partners because they don't fit some kind of ideal visual image?

I see this reflected in media, particularly in cinema and television. The female actors must be very attractive - it is essential. Not so essential for the male actors. Quite often we will see an average guy paired up with a physically beautiful woman. Perhaps this has distorted the perception of men in the real world to believe they're entitled to the Hollywood actress standard - an extremely high, illusory standard at that.

Agreed, it's pervasive but in the movies that average looking guy may have above average abilities, be the underdog who makes good etc so he takes the spoils so to speak. I've just mentioned that my workplace is patronized mainly by women. Many read romance novels, they're lying all over the place. Each story has an 'alpha' male who takes all the glory, the story may take place in a hospital, the hot nurse runs off with the brain surgeon, not the orderly or janitor. Or, perhaps, she gets the landowner, never the farm laborer, it's called hypergamy. Then there is the piles of gossip and lifestyle magazines, often promoting unrealistic body images, lifestyle and relationship aspirations. Finally, the drivel of Dr 'men don't git it' Phil, Oprah and The View comes wafting out of the TV room on a daily basis.

Cheers

Brewer

 

[Evolutionary1]

As usual, the latest session was full of useful information. I appreciate the trials you all graciously endure, and your bringing back the wisdom to share here. I hope that things get a little easier for you all. It was a really unfortunate situation, but it becomes something more than that as it sheds light on the way things are.

This was a very informative and powerful session and reading the responses was very interesting and informative as well. Thank you, Laura, for having the courage and wisdom to post this session and the background.

Over the years, I've observed the relationships of friends and acquaintances. I've listened to their laments about their spouses or significant others. I've often wondered how and/or why they remain together. When I was about thirteen and involved in a rather heated argument with my mother with regard to my mother's significant other, (he refused to marry her citing his reason had to do with her/our ethnic background), I lashed out at her for admonishing us to "try and get along with him" (there was no "getting along with him"; he would beat the crap out of us for not wanting to play a card game with him). My mother was busy hiding the fact that he was currently in jail for petty larceny and I wanted her to know that I knew precisely where he was, so I flippantly said to her that only animals were put in cages. Whereupon my mother went into her usual pity ploy and began weeping and saying that she loved him. It was a rather strange situation.

I can tell you that at that moment I was thinking to myself, "so what am I? Chopped liver? I'm your kid and it's perfectly fine for him to beat me up, attempt to molest me, and I'm supposed to accept all this because you love him?" But my goal at the time wasn't to force my mother to chose her children over some psychopathic maniac, my goal was to get my mother back, the person I once knew (or more like thought I knew). I was attempting to make her realize that normal human beings don't behave like this. Long story short, nothing I or my siblings said or did ever got through to her and this continued for 10 years.

Sometimes one can learn lessons from observing others and in this case I did have a ringside seat.

Annette, I'm sorry to hear about the horrible circumstances your mother put you in, but glad to hear that you transmuted it into a lesson for yourself about relationships (and common sense). Sometimes this is all we have the power to do. I, too, have seen such glaringly obvious examples of bad relationships and learned quite a bit from them. On the other hand, I was afraid of even attempting one for a long time! Not the worst decision I've made, though, considering my lack of awareness and will.

I've been married twice; once for 10 years and once for five years. I've been single now for 17 years. I was never quick to jump into a relationship and once in one, I was more comfortable in proceeding slowly. I've met a few people along the way, but generally speaking, early on I could discern that delving into an involved relationship was not going to work based on what I learned about the person and what I knew about myself. Most recently, (within the past five years), the first and foremost criteria for me is, "are you awake?" That old bible admonishment, "do not become unevenly yoked", reverberates in my head. Sure, it would be nice to meet someone on the same page, but I'm not actively seeking someone. And, to be realistic about it, I'm not a real socially active person and rather on the quiet side. However, I prefer being single rather than in some hellish nightmare of a relationship and doing some sort of mental gymnastics to maintain such a relationship. At this point, to become involved in such a relationship would be like knowingly choosing to go back to sleep.

While many relationships do become hellish nightmares, some are just pleasant enough to keep you complacent (or at least encourage complacency). Sometimes, this is just as dangerous, I think, when one is discerning enough to avoid the psychopaths, but not enough to consider "are you awake?" "Are we evenly yoked?" I'm pretty much referring to myself here ;), and I think that your criteria is good for avoiding unbalanced relationships all across the spectrum. Also, being recently single, your post gives me back a bit of the faith I previously held that being single is just fine; I have some waking up to do, anyway.

 

[theos]

I can tell you that at that moment I was thinking to myself, "so what am I? Chopped liver? I'm your kid and it's perfectly fine for him to beat me up, attempt to molest me, and I'm supposed to accept all this because you love him?" But my goal at the time wasn't to force my mother to chose her children over some psychopathic maniac, my goal was to get my mother back, the person I once knew (or more like thought I knew). I was attempting to make her realize that normal human beings don't behave like this. Long story short, nothing I or my siblings said or did ever got through to her and this continued for 10 years.

Sometimes one can learn lessons from observing others and in this case I did have a ringside seat.

I was in a very similar situation as you, Annette, right around the same age. The relationship examples I was exposed to growing up were subpar, to put it very nicely. Pretty much a parade of abuse, infidelity and lies where being unequally yoked was a consistent theme. I learned a lot about the kind of relationship I didn't want to be in. I also learned that there are monsters in the world and sometimes they live in the same house as you.

I've been married twice; once for 10 years and once for five years. I've been single now for 17 years. I was never quick to jump into a relationship and once in one, I was more comfortable in proceeding slowly. I've met a few people along the way, but generally speaking, early on I could discern that delving into an involved relationship was not going to work based on what I learned about the person and what I knew about myself. Most recently, (within the past five years), the first and foremost criteria for me is, "are you awake?" That old bible admonishment, "do not become unevenly yoked", reverberates in my head. Sure, it would be nice to meet someone on the same page, but I'm not actively seeking someone. And, to be realistic about it, I'm not a real socially active person and rather on the quiet side. However, I prefer being single rather than in some hellish nightmare of a relationship and doing some sort of mental gymnastics to maintain such a relationship. At this point, to become involved in such a relationship would be like knowingly choosing to go back to sleep.

I concur.

 

[forge]

[..]Recently while watching your video on the Introduction and background of Buckwheat and seeing the filming and editing skills that are being developed. Why not have Sott's very own virtual News room, which would require the creation of virtual sets for use with green screen filming. [..]A video version of 'connecting the dots' or a video version of the podcasts

As you can see here, Corbett used a raw alpha mask, it seems, antialiasing would have taken up too much rendering time in After Effects or similar:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/204286-The-Corbett-Report-Carbon-Eugenics-Whistleblowers-Muzzled-RIP-Mainstream-Media
It looks he went for hard clipping his outlines, deleting everything one or two pixels deep inside the mask to filter out environment. This seems very good for a Youtube target, since their compression blurs strongly. Only poor texts will suffer from the blur.


Edited to activate the SOTT link

 

[WIN 52]

And what if it is because men are always looking for beautiful women because, of course, they believe that is what they deserve? What if men turn their noses up at the women who are really good potential partners because they don't fit some kind of ideal visual image?

In all fairness, these men are likely heavily programed to want what is not that good for them. I don't believe it is possible to segregate the sexes, where programs are in full effect. I have experienced this programing firsthand, where I literally froze up and walked away from a beautiful woman who I liked, while she was ditching her blind date to be with me. It was the most crazy feeling I have ever had. That was a year ago. I left that area of the country shortly afterwards and have never met that woman again. I can't help but believe there was a heavy program running, in me, causing me to behave in this manner.

I have also wondered about being with or having a partner as being an STO thing. It seems in an STO style relationship, both people would need to consider their partner when making any decision. The self would be considered after the other is satisfied. Is this wrong thinking? Most relationships today are selfish or started for selfish reasons making them an STS activity.

 

[Divide by Zero]

Hi WIN 52,
In my past relationships, what partners or I would do is not communicate sometimes out of fear of rejection. That internal considering would sour the relationship with time. It's ironic, the fear of something can bring about what is feared.

I think that when two people who are collinear come together and can get over their programs (or work on them openly), the "STO-ness" flows naturally. I can only imagine the huge amount of trust between such a couple, allowing them to accept each other and themselves fully and assist each other through life.

 

[meta-agnostic]

Wow, it's taken me quite a while to get through this thread. I echo the sentiments others have expressed about thanks for posting the session, kudos for putting up with all this, etc.

The relationship thing is tough. I'm in my early 30s and have never really been in a serious one. From adolescence on I have always had the strong feeling that I should somehow be in one (no doubt from programming) but something always manages to get in the way. That "freeze up" feeling others have mentioned on both sides, some other complicating factor, the other person moves away or dies, anything. I've dabbled in online dating years ago before it was "cool" but pretty much refuse to consider it recently for the exact reasons in this session and many cited in this thread. Seems like putting yourself on a platter saying, "come on STS, take your best shot at subtly manipulating me with an unknowing vector from out of the blue!" Of course meeting "naturally" in person is almost as dangerous but I feel you can keep your guard up with the way you behave naturally, the kind of people you attract, and with online dating you're just asking for it.

But I wonder what exactly it means to "give up the quest". Programming or not, fully awake or not (I like to think I'm at least halfway there and would not be able to maintain interest in someone who did not show similar signs), I feel like there are still 3d lessons I need to learn from a healthy relationship in order to move to the next level. Luckily I don't have an obvious history of abuse like some others have described. My parents are high school sweethearts who are still married almost 40 years later and they get along relatively well. Not a 100% healthy relationship but probably at least par for the course compared to all the alternatives. Still there is heavy programming there, and not being at least semi-"awake" is pretty much a deal-breaker for me. I doubt I could even become good friends with someone now if they did not seem aware with regard to how they view routine political and cultural issues, manipulations that are not considered so "esoteric" but should eventually become obvious to most thinking people (and of course empathy). Still, the esoteric stuff is a heavy burden to carry and quite a heavy one to ask someone else to open up to, so does that mean giving up and accepting being alone? (and as soon as you do, someone will magically appear in your life if it's meant to be?) If so, at this point I'm pretty well prepared to choose being alone or at least not in a relationship over being manipulated and drained constantly just to have a warm body to sleep next to.

Sorry if this is rambling. As you can see I'm still pretty new here. :D

 

[shijing]

Still, the esoteric stuff is a heavy burden to carry and quite a heavy one to ask someone else to open up to, so does that mean giving up and accepting being alone? (and as soon as you do, someone will magically appear in your life if it's meant to be?) If so, at this point I'm pretty well prepared to choose being alone or at least not in a relationship over being manipulated and drained constantly just to have a warm body to sleep next to.

This is probably not unreasonable. I don't think that you could say that someone in your life will "magically appear" as soon as you accept being alone -- that is anticipation -- but it is one possibility. This is also true of what you said about the lessons you feel you still need from a relationship. This may be true, but it is still an assumption -- you may have more important lessons before you in other areas for all you know. And if you are really disciplined about what you would expect from a relationship (the opportunity to work together with someone toward a goal, as opposed to settling for mere companionship), then you are set up well, I think, to evaluate potential partners and make that jump if and when the opportunity finally arrives.

Sorry if this is rambling. As you can see I'm still pretty new here. :D

Not rambling at all :)

 

[Gonzo]

It occurs to me that the concept of someone appearing in one's life once they stop looking has become almost cliche. I'm pretty certain I've even referred to the notion when consoling friends who can't seem to meet anyone, saying something to the effect of, "You know, it's often been said the moment you stop looking, someone will find you.".

I've actually heard that as often as the sister of that thought, that the moment you finally find someone and enter a serious relationship, all of the single, available people start coming out of the woodwork.

Perhaps that was a manufactured concept to allow the PTB to inject someone into people's lives since those who actually believe the concept would undoubtedly have their guard down, believing it to be fate or even a divine matching of the souls.

That would be most devious.

Gonzo

 

[meta-agnostic]

I've actually heard that as often as the sister of that thought, that the moment you finally find someone and enter a serious relationship, all of the single, available people start coming out of the woodwork.

Along those lines, my personal experience has been any time a potential relationship starts to develop, there will be another or more than one prospect who comes up immediately if not simultaneously. And there will be some particular attraction to them even if they have some clear personality flaw or are somehow unavailable. And with guard up high enough anyway considering everything that gets talked about here, and similar subjects, it's easy enough to second guess the person you were focused on who might be a decently souled being while "the matrix" injects either an OP or someone much weaker-willed. Or maybe it's vice versa. Of course a lot of it could just as easily be higher self choices of it not being the right lesson to be with that person or anyone right now anyway, and either way being single certainly beats being trapped in a miserable situation you let grow up around you living a life of quiet desperation -- and not being able to up and change it any time you please without having to get out of whatever tangled web you've weaved.

As far as any influence from the PTB, I think it comes down to how one relates to other people and if you let them get to you and push your buttons without realizing it's happening. I know it's happened to me and I can look back and see it, and even now I can feel certain programs still run and think "well, maybe so-and-so is just misunderstood and had a bad childhood and needs to grow out of it", and it may even be partially true but it doesn't matter. But if you realize how it has happened and can happen again, both parties do ideally, and vow to be vigilant against being on either end of it and agree to go separate ways if there's just no way to fight it, then maybe it's still possible in this day and age.

But kids? Only if a paradigm shift has truly taken place, and whatever world(s) we find ourselves in seem stable enough to allow for such a luxury responsibility. Certainly not out of "biological necessity" meaning selfish desire to replicate your own genes.

 

[3DStudent]

I've taken a while but have now finished reading all of the responses in this thread. I must say thank you Laura and chateau for your efforts in producing these transcripts. I only fully realized the troubles that were associated with this with the discussions about relationships that proceeded. So I hope that things are going relatively well for you all now.

I don't have much to further comment on about Bob and Sue and I've detailed my related experience with a psychopathic female in the psychopath board. It would truly be a tragedy to lose one's soul over something like this, that is such a large price to pay.

I don't get why the C's said that we could eat kamut and said the saying, "When in Rome..." Surely we shouldn't do everything that others do, but I think this is only referring to kamut. But I don't see how the saying applied.

The part about manifesting food was most interesting. I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been much talk about it. But maybe that is getting ahead of myself and it's only a possibility. The night I read the transcript I was fantasizing about having food just pop into being at will. I was driving on my way home while doing this and I almost ran over what looked like a fox. It darted so fast and was so close to my wheels that I couldn't really identify it. I think this was definitely symbolic in the literal sense to pay attention to what is before you. So I guess before or if it happens it is just dreaming and wishful thinking.

I don't get why 4D STS need to time travel to do their dirty work. Don't they exist outside our time so they can just see what they want to do. Of course I should be confused though with 3D linear thinking. I wonder if their time travel is just how we would pick a certain street to walk down while seeing all the other possible streets to go on.

I think it's cool that cats have their own form of pipe breathing, hehe. ;D

Right alongside it, parallel to it, but never part of it, is the OP spectrum. It is populated by individuals who never, ever, can, will or do have an individuated soul OR a conscience OR any ability to hurt for another, EVER. MOST of them live normal lives, look just like you and me, have jobs, marry, have kids, play music, go to church, and can be exemplary citizens to the outside view, but they always have dark secrets behind their mask, some more or less serious, but definitely not human.

I thought that OPs have a conscience, and that it is psychopaths who lack this. I may be mistaken, but isn't a lack of conscience the determining factor of a psychopath, without which they are able to do all they do with no remorse? I know OP's can't hurt for another from the transcripts, but I thought they could still show remorse via a conscience. Also, we all have masks that we wear, or false personalities. And that they have dark secrets seemed to further change how I thought about OPs. I thought they were relatively good and functional people, just with a weaker will and able to be used as portals.

And thanks for the article on the "disorder disorder" Laura. That was a real eye opener for me. I could really see the ponerization behind that and it was quite unsettling. I was kind of in a state of disbelief, but there it was. It's kind of easy to spot it though, it is so blatant within those new guidelines for psychology. So now we have jerks, perverts, and psychopaths who have legal protection for the things that they do. That is an obvious indication that this world is going ever deeper into hell.

So, again, very nice session and following discussions. Sorry if I seemed to be nitpicking, I had made a mental list of some things unclear to me when I read the transcript.

 

[Laura]

Reading the article posted in this thread:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=16891.

where it says:

An interesting example of wheat’s addictive potential pertains to the Roman army. The Roman Empire was once known as the “Wheat Empire,” with soldiers being paid in wheat rations. Rome’s entire war machine, and its vast expansion, was predicated on the availability of wheat. Forts were actually granaries, holding up to a year’s worth of grain in order to endure sieges from their enemies. Historians describe soldiers’ punishment included being deprived of wheat rations and being given barley instead. The Roman Empire went on to facilitate the global dissemination of wheat cultivation which fostered a form of imperialism with biological as well as cultural roots.

The Roman appreciation for wheat, like our own, may have had less to do with its nutritional value as “health food” than its ability to generate a unique narcotic reaction. It may fulfill our hunger while generating a repetitive, ceaseless cycle of craving more of the same, and by doing so, enabling the surreptitious control of human behavior. Other researchers have come to similar conclusions.

gives an all new meaning to this comment by the Cs:

Q: (Perceval) Is kamut okay for us to eat? It's like "old wheat".

A: Yes. When in Rome...

Q: (L) In other words, when in 3rd density without the ability to exercise techno-spirituality, one does what one must. Is that basically it?

A: Yes.