Charm and deception.

Aaron Abke did a video recently on the Law of One. In it he talked about the world situation with positive and negative super powerful entities engaging with each other indirectly via humanity. And said some specific things such as that since we are in Harvest time. We could still harvest as a planet negatively. Depending on how people respond to things such as disclosure. This was the response I put to him (since deleted, as it sat there with zero likes. I do this often if a comment sits on youtube with zero likes):

I felt your video was very well done. It is hard, in my opinion. With the Law of One. To actually understand it. And in order to understand it we often need to go to other things. Read other things to gain more context. I think. I liked how you made very clear that the chess analogy was your own addition. I thought the chicken analogy is good and may use it in the future.

A strict reading of the Law of One though, in my view. Posits that the harvest time already happened. 1981 + 30. 2011. Session 40.8 discusses that there will be a transition period of 100 - 700 years that is "variable on the volatility of your peoples" (not a direct quote). So we could be in a period where the harvest is done and the positive forces are just going through a kind of grand sorting process (A 'wheat and tares' process, so to speak) to transition out the third density. If this were the case we are no longer at risk of going full negative harvest. But are just being kind of "managed" into sanity.

There is another source that I believe is also from the same channel that discusses the birth of what sounds like fourth density entities (mostly deaf, mostly blind, and INCREDIBLY psychic to a level we could not understand! Once they are born they will ignore humanity in general and get on with their own stuff). In around February of 2027.

That all seems a bit off the wall and it is hard to straddle both things. This weird, metaphysical very crazy sounding stuff, with real life and grounded research. But there is precedent for it in the material.

This was the Law of One section I was quoting. At least half of it (The other half being the description of the harvest date as 2011, being "as regularised in its approach as the striking of a clock"):

Questioner: Then what will be the time of transition on this planet from third to fourth density?

Ra: I am Ra. This is difficult to estimate due to the uncharacteristic anomalies of this transition. There are at this space/time nexus beings incarnate which have begun fourth-density work. However, the third-density climate of planetary consciousness is retarding the process. At this particular nexus the possibility/probability vortices indicate somewhere between 100 and 700 of your years as transition period. This cannot be accurate due to the volatility of your peoples at this space/time.

Aaron Abke has ignored me previously. Even when going on the comments on his premiers or lives. To talk about forgiveness without contrition. He has never been challenged on that and is fully behind the pro abuse (in my view), pro perpetrator immunity perspective of forgiveness without contrition. 

These are all very feminine attitudes in my view. The idea of veganism. Forgiveness without contrition. And generally ignoring things that are "bad vibes", even if they are true; and liking all the blankly positive responses to a post. 

Dreams:

My dreams recently are so on point it feels like "cheating" in the great work. I am just being told directly the insights it seems. Since drinking water instead of no caffeine or sugar Pepsi Max. I have had almost nightly dreams where before I was sometimes missing one for several weeks. Often even. I am also earnestly attempting to do all the relevant spiritual things like prayer, meditation, reading the Law of One and interpreting previous dreams. (Working on previous dreams may have free will implications!)

But now dreams are laying out pretty directly relevant and practical insights into my life. I have written my dreams down for years. Since I was about 18 but before July of 2017, when I kept the diaries and the date I have interpreted from. I used to throw those diaries away! But most recently. I have started occasionally doing audio diaries of them. Which I find very useful in that I can immediately drop my interpretations in. 

I said two posts ago that I had had a dream that was so profound, that my perspective had been shifted. That I didn't want to talk about it because it could not be explained. I still do not think it can. But I do want to talk about it because it reflects into the perspective I am bringing in now.

Part of the dream then. Was that I was in a female body thinking (small, pasty, frail, hands!) and feeling as a woman. It was an interesting experience because the sense of anger I felt in this situation. If it can be called that. Was very different to the anger I feel in my waking life. The woman that I was in that dream, but even now don't want to closely associate with. Felt completely justified in acting out her emotion that one would think was anger from the behaviours (hitting things, shouting). But was more like emotional conviction. The anger I feel as a man in my waking life is like a thing that is separate from me. Like carrying a case of lead. Because there is so much of it, and it is so heavy and fierce, that it cannot be part of me too closely. It is connected but it is not "me". Whereas in this dream, it was just an extension of emotional conviction that was part and parcel of me. 

There are two things that I think this dream represents: One, it represents that the Law of One and psychic forces involved. It represents that there are things to consider in the world. Realities. That I am not aware of and will never truly be aware of. Perhaps I will get psychic feeling insights. Specifically, one of the things I was thinking before sleeping this night was about the golden age and theorising, that the reason this shift and mass arrests/ disclosure was taking so long is that it is not enough to have a golden age. The people that caused the damage have to be exposed and punished. I was thinking specifically of a lot of female bureaucratic types. This dream might suggest that there are other things that higher forces consider that might not go along with what I would understand as "accountability". The 'woman' in that dream, was not capable of dealing with a great deal in general. Even tiny movements effecting her reality would very powerfully effect her and put her in constant emotional torment.

The second point, is the negative. That first point is the positive. A Law of One insight. The second is the negative. I talked about how chocolate seems to subtly undermine me but not in a way I can actually properly logically justify. Always in a different, but significant, way. Leading to me not stopping it because I could not justify stopping it. I had it about five days in a row and this time it was a very psychological effect. I was happier but in a very youthful, ungrounded way. I was not able to go to the gym when I would have liked to. 

So this is a more negative thing being highlighted. Since I am not a woman and don't want to be a woman. And even though a female perspective with a lack of condemnation might have some value on its own. I do not want to be that. Perhaps the world will not do the "accountability" thing as I would like to see it done. But the effect of my own perspective, my own output, DOES want to bring accountability to bear. Because I am male. An entire day without chocolate/ caffeine has made me get back to what I was. To masculine thinking. But I am not all the way there yet.

Even in this blog I feel more emotional and chatty in general. It probably won't be until Communion on Sunday that I can fully shake this off. Also, I need to get to the gym. Very often experiences and small lessons like that seem timed to end when I do Communion. I felt specifically last week that Communion had made me spiritual in a masculine way, whereas the energy work I was doing previously seemed to make me spiritual in a feminine way.

The Male Perspective.

To this end this blog post is going to focus on those things more directly. First, just as background as to what I want to say. I want to put forward this video:

Youtube: Akkad Daily: A Guardianista Reflects on the Manosphere: October 16th 2026. Both date it was created and accessed on:

https://youtu.be/VyA_ajzgAAU?si=QbQTGKZe7cmKoZ3P

But this is the actual video I want to focus on. This video could easily get deleted. The woman here is likely to be impulsive in that manner. 

Youtube: Elise Michaels: Update2. Except I'm venting and turn into a soft David Goggins speech half the way through. October 13th 2026: 

https://youtu.be/ddBQiYONySw?si=7nR_dxSiflKzkDHn

I did question halfway through writing this whether I should continue with a modest 625 views on this video. But my blog is also very, very low views. Between 5 - 30, of probably a fundamentally spiritual leaning. But a big part of the point I am making here is that the cuteness, vulnerability and crying is not a reason to back off of critical thought in relation to people. 

So, this woman, is extremely attractive, cute and charming. She has the blond hair and whatnot. I would put her in the upper echelon of looks. 8 or above. She will have gone down a couple of points due to age. But she is very facially attractive in an unusual way. There is something very nourishing in general about this kind of honesty. 

However, this is a very surface thing. I said yesterday in one of my posts that sometimes there is positivity that does not effect us negatively at all. It does not condition us and I used the example of an emotionally defined woman that is a pleasure to be around. I was thinking then of a female friend I used to have. I used to go round her house and it was all just sweet and positive. She was easy to make smile. Vulnerable etc. And when I left I experienced no discomfort from this positive experience.

But this is not always the case in fact, and the female charm can, at times. Seem to only be positive. But actually it is conditioning you. And the way it is conditioning you, is to overlook the negative that is clearly there. I have recently had the insight that certain charming women in my life that I know are emotionally defined. The positivity and pleasure of their company was concealing the fact they were not particularly pleasant or loving. So when they seemed to suddenly go cold a few years later. This was not a sudden change, but the love had never been there.

Very annoying. I was going to talk in general about things I have seen from her videos over the years. I did not follow her seriously but have seen a bit of output sporadically. But I realise I need a certain amount of specificity to deal with this so I will watch the videos more fully to quote this. There is also this second video [here] that I will call the "two months" video when I quote it.

I realise I will have to start out with the "big guns". Because it is a hard sell to state that an attractive blond womans philosophies are flawed. It runs against the 'women are wonderful' effect. I won't build a case with background first. I will go straight to the part that is relevant to a Law of One quote.

I will just state though first. That without the background information I am going to include here. Her case does sound correct. People don't make up, or misperceive claims of abuse right? If she says her comment became abusive. Then they did? Isn't faith in God virtuous? Isn't she following a Christian path of a sort in a valid way?

Two months: 

5:40 And you feel far from God. Because you haven't succeeded, in what you thought was his promise.

 

6:17: I have a different calling in life. I have different dreams in life.

 

6:48: And bases your entire reality on faith and hope, and intuition. And so far, it's never done you wrong.

 

7:26: You feel like you failed. How could it be? How could it be that the promise I thought I was going to have is no more. 

 

15:50: I want to have a good life. I want to be rich. I want the yacht. I want the Mansion. Some people think that's very vapid or vain. Because they value different things. But, for me, it wasn't about having a family because I don't desire responsibility.  

(So that would be she desires honour without responsibility!) 

Update:

6:05: And God will give you that side quest. He will give you that mission. And it does get really hard.

 

7:25: To then what am I doing with my life? Is God still going to give me the promise?

The different things I am going to go into here are that this women has kind of defined herself as on Gods path. But we have not seen any evidence of virtue. She has said specifically that she was never inspired to have a family, and, as quoted, she wants a lot of money.

But is that Gods promise? That he will give you yachts and stuff? 

She also discusses things like wanting to create a new movement where people are not 'abusive' to each other. 

Two months:  

15:00: I think it's time for us to create a new world. I think it's time for us to start a movement.

 

15:45: I want to create a different world. Because I don't want the one where the bad guy wins.

17:00: I don't want people to say these poisonous things to each other. I don't like to hear them. I don't like people to say these mean things. It's poison, we don't need that. We can be the change we wish to see.

More on how movements need to be centered in virtue in a bit. But I suspect this 'abuse' is red pill talking points that are uncomfortable truths. But not necessarily abuse and what is expected with a certain amount of public exposure and honesty. A level of public transparency which I would never expose myself to. Which is why my youtube doesn't have my face on it. And this blog is pretty anonymous. When I drop my human design chart I don't even confide my age. And details of my personal life are not on my blog. I do confide some things such as about my spiritual path and health. But other than that very little is known about me I think. 

Anyway, here is the Law of One quote this brings to mind and why this annoyed me:

Questioner: Can you tell me what the Orion group did in order to try to cause his downfall?

Ra: I am Ra. We may describe in general what occurred. The technique was that of building upon other negatively oriented information. This information had been given by the one whom your peoples called “Yahweh.” This information involved many strictures upon behavior and promised power of the third-density, service-to-self nature. These two types of distortions were impressed upon those already oriented to think these thought-forms.

This eventually led to many challenges of the entity known as Jesus. It eventually led to one, sound vibration complex “Judas,” as you call this entity, who believed that it was doing the appropriate thing in bringing about or forcing upon the one you call Jesus the necessity for bringing in the third-density planetary power distortion of third-density rule over others.

This entity, Judas, felt that, if pushed into a corner, the entity you call Jesus would then be able to see the wisdom of using the power of intelligent infinity in order to rule others. The one you call Judas was mistaken in this estimation of the reaction of the entity, Jesus, whose teach/learning was not oriented towards this distortion. This resulted in the destruction of the bodily complex of the one known as Jesus to you.

I should state clearly here that I do not believe that the pursuing of power is a service to self characteristic. I have complex thoughts on this I am working through, and will likely formalise later. I do believe this might have been an error in llresearch's thinking as reflected in the Crucifixion of Esmerelda Sweetwater. I do not believe wealth and power are service to self. But I do believes the service to self focuses on these things more exclusively. 

But it starts in the first paragraph. Promised power of a third density service to self nature. I would think that would very likely come with Mansions and yachts. 

Onto the next point of this claimed "abuse". I want to note a point here of how people can leave out, or sometimes even not perceive, details, to create a narrative.  

Two months:

10 seconds: After I quit mens coaching. It was really hard. I had been doing mens coaching for six years. On every single platform. Facebook. Youtube. Instagram. Tik Tok. For a million followers across all platforms and I was expecting people to be sad or disappointed. I was not expecting the cruelty.

4:50: And it's very easy to come from a place of high morale when you have never had the opportunity to be corrupt. When you have never been put in between a rock and a hard place. When you've never been challenged in such a way that, it forces you to sell your soul.

8:17: You can't be a mess in the public eye… A million followers across social media is enough to have widespread judgement.

10:50: For a long time. After that experience with the mens coaching and with all those nasty comments and… with all my observations and getting sucked into red pill circles. It's really hard sometimes to remain good. Because you see so much abuse in the system. You see so much negative talk. You get told horrible things.

Digging through my memory is going to be hard because I did not pay attention to this woman a great deal. She said something interesting and is very pretty. So I added her. But soon enough I found out that she markets herself exclusively to very high wealth and status men. I think I watched one or two thinking that I might need to know some things to deal with those same sorts of guys. The traps they get in that makes them resentful and things. But it was not of use to me so I unsubscribed. But she still continued to come up on my instagram and youtube. 

This is a significant point. That she markets or considers herself "above" other people. It is another thing that is not supported by "God" necessarily. It may be. I cannot speak for God obviously. But there is also the possibility that the positive forces just will not have a part in guiding her to see herself as above others, if this does not serve her and the positive forces ultimately. 

It is one of many things that she has omitted that would perhaps limit any sympathy she is to gain when she says that she is in a bad place.  

Like I said, she is feminine and sweet. And when I saw her I did not categorise her as genius guide of men so much as a woman doing predictably woman things. As shown in the red pill. That's where I have learned a lot of things about women from because society itself certainly has no interest in teaching me things I need to know about them. 

There were a few funny videos that were then released. It was like she had reached the end of her tether. One was that she made a video crying that she had gotten into mens coaching desiring high status men. But she realised as she had been into it that career go getter women are not the kind of women those men are looking for. They are looking for house wives. 

Which is very classic red pill. It is a behaviour that annoys men. Women are very insistent that them having a career is desireable to men. It is not. But they won't hear it. Then later on, a few decades and no children in, they realise they were wrong. And this is extremely annoying to men. Because they were telling women this from day one. And the arrogance with which the women declared their girl boss status earlier continues to grate.

Another was a funny one where she said that she does not want to get to know her dates. But wants someone to arrive that is already married to her. It was also funny. But it reflects the mindset of a person that doesn't understand the transaction required. Life does not give you things. You engage in trade by offering value, until, you are very familiar with a person and then, someone can fall ill or something and the balance of the transaction can be one sided. But at the start, in a place of the more shallow relationship. It is almost purely transactional. (Conveniently) not seeing this transactional nature is another female mindset that annoys men.

I wonder with this statement:

6:48: And bases your entire reality on faith and hope, and intuition. And so far, it's never done you wrong.

Is the 'basing her reality on faith and hope'. Basically that men wanted to sleep with her so gave her resources (which with a suitably young and attractive woman they often do, a large amount of resources, without asking for sex!) But now she has aged a bit and is less likely to offer children, that they are no longer interested in doing that?

So all these "cruel" comments. Are they saying things like that high status men don't want a career woman? Are they saying things like you have aged out and can't have children? Harsh, but certainly not abuse. Abuse is statements of violence or that she should be 'intimately violated'. And, it is the internet. I would NEVER expose such an intimate detail of my life. If I did, it would probably have spiritual teaching implications. It would be carefully weighed. For Elise to expect no pushback on a public forum to behaviours that really annoy men. Is just... It is naive and childish. 

This is a big annoyance men have with women. Things that are annoying that they do that are called out. With reference to reality are reframed as "abuse". Maybe it is "abuse". But the term of "abuse" has specific connotations that these expressions are not the same thing as. They are not unjustified negative intentions.  

So what is the way?

Of the people I have really admired in my own life. That would be the llresearch people and Stefan Molyneux. A few others. They tend to produce a whole lot of information for free. They also very strongly provide services to the poor with no hope. The Law of One. Carla Rueckert are the kind of people that start movements like Elise casually mentioned she wanted to create. Serving the rich is not inspiring in that same kind of way. Serving the rich is exactly what it is... Serving the rich. It comes with money. But it does not come with a larger cultural response. Which any Christian should know. 

I also want to address this specifically on my own and others criticism of her.

4:50: And it's very easy to come from a place of high morale when you have never had the opportunity to be corrupt. When you have never been put in between a rock and a hard place. When you've never been challenged in such a way that, it forces you to sell your soul.

Pearl Davis talks about this. That she used to look at women that were getting offered Yacht stays in exchange for intimacy and think and talk against them but one day realised... She never got the offer to go on a yacht. She is not attractive enough and does not know what she would do if she had been born more attractive. Maybe she would be the same?

But OK, let's say that there are people in her comments that have never been tempted to... sell their bodies? Prostitution? No, men do not get that offer as often. But a lot of men who do not get that offer tolerate well the difficulty that those women are rejecting. A lot of women make compromises for money. They don't want to live in a small town with their parents without any money. 

And a lot of men simply live with their parents without any money. The word "force" in this line, is doing a lot of work. And it is creating a subtle hypothetical that I do not know is true. And think is often specifically misrepresented strategically. 

Also, a lot of prostitutes do settle down in the end. And become useful members of society. So the implied lack of virtue isn't necessarily correct either.  

No family. 

The last thing I want to mention here is that she has said specifically that she does not want a family. OK, but back to our transactional model. What are you offering then? The miracle of creating a whole human being with your body. Is it Gods will that a person is given that and rejects it? It is yet another thing that just doesn't really make any sense. 

What it sounds like happened was that she knows she is very attractive. Couldn't get a high status man that she was coaching and doesn't want to settle. Which, OK. Perhaps you would make your husbands and childrens lives miserable by settling or you just can't do it. But the path she is talking about walking now is one in which God has given her things for... some reason. I don't know why. But without any particular humility you want to start a movement. Without providing obvious value you want to gain loads of money and be seen with respect. And preaching the non children lifestyle because she failed to secure the kind of guy she wanted. 

She could, of course, be doing exactly what God wanted her to do. She could be service to others. Carla Rueckert, after all, never had kids. The moral issues I see here could be in error. 

But these are the practical issues I see with her platform. I am using this as an example of how all the charm and sweetness and beauty might just be promoting something that is not particularly useful, and influencing us into its orbit; and it is something to be aware of.  

The perfection including dysfunction as found in the human design. 3rd and Final Part.

So here we are then. 

My incarnation cross:

33.6 Disassociation.

The ability to let go. Exaltation. The will to concentrate on revitalisation and not be handicapped by persistent recriminations. The ability to let go, to enjoy privacy. 

19.6: The Recluse.

The avoidance of contact in general but not exclusively. Exaltation: The avoidance of contact in general but not exclusively. The fool on the hill. The sage that if you can find him, will talk to you. The energy which generally fuels avoidance. Detriment: The sulking child. The self imposed exile that will only end when it attracts appropriate and soothing reaction. Oversensitivity to rejection that fuels avoidance. 

2.2 Genius

Unconscious and unlearnable alignment of stimulus and response. The natural. Exaltation: The inner strength to focus and realise. A natural gift for unlearnable knowing. Detriment. Genius as madness. Knowledge exclusively for power for the enhancement of the ego. The delusion that knowledge is power. 

1.2 Love is light.

Exaltation; Venus exalted as a symbol of beauty. The required harmony between established values and ideals that enriches inspiration. Self expression conditioned by ideals and values. Detriment: Desires and passions have their place but not at the expense of creation. Self expression limited by desires and passions.

1.2 is the only one that is not a blue line. I did not include the detriment on 33.6 because I have it in exaltation. 19.6, even from Ra Uru Hu's explanation as far as I understand it. Is not massively different between the exaltation and detriment. 

I have shown my chart a lot of times recently (a cropped version without planetary placements!) I am also referencing the experiences that I talked about in a blog four posts ago now. Where I talked about Master and Slave morality and reflecting on those. But to do so I used a lot of my personal experience to draw off. To say, this is the substance I am working with and this is how it is seen through Master and Slave morality. I will come back to Master and Slave morality in this blog. 

Back to the 51-25 and defined G Self. 

The post describes bullying and difficulty communicating with women. It also references things like social ostracism. 

In my view. You can see this very easily in my chart. But I think the way it flows could use more explanation.

Firstly, as I stated, I have the gate 51.1 in detriment. This means that I am able to absorb a certain amount of trauma. At least this was how Ra Uru Hu described it having his conscious moon there. The trauma I experience is from my medical condition, and then from that, from that and other weaknesses I have; I then get bad social experiences. Like social ostracism and other types of bullying (kind of sexual in at least one instance), that then also become part of the 51.1.

This, combined with my incarnation cross and chart in general. Means that I start becoming more spiritual. This kind of catalyst is how I found the Law of One in the first place. If young me had gotten a girlfriend I was happy with, around 14-15, and a larger social group. Then I may never have looked at the Law of One. Never have found David Wilcock. 

This creates a difficulty with the collective. Namely, I come to conclusions that are not part of the hive mind or as the human design would call it, "the homogenised viewpoint". Things to do with politics/ conspiracy or just things I have experienced. My belief that I am protected via spirituality (so a lack of fear). My interest in spirituality itself. My general intellectualised takes that annoy (and perhaps diminishes) people that haven't thought about things that much. My bad habits as a side effect of my medical condition etc. 

I have a full channel from the gate 51. So the gate 51 travels to the gate 25 and then, it defines the G- self. Which means that, through this specific wisdom, through this flow and connection of two parts of myself. I then become sure of my identity. The channel comes first before the definition in my understanding. Technically, even though it is perhaps unneccessarily precise. I wonder if a centre defined through a different channel is kind of a difference centre. So my 51-25 is a different defined G as a person with the 14-2.

So, we have a defined G, and a defined G without a route to the throat. Meaning it is projected, or as I prefer to call it. It is an 'information centre' so it is binded by free will. When something is binded by free will the second someone doesn't particularly like you and wishes to minimise you. It loses its voice. It is not an energy centre to the throat which can express itself regardless. This is, in my view, part of the mechanic why love is so important. 

But a point I am trying to get to, through all the tangents I evidently keep going on. Is that, I do not believe that once we have a defined centre it is perfect. The defined centre motivates us to improve it through increased knowledge and experience. So my G- Self, as it was, needed further tuning. The "you have wisdom that traumatises others from the gate 51-25 so now you are socially ostracised", is not the end of the process. Now, we have an entire defined centre. So what do we do with it?

It is very much a 'chicken and the egg problem'. What came first, the spirituality and individual viewpoints? Or the social ostracism that these relate to and often seem to be motivated by? But in real life, a lot of these things happen concurrently. Or at least, we are not capable of going back to our childhoods to identify cause and effect that precisely. 

Anyway. This is Stefan Molyneux. He has a G- self which feeds from the Sacral and into the throat. So it is effectively one that can still continue to operate if people try to shut it down. It seems to me strongly that his 14-2 channel reflects his "capitalist" leaning. Although I don't see capitalism as a thing, as though socialism was its equal. I see "capitalism" as simply the way things are when they are not interfered with by malevolence. Capitalism is just trade. But my point is the right leaning element of his platform can be seen here. 

Anyway, unwell and socially ostracised me then finds someone like Stefan Molyneux. A lot of his philosophy is G- self based (As is every point on his incarnation cross). Then, this is used to tune my existing G- Self. Which then further enforces the social ostracism of the original experiences. All that I learned from Stefan Molyneux as well, still has the 51-25 within it. 

Bringing it together. 

So, here's much chart, without planets:

 

I noted my incarnation cross because it is relevant I think. The gate 19.6 is indeed very sensitive and it experiences in the life, the themes of approach and rejection. You might say that with this chart, whether or not I approach a girl (or job or whatever) is likely to become a theme. The office bullying I described was very much hammering on that gate 19. And the experiences I have had being rejected for jobs for years on end would not help it either. It is on an undefined centre. So it is not strongly held or pathologically energised/ angry. But it is there, and, to my mind, with a broken economy and DEI. It is not receiving a lot of "good" catalyst.

It is the only hexagram within my incarnation cross on an undefined centre though. I tend to think, casually, as a hypothesis; that undefined centres are handed over to the world in general. They are not specifically bad. They are conditioned negatively in our world because our world is kind of negative. If we were in a more positive world. The conditioning would be positive, and not an issue.  

If I meet an emotionally defined woman that is just a joy to be around. It effectively provides positive catalyst to that open solar plexus.  

So, in a more positive world that gate 19 and the 'approach' would be felt more positively by me. Rather than simply as more justification to withdraw. 

The gates in my own chart are not the only ones that discuss solitude as a positive either!

But where we have gone here goes back to master and slave morality. As my chart sits, the bad experiences get handled by philosophy. At what point should moral violations be let go of? At what point should revenge be taken and what form should that take? What principles do bad experiences help us to understand. This centre is also, obviously, a potential aspect in my own song writing. Where my own chart invites the information out via the 21-45.

I hope this is not too complicated! 

But the master morality way of handling things. The way I would handle them when I have prayed, eaten properly, journalled and whatever else. is the 21-45. It is meant to be the first way of handling things. And it is far, far more ruthless than anything coming out of the 51-25. But expressed through wisdom. Expressed through what is the relevance of transactional thinking in relationships. And other similar principles. the 21-45 is about providing value and gaining power through that. 

Anyway, hope that all made sense and added to peoples understanding of the human design.  

Break. Mysticism and decision making.

I am breaking off today from the article set I was writing. To talk about something that is of metaphysical/ spiritual interest I think. 

Today, I am suddenly tired in a weird way. A non physical way. I can't think clearly. Which is unusual for me. It is also why I did not jump into that other set of articles. Which are highly technical. 

I have had a dream. An extremely profound dream. I will not describe what the dream was actually about because... You wouldn't believe me. Or, even if a person did. The actual profundity of it could not be explained. I will say, it was inhabiting the "being" of a person that wasn't me; and was a set of emotions that is unfamiliar to me. Which is very "Law of One" adjacent. - The dream had direct and profound implications for ideas I have had. Implications that completely change some of them, or the foundation of new ideas being formed. 

But also, the way I am at the moment is... subtle. But unmistakeable. I do not feel right and I have been eating chocolate. Which often, does not make me feel right. 

Decision making.

The problem I am having with chocolate is. I cannot, through a logical decision making process. Through an objective one. Justify not having it. What do I mean by that. The last time I ate avocado I literally threw up. I suddenly became allergic to avocado as sometimes happens with allergies. I am celiac. I eat wheat and I get quite dizzy and sick. I stopped alcohol for 10 years, when my father, a severe alcoholic, died with a lot of complications. I also realised I was losing entire days with hangovers. 

It's easy to stop something when there is a practical reason like that. Even with the alcohol. Which there wasn't a prohibitive problem. I had a direct, logical reason for why I stopped the thing.

With chocolate. It is not the same. Chocolate and stopping or severely reducing it. (To almost nothing). The only way I can justify doing this is via a kind of "mystical" process. But, for me, I do like to try and follow a logical thought process. Philosophy, first principles and such, is the stuff I admire. 

Each time I have eaten chocolate. The problem associated with that has seemed to be specific to that time. The first issue I had with it was that when I was eating large amounts to solve constipation, I got fat. But once I got proper medication. I could massively reduce the amount I was having so I wouldn't gain weight. Then I got diarrhoea from it. Then I had chocolate before a workout and overdid the workout and strained myself for two weeks. So I just, stopped having it with workouts. Now, right now, it is even vaguer. I just don't feel right. I feel sleepy. I feel "feminine" and ungrounded. I badly want to get back to the state of not having had it. 

There was another issue here and there. Another issue which doesn't seem important or can be easily handled. Each time I have had chocolate there is a different, and apparently, easy to handle problem. But reliably, there is a problem each time, and it is one that messes up my life to an extent of making me have to miss a few workouts or another, very temporary, but very important to me, issue. 

Faith in mysticism.

I am not a fan of making decisions due to signs and wonders. This subtle subconscious whatever is NOT the same as seeing 3:33 on the clock and changing your life because of it. It is potentially legitimate to say your subconscious does not like a substance. 

But, I do not want any more of these very slightly negative "side effects". It seems to me a practical step to eliminate this substance that just seems to be "cursed" from my perspective. 

I may have it, like I said, very, very infrequently. It may be a thing I only have with others as a treat. Since I do not want to justify another way that I am "weird". I have simply had my fill of being the outcast. But despite not having a logical, practical, objective justification like I would like to have. It seems to me I do have to follow where this more 'mystical' thought process has lead.  

The perfection including dysfunction as found in the human design. (Part 2).

So, following on from my last blog post. I will continue just generally talking about human design lines that I think show potentially dysfunctional themes. But, in the end, are still perfect. None of these will be from my own chart.

We intimately know our own charts. It is something that I think we can speak with the most authority on. So consider these next points more in the line of a "fictional character". Like, I can make observations on peoples lives and think through human design lines logically. But I will not have the depth of understanding as I do with a line of my own as I have seen it go through my own chart (assuming I am correct on my own chart!)

13.2:

Bigotry: The risk, always present, that fellowship can only exist for a patricular type, whether racial, religious, national or intellectual.Exaltation: Tolerance as the least offensive manifestation of bigotry. A role of openness through tolerance. Detriment: The obsessive belief that the highest ideals cannot be embraced by the lowest forms. An extremely difficult position, where even the highest ideals provide rationalisation for hatred. A role of openness so narrow that there is practically no one worth listening to. 

So, this line is to do with, I would say. Someone that is destined, through their very chart. To be politically concerned. This seems to me... counterintuitive. But I have a friend with this line who has sent me messages that he did not like I was bringing up right wing points. "Bigotry" is when someone simply believes they're right. They simply are right because they exist. Bigotry in the promotion of moderation though? It is simply a pathological belief that nothing outside the centre of politics should exist.

Like I say. An actual line in a chart that involves someone with political concerns is almost outside my imagination. I imagine them as only using the exaltation; but, to be technically correct they do not have it specifically in exaltation or detriment. It is almost like a line you would expect for someone that lives in a very political environment (my town is highly political). But who has designed a life where they want to be able to get on with a lot of people. They insist that the centre ground, where people can meet, is the only thing that is legitimate. Because if they did not have "bigotry" for that centre ground. Someone else would muscle in on taking the centre stage. Of sharing their own political vision. 

22.2:

Charm School: The belief that style can mask nature: Exaltation: The ability to successfully delude oneself and others. 

David Wilcock, in his conscious Sun! 

Hidden in Plain Sight did the most beautiful tribute to David. I really want to download that video. But I do not have X premium. It was not put on youtube likely because the copyright laws are too stringent. Anyway, if you search on X "@thehiddenpod tribute" you will find it. (Every single time, no matter how many times I see it, and hence, how much I am expecting it; David saying "As a cis gendered, heterosexual male" in his pink shirt cracks me up!)

But yeah, David is a case where it went badly wrong. We can be sure that his life did not work out well according to his true self. But this was his path. Even though he was what he was. He was a crazy person who talked about crazy and (mostly) incorrect things, and really believed them. We can see from this line that he was somehow meant to be that.

It is likely this line was meant to work out better and things were never meant to get so bad that he killed himself. But with this line we can see the basic structure of his life. With the incorrectness included. Is contained in his chart. 

37.5:

Love: Natural and unaffected devotion to the family. Natural Harmony and Perfect Sharing. natural harmony and sharing possible through friendship. Detriment: Emotional dependency that often turns love into hatred. The possibility of dependency turning love into hatred. 

This was talked about in the video in the first part. A line which is literally about "love". The person in my life, or that was in my life, with this line has both the detriment and exaltation. But the exaltation is not interesting. There is no mystery as to how that can fit into a well planned Godly life. The detriment though we can creatively talk about. 

I realise I have to couch a lot of this conversation in terms of 'past life planning' and higher self kind of stuff. I had planned in the intro to mention that. To say that the Law of One passages that talk about that I am taking on faith for this blog. I did not put that in the intro but I am just saying that here. 

But lets imagine... Women. And we will imagine Carla Rueckert. The Law of One states that most of us are here learning lessons (arguably that might not be the case if someone is harvestable to their following density, but it might still be. Carla being sixth density was not there yet I don't think).

Since we know that Carla, the channel for the Law of One. Had got most stuff right. Not everything. But a lot of things. What might we consider is Carla's next place to go in her study of the Law of One?

Well, I recall Carla had a very strong belief in the primacy of women and the female perspective. A perspective that llresearch has continued with and that many modern spiritual places do hold. One example of this is that I recall Carla saying that when women put on revealing clothes. This was only to relate to their friends and she disliked men saying otherwise. She was also proudly left wing. Remarking once that her town had bucked her states (Texas') right wing tide. 

In the current world. If Carla were to have been born again. If a lot of blissed out loving creatures in the ether were to incarnate. I would say, that the temptation to see women and loving tendencies as more the Creator than men would be extremely powerful.

Our modern world has provided the environment to teach this lesson. The primacy of the female and loving perspective in a way that was pushed back on several times in the Law of One material itself. 

I would imagine that this line would provide a great deal of teaching in this area. A woman, desired by the world. Where many people desire to 'possess' her has many choices as to who she will love and who she will not. With this line, that particular issue becomes very energised. It becomes obvious whom she does not love. And she does have to use the option of rejecting love in some circumstances. 

My super cerebral chart. Outside some obvious people. In general, it is not strongly understood how I feel about people. (I have no hexagrams on the solar plexus). When I do explain things. It comes with a highly measured, philosophical bent. One that most people probably wouldn't guess at.

Gate 37 is on the emotional centre. It does not follow the practised logic of many of the other centres. 

So if a person were to have that catalyst. And a woman. Then it would provide the catalyst of having their inner viewpoints. Deeply held ones. Like that the female perspective is more prized by the Creator than the male perspective. This would manifest in the world and would receive pushback. It would potentially receive consequence. So then that's when that deeply held belief could be evaluated. 

Imagine the power of a powerful consequence arriving in life from these thoughts and behaviours! Like being strategically challenged over the long term by an intelligent person in the real world. Imagine how difficult it would be to challenge this incredibly subtle emotional preference in a higher density! Where everyone is blissed out and the idea of rejecting love to learn a lesson is the most unthinkable heresy, or a concept that cannot be articulated. Cannot be thought at all. 

I imagine this is a fairly strong lesson in the world today.  

Conclusion.

I do have other interesting lines. Line 18.5. Line 47.6. But I think that is enough for now. I am not sure if I will write another post with interesting lines or if I will talk a bit more about my own chart and finish this small series.

For me, one of the overall points I am trying to make though is that these hexagrams, these parts of the human design, they show that the difficulties we have with others are sometimes part of Gods plan. There are even more outrageous hexagrams in the human design. There is a hexagram where a person never takes responsibility and always blames others (4.5).

Where this brings us to real spiritual evolution. I believe. Is that to accept these things. Acceptance is hugely important. It is one of the most important things for the service to others in the Law of One. To see something as dysfunctional as some of these things and to understand its place. To not rail against it. Well, that is a positive I believe! 

Just a small note. This was not intentional. But we can see quite a clear delineation here with Power, in the 13.2. Wisdom in the 22.2. And Love, in the 37.5. 

The perfection including dysfunction as found in the human design. (Part 1).

My last blog was kind of intense. It felt like it gave me a kind of grounding to acknowledge everything that was said in that post. I will address it at the end of this blog;

This is todays video:

Youtube: Dharma Science Radio: Bearing My Cross - Healthy Masculinity Through Human Design: 13th of January 2025:

https://youtu.be/356wKlFJKg4?si=mhd1HGvd_2wtQWTR

I might need to go back over this video. Even though I have listened to the entire thing. And not posted here until I had done so. I cannot massively recall everything said. The wisdom of the human design is not drawn together into a central structure always. You are not fed the macro picture and meaning like you are in philosophy (something I am really enjoying recently!) A lot of it is 'this is all this profound information on the nature and minutea of what is'. Now go put it together.

But Human Design doesn't like you using the mind too much. So put it together without using your mind! That's a joke. (But told by whom?)

I do recall though, probably everything I need. The video starts off with him reading his own chart and talks about how he experiences his not self. The undefined centres in a chart really get played by the world a bit when the person does not have their awareness. This is interesting to perhaps later understand my own undefined centres. 

As I have said before. I do not completely connect with the idea of the not self. I prefer to look at the chart as to how this or that problem plays it. The not self is "too vague". But maybe some value can be extracted from it. 

Anyway, a thing that comes up again and again when he is talking about the chart is all the lines where something is shown as less than ideal if you read it out. But once it plays out in the life it makes absolute, total sense. 

Human Design Profundity.

For me, this is a really profound part of the human design. It is one of the more profound facts I know about anything. Because so many of these lines explain things that I have so many problems with. Some of these lines are... tragic. 

I still do believe there is something that 'goes wrong' in charts that you can see sometimes - which I have only seen in the most dysfunctional people. This is when you can see a pattern kind of planned by the universe that didn't happen. But there is unquestionably a side that feels nasty, dysfunctional or confusing sometimes. Something that contradicts how you think the world should work. And it is RIGHT THERE in the chart. 

I will explain a few of those lines in my own chart. Then I will go into a few that I have observed in the world. Then I will go into a part of my chart that might have related to that previous blog post. 

Three right facing arrows in my chart. 

Anyway, 

Gate 21.2 (exaltation): 

Might is right: The legitimacy of action in response to flagrant and persistent interference. Powerful and extreme reaction. Here, the severest action will be the most successful. The legitimate rejection of interference on the material plane. 

Backed up also by 7.1 

This makes me sound like a really hard person willing to walk over other people. Maybe that's true in a sense, I do not know. As I have not had the opportunity to express that part of myself. I haven't been given "political power", so to speak. But the way it manifests with me in my estimation is that I push to create music. When you create music. It is very anti politically correct. Because you don't have that much control over what comes out. "I have the right to resent you" was one of my recent songs. And in the past, they have been very dark. 

Sometimes though, they are not dark. But you think they will be dark before you write them. Sometimes they have creepy ancient metaphors in them, towers and demonic priests. But like I said, sometimes they are just horrible. Saying exactly all the angry (but true and justified) feelings you feel and in order to make music. This line I feel, allows me to push into that. It allows me to push into music creation where denying this, suppressing it in any way. Would just completely stop the music at all. 

Gate 45.4 (detriment)

Direction: The tendency to try to influence the direction of a group for personal benefit. The lack of expression of higher principles on the material plane. 

Also I think, linked strongly with 4.1. (Which is a kind of skeptical thinking)

This, doesn't completely sound like me does it? But also, in some other way, it sounds very like me. My blog is very spiritual. It does not sound like I am lacking higher principles. But at the same time. There is definitely a side of me that does that. There is a very grounded element that is kind of skeptical and selfish.

This is perhaps because there are two channels into the throat. The 11-56 IS very spiritual. This is probably where all the Law of One, and a good part of the Human Design stuff is happening. The 21-45, here focusing on the 45 is carrying a different message. 

It combines with the 4.1. to create a focus on the real world. In a very practical and economic/ political and philosophical kind of way (as in philosophy like Ayn Rand that leans right). Here, there is no expression of the ego wanting to help the other in any way. It is about having clarity in how to deal with the world and others and recognising it as a selfish place often. It brings a level of reality to an otherwise very cerebral chart. 

Gate 51.1 (detriment, twice):

Reference: The advantage of previous crisis experience. A tendency to withdraw after a shock. The weakness of the ego in times of challenge.

One of these is my unconscious Venus, the other is unconscious Jupiter. 

This is at the point where I decide this is part 1. All the other things I wanted to say are going to go into additional articles. I am exhausted.  

Venus tends to be how we experience relationships with others. So people generally experience this from me. Jupiter is kind of like a spiritual message. Although, there is less of a "spiritual" element to the body/ unconscious/ red part of the design. 

What could possibly be good about this? A position that traumatises a person. 

Well, Ra Uru Hu had a lot of positive things to say about this line. For me, I would say it is not so much about the line. But it's position on my chart. 

The energy flow in my chart starts at the 44, moves to the 26. This is about getting background information into how humanity operates. Since these are outer planets. It is all incredibly deep and only ever semi conscious. 

From that base. There is the way I face the world. The 21-45. The manifestor part and what people see when I am in a good place and they are "impacted" by me. The moving of a pure energy into the world that 'orders' things. And that the world resists.

But there is also the Projector part (because the G- self doesn't have a route to the throat). That starts from the gate 51.1. This carries, pretty much every time I have been socially ostracised or bullied in some other way. It carries my interaction with groups (Jupiter). It has become a basis for what the G- self then experiences. 

Everyone who doesn't want to hear the truth of the 51.1 as expressed from the 25.6. Will inevitably ostracise the person with the channel. And we will see where this gets them long term.  

All of the Philosophy I have gained. All of the Law of One stuff that is heart chakra based. Is included in the G- self. The philosophy that among other concepts. Relies on Universalism. Which is a big part of the G- self.  

The G Self is generally a soft and positive centre. But the 21-45 is not such a nice feel. It sets up the chart potentially, of someone that can understand and express in pretty harsh terms the nature of a transactional relationship. But runs all of these kinds of interactions past a strong set of values that are only ever understood if they are known as a person. 

Conclusion for part 1.

This blog post has started to take on a life of its own so I will reign it in for the moment. I do intend to continue focusing on the idea that someone has a line that sounds generally crazy but that this all comes together with the amazingness of life as it is.

Reflections on Master and Slave Morality.

I have found that Nietzsche's ideas of master and slave morality, and resentment. Have been extremely useful in my life. Suddenly these are powerfully useful. 

Perhaps, but not definitely. Because Nietzsche's chart and my chart interacts with illness in the same way. With problems in the body, the lower chakras are effectively switched off, and the defined Ajna goes into overdrive. Making the person into a kind of makeshift projector. Who experiences a desire to want their knowledge to be valued and to gain power that way. But without the spiritual connection of a real Projector. Who receives an invitation and doesn't have pure energy centres into the throat, or a defined sacral, getting in the way of their information processing.

The 'makeshift projector'. The needs of the Projector without the circuitry; I hypothesize leads to a kind of powerless resentment.  

I am actually reading Nietzsche's work itself. I am never fully convinced a retelling of a persons philosophies is definitely accurate. I remember reading Adam Smith (the original 'free market' thinker) and Karl Marx originals in University and the passages I read seemed to diverge wildly from their reputations. Adam Smith was talking about quite strong regulations he would like to put in against banks. Even though what is said about philosophers work has been poured over by very intelligent people. There is a lot I can get from their actual writings. I hope to get through Nietzsche, Simone Weil and Kierkegaard. That is just the start. 

Resentment.

This is my chart. This is relevant to the theme of 'resentment' because the "cure" for that for me seems to partly be the 21-45.

The catalyst I sometimes face, one that annoys me and one that I do not get when I pray (I think this is important and I do assign this catalyst to a temptation or negative place). One that just sucks the life out of me is women in some fashion. A few weeks ago it was a very married looking blonde with massive cans that seemed to want to talk. And today, it was a younger girl, although I did not see her face, who sat right close to me and then when the 'event' we were at ended just walked away quickly. Not giving me the opportunity to so much as smile at her.  

With the lack of attractive women and sexual opportunities in my life. With the utter uphill battle this would be if I were to ever pursue this seriously. (Need to lose weight and a lot more, I would need, in truth, pretty astounding good luck!) These are really uncomfortable experiences. Men are designed to orbit women in a way. Every bit of energy a man puts into self improvement, the muscles are to protect woemn and look attractive to women. This is why mens self help doesn't include so many statements of self worth. Because women are to judge that, and they do so very arbitrarily. Men orbit women, put them 'in the kitchen' so to speak. Look after them and women orbit the children they have. Even though that is not precisely how it always goes in the modern world. That is a big part of how we are evolutionarily adapted to relate. 

I have a difficult past in this area. A fertile opportunity to 'resentment'. As a lot of people apparently do. The problem with having any kind of difficulty with women as a guy is that women are an untouchable class that cannot be criticised (outside of the manosphere of course). Out of five of my main jobs. Two of those I was viciously and deliberately socially excluded by women. To the extent that every other person at the place socialised and I was exclusively not invited - for years on end in both cases. The remaining jobs were... three, "all male" (my favourite job, even though it was low status). Four, immigrants, where I didn't talk to anyone because people barely knew English (I also liked this one, for about half the time I was there). And lastly, a very female environment where management didn't like me. So the same kind of thing in reference to exclusion, I was deliberately treated worse than everyone else there in proveable and obvious ways, but the women on the ground floor didn't have anything against me. 

Outside of that is not much better. In my regular life. Not much better. No female friendships. I did have one that killed herself (a few months after our friendship ended. It would not look good if this had been during our friendship!) Most women in my personal life that I could have potentially socialised with have responded with condescension and made very clear that this was not something they wanted. 

I have also, practically, aged out of where these social situations are likely and that I have the energy for them. The women at one of the jobs where I was socially excluded the worst, with deliberate cruelty, will never get any particular consequence for how they behaved towards me. 

There is a strong 'diffusion of responsibility' as to how women behave. A single instance of crappy behaviour is often... Quite understandable. Not even crappy by strict definitions. The girl I saw today that moved on and didn't want to talk to me. Is completely her right. There is nothing really off about that. But add these things up over a long period of time and it starts to feel like some sort of response is necessary. Or even if it is not possible due to a position of powerlessness. I have no power to respond to these women. It is worth noting, just simply to validate my own emotions. That to be able to respond would be positive. 

A woman not responding to a personal message on its own is not a big deal. But when you add it to a long list it becomes generalised. For instance, in the below tweet. This seems like a reasonable reaction to circumstance, correct? But the subtext here is that if a man is in a position of low status. And lower status men are obviously less likely to have girlfriends than high status men (and she would relate to a man who was in her friendgroup due to being one of her girlfriends boyfriends! Or a high status boss she had to relate to.) So in practice, this means that her, and the women she discusses it as being a universal principle. Have a more negative attitude, and one that is carried out in the real world, towards men of low status.  

Which we know from experience. But even pointing this obvious thing out gets people upset. 

I also, as a general principle. Do not owe women anything collectively if they have not given me anything collectively (including respect). This is not so important for me because as someone that has a chronic health condition, it is unlikely I would be well enough to defend a woman if she was targeted to be beaten or raped. But I can understand how other men do not have that responsibility either. 

Ah, I am quite proud of this chain of reasoning. It is a difficult thing to articulate often!  

Slave morality.

This, what I have said, is what I have to work with. This is my past experience with women. The raw material I have to draw conclusions from. I do have a very positive relationship with my mother though, and that is arguably a more important relationship than any I have just referenced. 

I mentioned previously how the worst sides of myself seem to be drawn out by doing energy work on myself. There is nothing good about this. I wrote down in my journal when the feeling was fresh a huge amount of things that showed how everything was going wrong. I could write an article with this information and with any connected research at a later date. These are the signs when someone is on or off their spiritual path. 

One thing I noticed is that I was able to carry out the appearance of doing the things I normally do. But without the attendance usefulness. An example. I started reading philosophy a bit more in this energy healing time. But I actually USE philosophy way more when I am my real self. I have found that thinking isn't really exclusively cerebral. The reason I am motivated to write this blog is a feeling. I feel passionate and powerful relevance to Nietzsche's concept of Master and Slave morality. The impulse to work out if his ideas on life constituted a "meaning of life" as he, and other philosophers, say it does. 

The reading of philosophy detached from that is just an "isn't this interesting", and I suppose "aren't I clever for knowing this?" 

A similar thing went for music. In the 'slave morality' frame of the energy work. I was thinking a lot about writing fiction stories and when I played, it was coming together almost like classical guitar. But once I was into my 'real self'. I feel passionately engaged with music and have no instinct to play less then presently. I was back to scales and loving blues music. The previous classical music kind of meandering was quickly gone. 

The resentments of the above though, is why I mentioned, in this article about Nietzsche's views. All of that on women. The experience earlier today, though it was short lived. Pushed me straight into "slave morality" and the anger at feeling low status and having women... make that case... subtly of course; and with endless plausible deniability. 

This is all completely real information. These are legitimate grievances, built on a solid foundation of reasoning as stated. But they still completely disappear in a more healthy state.

Master Morality.

I don't know whether I really like a term as 'Grandiose' as 'Master Morality'. But there is a clear opposition to that slave morality mindset. That is what I am talking about here. 

The other day, when flipping out of the feeling from the energy work. During the energy work or 'slave morality' mindset. I had made a long, very sensitive comment on a human design youtube video. It was to a guy actually. This had clear 'Makeshift Projector' energy to it. I reasoned out why his video was good and added some of my own insights onto his chart. I also felt generally annoyed that I probably wasn't going to get a response. 

But then when I slipped into my 'real self'. Stopped the energy work and did more exercise. I could not believe that I had bothered with something so irrelevant. I deleted the comment. I was no longer interested in it, and I would no longer say what I had said. The comment was 'alien' to me in a sense. I would not comment on his chart. That is obviously not a good thing to do and not something I care about. If he has his own answer as to why something is. It is his own answer. 

In the 'Makeshift Projector' place, I get upset with so called bad treatment and hope I can get back at everyone somehow. In my real state, or my master morality. There is nothing I care about less. I simply do not care about these people. I feel great about the gym, the Law of One and other things, and that's all I need. 

It is an irony. That in order for me to not be petty. In order for me to NOT care about revenge. I have to be far MORE ruthless, not less. 

The process after having the girl sit next to me from earlier was as follows. I went home and tried to reason myself out of it. Mildly effective. I read the Law of One. Massively effective. I prayed, and I consider that catalyst a good one to make sure I am praying in the morning and not running into those sorts of women. 

And finally, after the prayer. I wondered if I could take any of these emotions and make great music out of them. Like plugging lyrics into this kind of song:

Youtube: Red Grey Matter: Eva Carboni: July 6th 2019:

https://youtu.be/BBP0B0hVXUk?si=uUEwG5jnCKMJnBho

An interesting point. The singer this channel is aggressively promoting at the moment. Is AI! Had me fooled for a while!

You can imagine a good song being able to be made out of these kinds of emotions. All of that longing and such.

Anyway, that's all I've got for the moment! 

Gen Z, societal change.

Todays video: Psychology with Dr Ana: Does Gen Z have a puritanical problem?: Video created on: October 7th 2026:

https://youtu.be/UguB2U7EHdo?si=RjsK5k2p3mAkzsqx

I also want to talk about this general theme. It is important I think. I do believe in a Q narrative. I do believe that the world we are told exists in the Law of One, the one with Extra terrestrials and a bunch of other stuff. Does exist. 

This... changes things a little bit. Socially and philosophically. My idea of what the future is going to be impacts on my philosophy and because I do believe what I do. In the event of a Q narrative I DO believe people who have behaved a certain way all their life will suddenly change. I do believe that events can bring down pressure that is strong enough to completely change how people relate to the world. 

Real world thoughts:

So on that video from Dr Ana. I think this is a very important thing to realise in order to "keep your ear to the ground" in a sense. 

Gen Z are far more puritanical than previous generations. There are many, many things that I think might influence this. I think it is worth reflecting on the experience of these younger generations because me, as an mid to older millennial. Really stopped thinking about how people construct the world after I left that period in my life. But it is an important thing to know. I had never really considered how things like social media might effect youngsters now:

Based on what Dr Ana has said. That Gen Z are more puritanical. She specifically related this to "woke" culture. But it seems to me it would be on both sides. Gen Z women are trending hard left and Gen Z men are trending hard right. Gen Z, in general, are not drinking alcohol. Both sides in general are puritanical. Since liberals have the woke era and Communist style thought policing. Young men have Conservative attitudes.  

These are some of the reasons I think this could be. This is not going to be specifically to puritanism. Although it will focus on it. It will also be to the general issues the generation faces.

A) The introduction of politics to a generation far too young.

In the UK, in 2016. Brexit in the UK, and Trump in the US, was advertised. Pushed by the left primarily. Onto very young people. This was about my introduction to real politics. I had already done most of a politics degree. But had still not engaged in it seriously. Perhaps because my psychology didn't lend itself to leftist indoctrination the University professors were trying to push. 

it is a cold thing politics. Any real exploration of it is the study of clandestined creepy groups and all sorts of criminal things. it is the study of manipulation and how many innocent people can be manipulated. It is the study of utter focus on power and utter selfishness. 

I spent my college years blissfully unaware of politics. But at that age. I did have the fanaticism that comes with an undeveloped moral world view. One that has not experience or detachment and thinks everything is super important. One that considers its view correct because it cannot perceive the virtue outside of it often. 

For me, I think that being engaged with politics, and all its poison. Would have seriously messed up my life. But nowadays, Gen Z, many of which were born in the 2000's. Making them 16 when these events happened. They have been radicalised. 

B) The introduction of social media:

Ana mentioned this in her video. When I was young, there was a lot of freedom. There was a lot of excitement and if you went out clubbing. You danced. We did not have smartphones. Facebook really started up when I was perhaps 17.

Gen Z have had the camera on them all of their lives thus far. As young as 10 pretty much everything has been captured. The constant fear creates a communist esque perfectionism most likely.

C) The 2008 crash. 

I used to ask people a lot what their plans were in life. Their ambitions. I often got good responses from this. People were always excited about something and appreciated being asked. But a few years after 2008 (Like, roughly 2010 when women and men are recorded as politically diverging wildly). I noticed peoples ambitions had been crushed and the question brought up sullen resistance, so I stopped asking. 

D) The rampant discrimination of the left and its effect on masculinity.

One of the things that I am convinced makes life worth living is masculine passion. Women like it as well. They may say they do not and that this or that man is "arrogant" or whatever. But they are excited with it. It is also how innovation happens and how a society moves forward technologically.

For a long time now, and the left, having really won this part of the culture war. The left have been waging a war on masculinity. Everything is 'toxic'. There was 'metoo'. And there is diversity hiring making sure white man cannot get jobs. 

This has a chilling and long term sociological effect. Men do not fantasize about having a better life. Those fantasies do not involve women (who are often so feminist and resentful they would seem to not want to be involved anyway). So obviously this can lead to a chilling and puritanism. 

Also because, the millennials, in a sense. Learned from their Boomer parents. The joys of taking life easy. This was kind of a wisdom that was not shared since they had not status with which to bring Gen Z along with them! 

E) The degeneracy of millennials.

Millennials. Are really quite intense. There really is a lot of drugs going around. I remember a woman telling me she had never gone for a night out and not been offered cocaine. Weed, and way, way stronger things, are huge. I have heard of the most debauched parties. I have also heard Gen Z people reflect this attitude to me. Notably with the vaccine they found it hypocritical for Millennials say that they did not want to put one in their body when Gen Z don't believe Millennials are that discriminating in other parts of their lives.

F) The weirdness of Gen X.

There is a lot of stuff said about Boomers. I have mostly seen the positive side of Boomers to be fair. There is a certain ability to be able to handle life if you have a good grip on hedonism. I have found Gen X to be neurotic and Nihilistic (When I see them on X, they are always showing off about their Nihilism!). I haven't engaged with them a lot and do not know a lot about them in general. But I think it's worth mentioning. 

The coming shift.

I had way more 'substance' to go into this article. I was thinking recently how hell for leather a 25 year old fitness influencer is that I follow. But I think these points capture enough of what I am trying to say. 

I showed at the beginning a tweet from someone that talks about the supposed coming 'shift'. That, as I also mentioned. Does make sense to me. 

I was reading the Crucifixion of Esmerelda Sweetwater the other day. It's kind of a prequel to the Law of One. A fictional story that discusses a lot of the concepts the Law of One also does. I realised, after reading it, (it focuses a lot on how the negative twists spiritual laws in order to operate). I realised that I have an assumption within myself that I can save people more than I can. Yes, having someone like me nearby with any societal change. Someone that they trust and lives in the real world with them. But also, that is knowledgeable about these entire areas. That is good. 

But you cannot really protect someone from the impact, the societal revealing of absolute horror that this kind of political change will bring. In a way, that book, the Crucifixion of Esmerelda Sweetwater. It describes the process that a lot of people have gone through in order to take on societal beliefs. Their own free will was used against them. It was slow, cunning and powerful. But it trapped that being within it. 

The breaking of that will be traumatising. The societal effects have been massive to create Gen Z as they currently are and I wonder how much they will change if this were to all go down.