Sloppy Zhang

Well from what I recall from my high school biology class, all the "code" for organs, limbs, everything really, is still there in the DNA. But as it's replicated, there are little "blockers" which block off those strains representing things that only grow once, that way you keep growing skin and not, say, arms. So as far as I know, regeneration is possible, you've got all the blue prints and the resources, it's just as far as your DNA is concerned, some stuff is off limits. Now if you were to be able to add and remove the ban on growing those parts.... hm....

I'll say this again: Regardless of your intention, there are always going to be multiple audiences. Presidents who assume that they only have one audience (the American people) can wind up getting into hot water (by saying something which is okay by American standards, but pisses off foreign audiences). So Presidential speechwriters have to always take into account multiple audiences, even if they aren't the primary audience.

At any given moment there are multiple audiences. There are the people you talk to directly... The people who are viewing the thread, but aren't commenting... The people who aren't even registered, but watching as things unfold... People who run a google search and stumble across a thread... People who register in the future and use the taobums search feature... And who knows who else? I can't tell how many times I've stumbled across just the right post, just the right message, which was written a long time ago. Of course, I've also gotten incredibly helpful and insightful posts from the present. So who knows?

I go back and re-read threads. I went back and read all the Kunlun threads. Most of the posts were deleted when I got to them. Then when people had questions, I would go to link to them, only to find that even MORE posts were deleted. And there were some good, insightful ones in some of those old threads as well You never know who wanders into some of these threads far into the future.

Well I'm not saying that sailing and camping can't be fun and all that stuff you know, but it's gotta come from them. I was reading this article about "how to talk to your teen", and I think a lot of it rang true. It talked about making them think that what you want them to do was their idea. You know, because teens always know how the world should be and yadda yadda. So this lady was talking to her daughter, and instead of asking, "how was your date?" when her daughter would come home, she'd ask, "how was your night?" and more often than not, her daughter would start talking about the dinner, or the movie, and then follow up with comments about the guy and things like that. So I'd say go off of what your kid already likes to do. Drop hints and stuff. Try to prompt them to take it one step further. So I dunno, if your kid likes swimming, see if you could talk them into swimming in larger bodies of water, like lakes, but phrase it like, "ever thought about swimming in places other than a pool?" or "I'd bet you get a lot more resistance swimming in the ocean, what with the waves and all" or something like that. Then see if they'd be interested in traveling out to places further afield to get them doing what they like doing. To get there you might have to kayak, canoe, sail, or whatever. Prompt by saying all like, "hey how about this?" Then eventually you're full blown out sailing, then just be all like, "hey maybe one day you can take this boat out on your own? " and then one day they might, and they'd be doing what you did I know that a lot of times I didn't have an answer for my parents right away, or I wasn't feeling up to something at the time, but later came back with it. Like they'd ask, "so how about going kayaking?" or something, and I'd be like, "I dunno." Then about a month later I'd be like, "hey, remember when you talked about kayaking?" Stuff like that. So, I dunno, I suppose it'd depend on your kid. My parents were kind of suffocating, actually, so stuff that they really wanted me to do, more often than not I'd reactively not want to do it. But once the heat died down, less emotional strings attached, I'd come back to it. Maybe it's just in my case, but don't act like it'd be such a big deal for your kid to go through a "rite of passage", even if you think it would be. One of my professors said that when she was doing research on behavior of young people, she said we are characterized as being, "a political and conflict averse." So if something seems like something that could blow up in their faces (like first night camping they realize they hate it and come back, disappointing you and/or themselves, causing a fight or something), then they just aren't even going to engage in the first place.

There are TONS of different "initiations" into adulthood for the modern person. I'm speaking as a male from a family of humble means. In my state, you can get your license at 16. So when people are around 14 or 15, they take driver's ed, and get their permit. Then they drive around with their parents. It's the first time they have a very literal power to go where they want to go (parents allowing). Now depending on the parent it'll range- some parents are very over protective, and some parents use them as a chauffeur, so kids get various mileage and experiences in this process. Then they get their license, and they're on their own (but again their mileage varies depending on the protectiveness of their parents). 16 is also about when many people get their first job, their first paycheck. The first time taking orders from someone other than their parents or their teacher, in which they get money for the rewards. They stop looking at products as value in "dollars", but value in "hours worked" (or or "hours they will have to work in the future"). It's also when they pay taxes, and learn that not everything they earn actually belongs to them. If you're part of the population that goes to college, taking exams are also an "initiation", many times a process gone through with your peers. Getting into college (and then finding ways to pay for that) is also an "initiation". Life in general holds a lot of firsts- first girlfriend (or not), first time having sex (or not), first time drinking underage (or not), first time trying out some type of drug (or not).... (I include "or nots" because as with everything it's a decision, and making a decision, be it right or wrong, is very much a right of passage). Anyway, we don't have big ceremonies where the whole family/village gets together, sings and dances, or sends you on some type of trail. I'll say what I said in the internet thread- the form has changed, but not the substance. Young people are always put on trials, their decisions will always lead them into adulthood. Everything from how they behave to who they choose to hang out with to what they choose to spend their time doing. To the parents with the teens out there, I would suggest against doing something like sending them to the outback (no offense to you outback residents) and having them go on some "survivor" type journey. It's silly, gimicky, and, from the perspective of most teens who live in a first world country, utterly pointless. Again, the form changes, but not the substance. Survival skills are important, but it's not about learning how to start a fire or hunt and skin game- it's about learning to assess the situation, keep a cool head when others can, or are, freaking out, and being able to plan ahead. How are the choices you are making now going to affect you in the future? Make it something the kids can relate to. They may learn how to apply survival skills to the wilderness, but totally miss making those same survival decisions on a day-to-day basis. Just food for thought from a young person (age 21).

Do you get horny, or is it just the physical erection? I dunno about the rest of you guys, but from my knowledge and experience, it's NORMAL to get an erection every once in a while (in a non-sexual way). It means blood is flowing to that area. In fact, one of the tests to see if someone has ED or if it's all just a mind thing, is to see if he wakes up with morning wood or gets erections throughout the day. If he doesn't, that could mean something. If he does, just not when he wants/needs to, then it's most likely a mental/anxiety thing. But I digress.... Do you start thinking thoughts during meditation that leads you to have an erection, or do you get it, and then start thinking stuff? Thoughts and body responses which happen simultaneously over a long enough period of time can actually cause each other. Thoughts causing reactions in the body, actions in the body causing reactive thoughts. Rather than stopping meditation, work through them. Where are they coming from? Let them go. Where is the erection coming from? Let it go. Basically- what came first, the chicken or the egg? Then let both go.

Yeah, I agree about the inner drive thing, and also about the middle ground. I've seen some really dedicated students and really dedicated people who have followed methods that were incomplete, or learned from teachers who could be considered less than reputable. And I dunno, it just makes me sad that these people toil on and are going to run into obstacles, and they are going to be told by teachers they trust that those obstacles are their fault, that it was them manifesting it, and something or another. And I think what would happen if they took that same dedication and put it toward a method which was legitimate and whole- how much progress they'd make, and how much advancement would go on in the world in general. And I question why that situation is happening- and I ask "how does someone distinguish a teacher with the goods and a teacher without them?" They may have phenomenal inner drive, but perhaps they haven't reached the point where they can accurately distinguish their internal feelings as Ya Mu suggested. They want to do SOMETHING, but don't know what. In light of their internal compass being undeveloped, they rely on their mind, their research, who turns up on google, who talks the best game, who seems like they have the goods from the experience they have. And a lot of times it's the fraud who's got the better marketing campaign.

I'm going to relate some experiences I've had with meditation and awareness because I think it applies to many people in the modern world....... The thing about meditation and most forms of cultivation is it makes you aware. Duh. Okay. That's good, right? Well guess what: the truth, if you're a modern person, probably SUCKS. The FIRST thing I noticed about myself was how TIRED I was. All the time. 4-6 hours a sleep per night, constant work during the day, then 4-6 hours a sleep at night, wake up and do more work. If I was awake, my mind was thinking about work. Take a half hour to an hour to meditate, observe some thoughts, back to the work week. But as my awareness developed, and I started to carry my awareness with me, I realized the toll my lifestyle (which in some cases is very hard to change) takes on my body. I see a lot of people saying, "meditation makes me sleepy." And a lot of guides about how to avoid this. But I counter with this: meditation makes you aware of the condition your body is in, and most people are SLEEPY! Day in day out, I was living in my mind. When you're so tightly wound in your body, you lose feeling. When you're so tightly wound in your mind, you even lose the feeling of that. Even after years of karate and other martial arts (of the external variety), my mind never got into the habit of really connecting with my body. It was more like, "this is what I want my body to do, this is how I prepare it to do it." I was sending commands to my body, but was not listening to any input from my body. So through meditation and awareness I realized I was tired. Meditation didn't make me tired. I was already tired, and wasn't aware. So what do I do when I try to meditate and I'm tired? I take a nap! I get myself to a healthy state, THEN start a practice. Now some days, it's a trial in and of itself to even maintain a healthy state. But awareness helps. A lot of tiny changes add up to a big change, so when you get the awareness of one good change, one bad change, one good decision, one bad decision, eventually you can make lots of little good decisions, so at the end of the day you aren't an emotional, mental, and physical wreck, and you can get some good practice in. Now sometimes it means getting rid of bad habits. Sometimes it means doing what you aren't expected to do. And sometimes you run into a barrier, where you can't do any more and still remain in the life you are currently leading. And sometimes you are in a position where you can change the life you're leading, and sometimes circumstances dictate that you hold your position for a little while. In any case, a small bit of a rant/personal experience, but the key message is that, in my opinion: Most people are a wreck PRIOR to meditation/cultivation/practice, and their practice makes them realize this, and most likely if you're living anywhere close to a stereotypically "modern lifestyle", you've got to do quite a bit of work just to get to "base health". So don't get down because you did some practice and you realized you're tired or something. Learn to figure out why you're tired, what decisions throughout the day led you to that state, and how you can start to change it, little by little. Because when you wake up and suddenly realize you feel like shit, and don't know why, you might just be making progress. Because finally, you feel

Yeah I was pretty much going to bring this to a close as well. Of all the things you could label as dangerous by default, I think video games are quite far from being one of them. Video games have definitely brought good things into my life, and I think that, like anything else, if you make good decisions, almost everyone can interact with them in a healthy, enjoyable way.

kewl

More activity, less computer time. Consider the mental attitude towards the computer, and what you do with the computer. For instance, getting on TTB's and thinking about how much your life sucks, about how women just want to be abused, about how you'll never give the women what they "really" want. You've heaped a whole bunch of negative connotations together with the computer. Compound that with some classical conditioning, and you've got a recipe for success: pretty soon you don't even have to think, you sit at the computer, and start to feel sad and depressed and drained. Seriously, start examining why you even need to get on the computer. Unless you absolutely HAVE to, DON'T! If you ever find yourself at the computer going, "sigh, I wonder what I should look up now? Don't really feel like much...." GET UP, LEAVE THE ROOM, and DO SOMETHING ELSE! If you don't have something that you MUST be doing on the computer, there is no reason for you to be there. If there's no reason for you to be there, then piddling around on it will not do anything constructive or healthy, it will only bring you down, so get up and go do more qigong or exercise or read a book or study or go talk to people or SOMETHING. [edit] Oh, another thing, consider what you're LOOKING for. Like the people who claim that ejaculation saps their energy and is the bane of their existence, and cry every time they blow their load, afterward they are tired and their muscles don't work as well. That's your body RELAXING, but they look for even the faintest sign of fatigue and weakness and then proclaim, "obviously it saps your strength, see, right after I came, I couldn't go workout, yup, it saps your strength." It's like, maybe, MAYBE you should have just relaxed, and chilled, and find out what that means, rather than jumping to conclusions. Maybe you EXPECT the computer to fatigue you, so as soon as you sit down for 15 minutes (you getting settled in), you don't feel like moving, etc, and you are mistakenly attributing that as the computer's fault....

Easily countered by some self awareness, as well as awareness of the situation, coupled with an ability to make healthy decisions. Nice weather outside, friends want to play some basketball, you've already played for two hours? Okay, get up and move. Rainy day outside, your friend across the country has some free time, you've got some free time, you've been working on a paper all afternoon, going to take a break before you get back to it? Maybe it's time to play some games. Now you can apply that to ANY life situation. Countered by self awareness and an ability to keep it together, which increases with experience (though some people seem to naturally be more "together" than others, even at a young age) This is a HUGE assumption. You're assuming that if you play video games, you automatically take up a poor posture. You are also assuming that video games are not balanced by other activities. So can getting into an argument with someone. So can thinking about a painful experience. So can almost anything. As above: learn to deal with it healthily, won't be a problem. As above: are you so weak that you cannot even deal with mental images coming from your mind? Is your own mind so weak, and your practices so feeble, that watching a series of static images played one after another to produce the illusion of movement breaks everything you've worked for in developing compassion and other "developed" virtues? Please, do not underestimate the individual. That's obviously your top concern, sitting hunched over your computer typing away at a random internet nobody! (see all the assumptions I've made in that sentence?) Addressed above- balance your life (healthy decision making which is an area of life independent from external form such as video games, as well as appropriate mental togetherness and health). Your generalizations show themselves again: "because some people play games in an unhealthy way, games are inherently unhealthy, rarrr!" The downsides which "outnumber" the "meager benefits" exist only within a small portion of the population which would have a problem regardless of the existence of computer games- if they instead got addicted to marbles, you'd be on a crusade against the anti taoist principles of marbles! I think you've indulged enough in your computer usage already. I'm sure you will develop arthritis from all the typing you've been doing, you'll develop shoulder tension from your poor posture, neck cramps which will stagnate chi flow to the upper centers, creating blockages and causing headaches. The eyestrain from having to read all the text will throw off your circadian rhythm, you won't be able to sleep. You'll also develop erectile dysfunction because hunching over the keyboard puts pressure on your crotch, squeezing the blood vessels, and causing them to rupture. Permanent damage to your man parts. And what's the reason for this? All of your posting on TTB's! TTB's is anti taoist, we should get rid of it! Any real taoist would NEVER be on TTB's! It's hypocrisy to call yourself a taoist, but then destroy your body and social life (which I didn't even get into about how bad it'd be destroyed because it's just so scary, I don't want to artificially stimulate my body by thinking about it) by being on TTB's! [/sarcasm] The point of that little run was to show you what happens when you apply your same logic to something else. And what happens? It's ridiculous! I'm sure you have taken steps to ensure your TTB's activity is healthily balanced with the rest of your life. I'm sure you can find people who spend a lot more time on TTB's than you, and a lot less time than you. I'm sure some of them live healthy lives, and some of them live unhealthy lives. And guess what? TTB's (more than likely), has very little, if anything at all to do with that! The ones whose lives have been destroyed by TTB's activity are a vast minority, and the factors contributing to their degrading quality of life would have been there regardless of the existence of taobums. Correlation does not imply causation!!!!!

You keep saying that, but you've never really presented anything other than stereotypes and far reaching generalizations which don't have any basis in the real world. No, I'm not, actually. I worked pretty hard to get my B in statistics. Got the credit, haven't looked back. I'm not that great in math, but I retained enough to know when data is being manipulated to suit someone's argument. But that number, two hours, was fairly arbitrarily determined. They defined that just there, in the article. The two sources, which I cannot access (have tried, if you got direct links, please link them) refer to studies done in child development. And that's its own animal. But teenage years? Young adult years? Adult years? Older adult years? People who know the difference between reality and fantasy? People who can make decisions about 1) how much time they have, and 2) how much time they can spend on something? Completely different. And how so? Compared to watching a movie, video games are more engaging. In a previous post, I listed several reasons why video games would be a fun alternative given certain situations. It's not always the best option, but it's not always the worst option. Furthermore, you don't seem to be taking this holistically- you seem to be homing in on one aspect, the video games, and going at it relentlessly without looking at other factors. Some people enjoy mental exercises and activities more than physical. It doesn't mean that since they play video games more often compared to other people, that they are being unhealthy. It means they'd rather do that than something else, and that's fine. Now I'll be the first to admit that problems arise when games are done to the exclusion of other activities necessary for health and well being. But, AGAIN, that's a fringe case, and is based on the individual's ability to make healthy choices. Which is NOT caused by video games- that's a pre-existing condition. EVEN when you consider teenagers.

Maybe we should examine WHY the view spiritual systems as a product, and the teacher as the sales associate. I have made the point many times before that, in the present, not a lot of teachers do many sorts of demonstrations, no real "proving it". A lot of times, this point has been made with contempt or ridicule. "I am not a circus animal, I should not have to perform for you on demand. Grow up." But look at it historically- all the martial arts that we have today were established through USE. Yang Luchan showed up in Beijing, got up on a platform and said, "I bet nobody can knock me off. I'm a badass. Come get me." And guess what? He was right. Earned the nickname Yang the Invincible. His son didn't ride on coattails- he had to go through the same process, and earned the same name. This is our beloved tai chi! Learning from a master was learning a skill, a way of life, learning a method of self transformation. How do I go from the person I was, to someone like my teacher? People could see, and feel, tangible realities about what they wanted to learn. There was absolutely no question in the students' minds about a teacher's role as a teacher. In some places and parts of history, if a martial artist defeated you, you'd want to become their student- they obviously have something you don't (if they let you live, anyway!). Energy arts, meditation, cooking, art, business- people want to learn from the people who are successful and who have demonstrated some practical skill. What do most modern day teachers do? "I don't give demonstrations because people don't believe me." "If you really believed, you wouldn't need to ask." "How dare you disrespect me?" "Grow up, and do some work yourself before you demand anything of others." You don't see their art. Their art is behind closed doors. If you'll allow this, you could say it's still in the box. Sitting on a shelf. You've got to complete all the right payments and give all the respects before you even get to look inside the box, let alone take anything out. Compare this with ANYTHING else- education, other sports, hobbies, whatever. You've got to have some kind of credentials- recognition from an institution of known and acknowledged standards, or enough experience in the field to have produced results. I hate to start talking about the good ol' days, but yeah. We don't have public lei tai matches or civil wars that martial artists can go fight in to prove their mettle. But it's not like we don't have anything either. The only able bodies are not those of already believing, loyal students. Now I'm not saying that anyone "has" to do something or else they aren't legitimate. I'm not saying that the sole standard for success or efficacy of a system or person is the amount of public support. I'm just saying, you know, it's all a two way street. A lot of people seem to be giving the student a hard time, and it's like.... well, I hear a lot of people talking about getting their material "out there", to elevate the level of humanity, and things like that and.... well, I dunno, public demonstrations would do a lot. We live in an era where people tend to "think", and "rationalize", so why not play to that? Why not play to what the current trends are? But everyone can, and does, and will continue to do, whatever they want one way or the other.

Well the infamous quote from Bruce Lee is that, "I don't fear the man who has practiced 1000 techniques once, I fear the man who practiced 1 technique 1000 times". I feel like reading about a lot of historically famous fighters, many of them have had signature techniques, some specialty they were really good at- everything else they learned was to compliment that and allow them to use it better. I guess there are a lot of ways to look at it. It's not very good from a marketing standpoint. Because training is boring. Learning techniques is the easy part- it's getting to the point where you can actually USE them effectively that is 99% of the work. You already know how to do everything and what you do, you just have to DO it. In some cases, even if the person knows what you're going to do (as in the above fighters), there's nothing they can do to stop it. But if you don't plan on taking the "one technique" path, I would take a page from the MMA playbook- have a plan for everything. Be able to punch, kick, throw,, grapple in close quarters stand up, move your body, wrestle, joint lock, escape, and maybe a couple of other things. Make sure that you have at least 1 thing which can address each of them. Make sure you are competent in all of those areas at least a little bit. If there's a particular form or technique you like or want to emphasize, that's fine, but that form/technique should handle each of those aspects at the very least.

The middle value is the median. The average is the sum of all the data divided by the number of people the data was taken from. Though my expertise is not in statistics, the choice presentation of data and "facts" is what I do study. The weakness of the average is that it is highly susceptible to outliers. Michael Jordan graduated with a major in geography from the university of north carolina, yet his career salary came from being a star athlete. If you average the salaries of four year geography majors, Michael Jordan's phenomenal career salary gets averaged in, creating a number which is a bit different than what you'd get if you look at all the numbers in total, or perhaps other statistical data, like the median. Now the thing with polling people who identify as gamers means that extreme outliers are included, but might not necessarily be fully represented- because you get people who play 1-2 hours week mixed in with people who play 14-16 hours a day. Then you've got people like me who self identify as a gamer, but the last time I played a video game was January 1st- after that I had to return to classes [edit] Furthermore, I must say I am raising an eyebrow about some of the conclusions that you are drawing from this study (as I've had time to review it more thoroughly since it's initial posting). To say the study defined video game overuse as more than 2 hours per day is more like a half truth- The actual quote (page 2, lines 31 and 32) is this: Now those numbers at the end correspond to references at the end, 6 and 7, which are: Now I haven't been able to access either of those two things, but so far, this is what I'm seeing: 1) computer game overuse is defined as more than two hours for the purpose of this study- it is not a universal definition, and I do not think it is meant to be taken as such. The later section on addiction, page 4, lines 39-40, say this: 2) Much of the research and the thoughts about causes discuss children, and in some cases, adolescents. At least, that's what I gather from the referenced material (which, as of the time of this post, I have not accessed). Now that's all rather interesting, but children are much different from adolescents, which are much different from young adults, which are much different than older adults. And ALL of those unique, diverse groups partake in video gaming. Even a narrowly focused study admits that there are limitations and there is not conclusive evidence to support certain wide sweeping statements, yet you, Stig, seem to be attempting to apply this to all gaming! Revisiting point 1, we must then question for whom two hours is "excessive". Is it young children in their developmental stages? Is it adolescents who might need to be handling other important responsibilities? Is it young adults? Adults? Older adults? What genres of games are we taking into account? The socio-economic status of the person? The season? (as a kid I spent more time playing games during the summer than during school) A lot of factors that don't seem to be accounted for. 3) I just have to laugh out loud at some of the other categories, like a temporary increase in aggressive behavior. Then I have to sigh, because of the short sightedness of the researchers. I posit that what they call "short term aggressive behavior" is known by another name- competitiveness. Perhaps they should look at the "short term aggressive behavior" and "actions which are no pro social" which occur on colleges campuses towards rival fans on game days! The same games which they say encourages "short term aggressive behaviors" more often than not also encourage team strategy and communication in order to accomplish a goal. Of course, that doesn't always work out (WARNING: language): [edit]4) On the section about people who are likely to be addicted, especially to the internet/mmorpgs, it talks about people who are marginalized by society, who aren't very comfortable in social situations, and who go to the internet to escape. I'd say those same people are the stereotypical "comic book guys" of The Simpsons, and the stereotypical D&D nerds of the days long past (a few of whom are now big game developers and doing quite well!) In that case, AGAIN, internet and video games are not the cause- they are where people run to for shelter. Their condition occurs before the addiction to video games. In which case, regulating or eliminating video games would simply be getting rid of the symptom, the external thing that they latch on to, and would not be addressing the root cause, the internal condition which leads them to attach to things in the first place! And now I've officially wasted too much time on this topic.

I am quite the intelligent person Most of my work is done on the computer. I can keep multiple windows open. Work, post, work, post. Multitask your way to success

It's a completely different dynamic though! Even just considering school, when I was in high school, over half of my assignments were either supplemented by, or directly required, the internet. Now that I'm in college, my assignments are almost ENTIRELY required to be done online. It is assumed that you have access to texting or social media when working in group projects. I myself don't have a facebook, but almost everyone else does, and facebook is a medium through which people can send messages (including work related stuff). So time management is not "the next two hours are internet time, after that it's no internet time". You've got learn how to manage yourself while on the internet. You've got to learn how to say, "I've got to research ancient Mayan architecture, not get into a debate on TTB's." Because chances are you're going to be on the internet either way. And this standard is moving down through the grades as well- I see articles about a lot of middle schools, and even elementary schools, becoming more centered around internet means by which to conduct education. The internet is just a medium through which you demonstrate your discipline, or lack thereof. Being off the internet won't make you a more disciplined person, and being on the internet won't make you less of one.

In my rather limited experience, it has a lot to do with triggers and associations. A certain thing, or a certain behavior, is associated with a particular action or mental state. Let's say each time you feel lonely, you look out the window, and each time you do that, you munch on something. It's simplistic, but you can extrapolate it out to however far you want. In extreme cases, even thought patterns which leave you at window, like, the fire alarm goes off, and you think, "wow, in case of a fire, what if I couldn't get through the door? I could always go out the window... hmm, window, I'm kind of hungry." So that leads into addictions to food and overeating. Part of the "taoist" cure (which I guess could apply to anyone, even non-taoists) would be 1) becoming aware of such associations, becoming aware of the "triggers", and 2) letting those things go, breaking up those associations.

This thread has some good insights: http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/1566-subtle-body-anatomy-of-tan-tiens-and-chakras/ A little while ago, someone posted links to Joel Signeur's material: http://www.chineseshamanism.com/index.html he mentions chakras and stuff in there.

Some of them don't Actually, it's rather interesting, in both high school and college, all the Asian kids hang out with one another- a ton of Asians I meet know a lot of other Asians in the community. Maybe it's the shared culture thing, maybe it's the shared value thing- hard working students reinforcing other hard working students. Like hanging out in high school with some of my white friends, they'd be like, "oh man, that test was so hard, I'm so glad I got a B. I barely studied, I definitely guess well." And my asian friends would be like, "you got a B.... and you're.... okay with that?????" So you hang out with people who've got the same kind of work ethic as you do. So guys and girls of similar backgrounds do get together that way. I have a friend (Chinese) who's got a theory about how you can tell what generation Asian immigrant someone is by how they look and work. He says that by 3rd generation, you're basically white- stupid, fat, and don't work. Anyway, it's definitely a very interesting community dynamic, imho.

Then you either: 1) have not had enough practice in social interaction to be confident in your recognition of cues or 2) your brain is not wired to understand those cues, which is something that professional consultation can clear up for you. And as I said before, you've got to be able to know when these are social cues, flirtatiousness, people being circuitous with their speech (as they often are), or whether they are actually meaning what they said. If you don't know this, see points 1 and 2 above. I can't tell you how to respond, because it depends! You've got to be able to correctly read the situation then. and. there. If you can't, see above. So why would you care? If you don't want to be part of society, if you don't want to be one of the crazies which you insist they are, why do you care?. Unless you do actually care, which I think you do. In which case, see the points above. You are using stereotypes which do not always apply. Sometimes being the good guy is being the strong, yang guy, and being the bad boy is the weak yin. The bad boy, who has got to make fun of others to make himself feel good, to pick on and bully others, compared to the good guy who has such a strong quality that verbal barbs do not phase him, and can handle himself and others confidently, yet with respect. I have said it many times before- when you are yourself, you have to be confident and comfortable in being yourself! if you feel weak, and vulnerable, and defensive, and jumpy, and think people are always out to judge you for everything you do, other people (men AND women) pick up on this, and don't want to hang around you. If you can't even like yourself, why would other people like you? People can sense this subconsciously, and avoid you. I see plenty of guys who I consider to be at a "disadvantage" with plenty of hot chicks. Guys who are short and fat and balding. Guy who are short and skinny. Both of these types of seen out with and/or dating and/or just having fun with really attractive women. I'm like, wow, wonder what's going on here? Then you look at the attitude of the guy she's with- he's bright, outgoing, confident, you meet him and he gives you a strong handshake. Someone makes an attack at him, an underhanded comment about his weight or his hairline or his height, and he just laughs and shrugs it off, and changes the subject to something entertaining and fun that everyone can relate to and join in. Doesn't lose a beat. They are at peace with themselves, who they are, what they look like, and they don't care. People realize this and want to be around them! Someone's who's fun, non-judgmental, and isn't insecure. This is something EVERYONE can do.

Anonymous is cool.