Charging the last terrified rapscallion

I know. I’ve just known a real narcissist. The difference is that with a pseudo-narcissist (like my mom) there usually is some way to avoid triggering their trauma. With a real narcissist (like that girl) there really is none.

Yes, and what you are describing means you have to cut it. I’ve had such emotions.

You will also find out in future that there can be relationships with all the joy and none of the pain. Even dysfunctional ones will more often be better than not.

There is, however, a kind of protective narcissism that can be removed if you treat a person gently.

The society (some family members included) may treat schizophrenics, autistic people with PDA, others harshly enough (pressuring them to be “normal”) that they develop this thing, that may seem very similar to narcissism.

EDIT: Putting it a bit differently - if a person is kind to animals, there are likely not narcissist, but may be pseudo-narcissist. If they can’t do something you ask of them, it may be PDA. If they can do something kind involving sacrifices on their own, but suddenly can’t when you put that as some expectation - then they are traumatized and the problem may not be with them.

I think this seems more like a BPD person, but - narcissism too.

As you are asking for advice, mine is:

About narcissists - never ever allow them to have any degree of control over you. Similarly to people grown cowards TBH.

Did you have a honest talk, without substances, on all the conflict parts?

If there’s avoidance of that, nothing you can do. I have, eh, some experience in my life too. Just move on.

Also, about substances - stop drinking. Try limiting yourself to something like tea without sugar and buckwheat, and maybe something like salted turkey broth with some pieces of turkey meat eaten separately. Maybe milk.

At least that’s what helped me to regain ability to sleep after my losses and traumas.

… for the very reason that Fortran you can grasp in an evening.

Doesn’t have anything to do with what I said.

I said that all propaganda is problematic, not only that of visible political parties, and not only right-wing one.

Furthermore I said that the problem is that humans are, I repeat, fucking apes.

And you writing something irrelevant and some anonymous idiots downvoting me illustrate this very well, because only fucking apes would take this as an attack on their particular crowd of apes, and ignore the actual meaning.

Oh, only right-wing. When you want to say something cool-looking, but don’t have the courage to be honest.

It’s all of propaganda, but even that’s not completely true.

What’s true is that humans are fucking apes. There’s no victory over that.

There’s no political good.

There is a kind of shorter-term marriage in Shia Islam which sometimes may approach prostitution in practice.

But generally no. A traditional European marriage is not a worker servicing a client.

Well, honestly what political positions women have means less in “interesting times” like ours.

They are not strongly pressured by conservative men of their family and surroundings (if they have such), because tribal parts of politics rely a lot on crowd instincts, and those of women don’t work exactly the same. They do participate in politics, but with the different kind of emotion.

For men a woman holding different views is usually not an existential enemy. They might ridicule that or dislike, that may look disgusting, but it’s a different kind of attitude. It’s pretty normal for women from families from authoritarian elites to have publicly liberal views. The dictator daddy won’t punish his daughter for reposting something virtue-signalling against what he’s doing. He knows it’s of no consequence.

At the same time women, of course, see the tendencies around us and their views change accordingly.

But again, in the “interesting times” what men do may matter just a bit more, because there are power dynamics involved where women are disadvantaged due to both different tribal instincts and to men being more represented among people with power. In some sense political views are a kind of compensation.

So it’s both bigger incentives for such views (with actual incels loudly talking) and less pressure (that’s spent on threatening violence against male opponents).

I’m not an incel. Just thinking.

We won’t. The desire is to be connected to a real living woman. Toys can’t get sophisticated enough to make you believe what you prematurely know to not be true.

Yes. Liberal is the opposite of “moralist” and sometimes “oppressive”.

The US use of the word “liberal” is a bit shifted in the direction of “libertine” (same as libertarian, but strongly focused on personal freedoms of substance abuse and sexual promiscuity at the expense of economical\political freedoms to own catgirl slaves and shoot up crowds).

Being less educated and living the traditional life of sitting at home and doing house work.

Easy.

I agree. We should realize the following:

1. There are things we are not entitled to.

2. There are things we are entitled to.

3. There is Nintendo’s opinion on which is which.

4. There’s someone else’s opinion on which is which.

5. There’s law which should be a dignified compromise between these.

6. The law may or may not be such a compromise.

7. Our obligations before law mirror our rights.

8. Our engagement with law mirrors our participation in forming it.

9. We have been robbed of that ability and raise our voice where it matters.

10. Hence Nintendo’s opinion and said law don’t matter shit.

They’ll just be afraid.

That’s not surprising, but if that doesn’t change, things won’t get better.

You don’t want oligarchy and she’s on oligarchy’s side. Please remember what made Trump win the first time.

I don’t expect her to improve things at all. Only compared to what would happen if Trump would win.

anticommunist propaganda

As if that was needed to show how communists do things.

people feel like they’re getting fucked, and Trump offers a clear, simple narrative of who is fucking them

Correct.

Kamala comes across more as representing the political establishment, and her messaging doesn’t tap into that dissatisfaction or contrarian nature

Not only that’s correct, but she’s still your enemy. It’s just a situation where one has to choose what’s worse. From my point of view far from USA - Trump is immediately worse. But that doesn’t mean Harris is going to radically improve things.

It’s sad you have no third strong grassroots movement, but that seems to be the case in every shitty election.

Russia, when it supposedly had those, first was choosing between Yeltsin and his “kinda democrats, but with that smell” and “red-brown” communists with Stalin pics and swastikas, second between Putin and senile communists, the third one was between thinly masqueraded Putin and rich city kids, and then it kinda lost meaning. Trump is kinda similar to the “red-brown” side in the first example.

One can find many such example.

He says that fear is a bigger motivator than love.

He’s correct in a sense you may not notice.

Those voters fear Harris and what she represents, and love some idea of what GOP could in theory represent.

So the fact that Trump is shit means less for them as it’s on the side they love, while Harris being stronger makes them even more afraid.

That is, the best strategy for Dems to insure victory would be to successfully present Trump as having a potential to win to his own voters. Then they would care about him being a felon and such.

Telegram is not private. That makes the comparison to be infinity in favor of DeltaChat.