• S E X
    L O V E +
    R E L A T I O N S H I P S


    ❤️ Welcome Guest! ❤️


    Posting Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • SLR Moderators: Captain.Heroin | madness00
  • Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

Redefining personality to make the sex better

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,399

This is not the one I was looking for but I looked for a long time and could not find the one I was thinking of.
This will give you a little taste.
You should research the Egyptian Temple of The Body.

Like I said, it is built to represent inside the human body and shows many secrets of how things work.
It will give you many insights that may be of interest to you.
 

Crackedout420

Bluelighter
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
406
Location
Winnipeg
I dont know if this pertains to the topic at hand, but I had a dude tell me he wasnt a virgin when I asked while we were fooling around. He said he wasnt and told me the next day he was and only lied because he thought I wouldny go through with the sex if I knew he was a virgin.
 

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,399
He was horrible at everything lol for the record.

yeah I bet! No wonder he didn’t want to tell you he was a virgin. You would have know he had no idea what he was doing!

although had you have know that, you could have educated him better.

How funny you found a virgin! How did you manage that one??
 

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,484
I dont know if this pertains to the topic at hand, but I had a dude tell me he wasnt a virgin when I asked while we were fooling around. He said he wasnt and told me the next day he was and only lied because he thought I wouldny go through with the sex if I knew he was a virgin.

Given that your post history says you smoke meth, I can't be sure if your talking about a male homosexual partner who was a virgin, or a male partner as a female.

See, there's lots of male users passing themselves off as females on the interwebz.

.....

As a man, losing my virginity? (which was to a woman. and I'm strictly heterosexual).

Pffff

What a terrible terrible experience.
It's like that for most dudes I hear though.
 
Last edited:

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,484
So you've figured, I'm using self-dialogue cue sequence to effectively modify my personality.

The variation in responses to me is dramatic.

Each cue was selected on the basis of it resonating via "emotional relevance", having revised the entire dictionary, thus covering every possibility.

The four cues are as in the diagram,

"Jealous Union, Incite Force".

I've graphed them above in terms of their emotional potency, transitioning from one to the next.

However, if I were to graph them strictly according to the degree of "imposition" associated with each, what we get looks like,



So,
- "Jealous" actually has an inherent aversion about it, thus, negative contact.
- "Union" is a mutual, not imposing
- "Incite" begins to impose in the slightest sense
- "Force", this is full on imposing.

Therefore, graphed according to contact or imposition, the outcome is actually quite linear.
 

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,484

This is not the one I was looking for but I looked for a long time and could not find the one I was thinking of.
This will give you a little taste.
You should research the Egyptian Temple of The Body.

Like I said, it is built to represent inside the human body and shows many secrets of how things work.
It will give you many insights that may be of interest to you.

Thank you baby 😚
 

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,399
Thank you baby 😚

You are welcome! 😘

I wish I could find that documentary I saw where a cool guy took you on a tour of the inside of The Temple of the body and explained everything. It was very enlightening.

We are a small version of the Universe inside.
Really cool stuff!
 

Captain.Heroin

Suicide Obsession
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
94,183
Location
Harvard University
Jealousy is not a behavioral superposition. It's a sick state of mind that not everyone exhibits.

My hints/advice: abandon self-identity, self-concept. Forget who you are. Live in the moment and learn to be in touch w/ your partner, read their reactions/faces well. You AND them need zero sexual agenda. Honesty helps.

That's probably why I can't hold down a relationship.
u gotta try w/ someone who loves u as much as u love 'em imo
 

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,399
Jealousy is not a behavioral superposition. It's a sick state of mind that not everyone exhibits.

My hints/advice: abandon self-identity, self-concept. Forget who you are. Live in the moment and learn to be in touch w/ your partner, read their reactions/faces well. You AND them need zero sexual agenda. Honesty helps.


u gotta try w/ someone who loves u as much as u love 'em imo

yes indeed Captain!
you got it baby!!

I am so glad you are happy!
With someone you adore and adores you.
It has to be that way.
You have to be thinking about them all day and can’t wait to be together again.
 

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,484
Alrighty so, one of the reasons I post in this thread, was to share my thoughts and get pieces of feedback here and there.

Another reason is, to clarify matters in my own mind.

I absolutely believe in mathematical application, as Jason Padgetts contention - there is nothing in the universe that isn't assigned a mathematical denomination - and there's a subsequent sense of innate symmetry behind everything.

Or everything functional.

I'm sure this is pertinent to @Painful One 's description of the video containing Egyptian temples, how they embody or reflect the mathematical structures of the stars and the universe, which is subsequently reflected in ourselves.

Point being - these paradigms are structured, symmetrical, and deeply hidden.
Laws of physics, laws of chemistry - and in this instance - the paradigm of human emotionality, it's just another structure, symmetrical, thus far unelucidated.

So - if I'm to assume I'm touching on elucidating that model - which sounds like a bold statement but, something which I truly believe I'm doing, then, I'm simply sweeping away the noise, and uncovering something.

Not inventing - discovering.

For this reason, I'm still understanding it myself.

cont...
 

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,484
....

For this reason, this graph, my most recent graph,



What I'm attempting to highlight is, the move starting at a place of zero contact, to high contact - or the epitome of contact.

This "contact", that I'm referring to, I also use the word, "imposition" - seemingly to allude to the same thing.

And, additionally, "intimacy".

Can intimacy be had without contact?

So, trying to rationalize this process myself as much as anything, to implement that intimacy, it requires contact.

But by cycling gradually towards something which one may not historically associate as being "intimate", that being "force" - this perhaps attains the epitome of intimacy, and despite being "imposing", given the nature of its application, being outwardly "impositional", is something we preclude entirely.

Theoretically?


Starting with "jealous", which - has negative imposition.
i.e. If you "jealous" someone, you're typically gonna - what - get their attention then blank them, type of thing? Or carry yourself in such a way that kind of says, "fuck you" (but it's hot).
Either way it sends emotion super high - for this reason, well, it gets their attention - put it that way.

But at this stage, we absolutely don't "get in their face".
i.e. saying "fuck you" is non-impositional. It's kind of, negative imposition.

"Union" - mutual coming together, approachable - we're not actually "pushing forward" with this.
No - kind of, neutral imposition.

And this, so on up the graph.


See, I ordered the cues according to what felt intuitively necessary.
So they effectively define my personality, it must be correct, or with a maladaptive personality - I basically feel wonky - in addition to getting undesired responses from other people.

So, what felt correct - that's what the order is based on.

But now, I need to rationalize the reasons, WHY it feels correct.
 
Last edited:

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,484
I agree though that it takes an emotional connection for me and a SOUL and spirit connection.
That is what attracts women like a magnet. Like a moth to the flame.

Plus lots of foreplay. This is where you men always mess up! Women‘s engines heat up slowly.
If you want to make us have an orgasm then you had best be doing so much foreplay that we are literally begging for it before you even try and fuck us! Learn this lesson!!

I actually wanted to requote this, in perspective of using the cue, "jealous".

It carries two very insightful comments.
1) women arouse differently to men
2) to "beg for it", there has to be an element of, "you can't have it".

This is almost certain why "jealous" is the foremost consideration in this paradigm.

Relating the two statement, "heating up", pertains to high emotion, "jealous" being the characterization of this.

In other words @Painful One is basically confirming my contention, just in layman's terms.
 

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,399
I actually wanted to requote this, in perspective of using the cue, "jealous".

It carries two very insightful comments.
1) women arouse differently to men
2) to "beg for it", there has to be an element of, "you can't have it".

This is almost certain why "jealous" is the foremost consideration in this paradigm.

Relating the two statement, "heating up", pertains to high emotion, "jealous" being the characterization of this.

In other words @Painful One is basically confirming my contention, just in layman's terms.

NO! NO! NO!
I am absolutely NOT agreeing with you on this jealously thing!! AT ALL!
Jealously is a negative emotion and does NOT belong anywhere near “intimacy “
(which is what you are trying to figure out how to achieve.)
Jealousy can and will backfire on you!
Do you like it when a lady you like flaunts another guy right in front of you?
Does that not make you ANGRY? Yes it does!

DO NOT twist MY WORDS to try and fit your warped view of things!

Why don’t you try using the word “unconditional love” instead of “jealousy” and get rid of the word “force” as it comes
across in a “rapey” way in this discussion.

I was explaining to you men, that women do not go from 0 to 10 ready to fuck in the short amount of time that you men do.
You men, get a boner and you are ready for full penetration and action.

We women need to be shown love, we need to feel that We can trust you and that takes some time and finesse.
after all, we are allowing you to enter our bodies and you could hurt us easily if you were reckless.
We women need to be shown affection. We need a lot of foreplay and foreplay can start with you guys just doing the dishes for us or cooking us a nice meal. Giving us flowers. Foreplay for women starts FAR in advance of the actual act of making love itself.
Smart men know this!

Then when the time comes, we need lots of kissing, lots of gentle stroking, lots of attention to our breasts and pussies.
You have to get our juices flowing. We need lubrication. It is painful for us to have you just ”force” your dicks inside us!
You need to use Your hands and mouth and have us squirming to the point we are saying “okay, I am ready, please give it to me.”

Do you understand???
 

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,484
NO! NO! NO!
I am absolutely NOT agreeing with you on this jealously thing!! AT ALL!
Jealously is a negative emotion and does NOT belong anywhere near “intimacy “
(which is what you are trying to figure out how to achieve.)

YEAH YEAH YEAH!!

I mean in so many ways, you're hitting the nail on the head - and confirming saying what I'm saying.

It's negative - negative imposition, just like the graph demonstrates.
Not positive.
Negative.
Almost aversive - you're echoing my sentiments almost exactly.
It's like, you know those new style kitchen drawers? You don't just pull them out. You push them, and it releases the mechanism, and then they spring out at you.

Saying "jealous union" it's like, yeah - oxymoron.

Are you familiar with the principles of quantum mechanics?
Light, by example, is denominated as a given frequency on the electromagnetic spectrum, and it travels as a wave.
But when it's measure, it's observed as a particle, called a "photon".

So it's a wave, or a particle - or a wave and a particle?
Wut?

Like "Jealous union".... wut?

Jealousy can and will backfire on you!

That's what it's meant to do.
Backfire - counterintuitive.
I need to start relating this to more practical situations - me picking up gals etc - describing how that transpires.
Then it'll begin to make more sense.

Do you like it when a lady you like flaunts another guy right in front of you?
Does that not make you ANGRY? Yes it does!

Depends how it's done.
Not always just flaunting guys in front of me.
Which can be like the ultimate "fuck you". That comes in handy also - any guys who are divorced probably know what I'm talking about - AmIRite??

DO NOT twist MY WORDS to try and fit your warped view of things!

Why don’t you try using the word “unconditional love” instead of “jealousy” and get rid of the word “force” as it comes
across in a “rapey” way in this discussion.

Because the alphabetical architecture of the words "unconditional" and "love" - do not generate a resonance consistent with anything emotionally relevant.

There is a type of wave-relevance to the word, "love" - but, frankly - it's a little ghey.
I would never advocate it.

"Love" is kind of an expression of infatuated vulnerability.
Never gonna blow a disco-sluts head off with that application.
They want MEAN, NASTY, DIRTY etc.

I was explaining to you men, that women do not go from 0 to 10 ready to fuck in the short amount of time that you men do.
You men, get a boner and you are ready for full penetration and action.

Historically, you are absolutely correct.
This is the issue largely being addressed.
I would relate this situation back to the original male-to-female flow state chart.
Males - big and imposing.
Females - comparatively vulnerable, at least physically.

Again, the aim being to manipulate or modify that conventional state, i.e. MAKE women horny on the spot. An intrinsic part of this is, that emotional flare - which is caused, really, almost exclusively by jealousy in some capacity; or it's certainly the most profound characterization of it.

We women need to be shown love, we need to feel that We can trust you and that takes some time and finesse.
after all, we are allowing you to enter our bodies and you could hurt us easily if you were reckless.
We women need to be shown affection. We need a lot of foreplay and foreplay can start with you guys just doing the dishes for us or cooking us a nice meal. Giving us flowers. Foreplay for women starts FAR in advance of the actual act of making love itself.

I tend to agree.
It's gotta be a firm decision to allow someone who could potentially completely overpower you and again, potentially do damage, to perform such an intimate act; willingly give access to the most private, tender, and sensitive area of your body.

However, my experience tells me that, emotional implication is the most reassuring presentation a man can offer - much more so than being a creepy nancy boy and offering to make you dinner.

And what I'm trying to generate here is, not placate women etc.
I'm trying to generate a presentation that, first glance, first look - the emotional wave hits her and BOOM - her panties are wet.

Just. Like. That.

Instantaneous.

Then when the time comes, we need lots of kissing, lots of gentle stroking, lots of attention to our breasts and pussies.
You have to get our juices flowing. We need lubrication. It is painful for us to have you just ”force” your dicks inside us!
You need to use Your hands and mouth and have us squirming to the point we are saying “okay, I am ready, please give it to me.”

Do you understand???

I do understand!

And that, my sweet - is why I believe it's imperative that the cue "force", is located in the last and final position.
It's an imperative and intrinsic component, but it's not something we could possibly, basically - apply in first position in the cue sequence (I have tried this, and it's kind of imposing/aversive - not in a good way).
The other three cues, are precursors to it, building in, leading in to it.

And of course, "incite force" - we're not so much applying it, as much as giving you the discretion to apply it yourself.
Perhaps the intrinsic dynamics of things, the demands of the universe per se - are simply, to ensure the application is present, in order to achieve gratification - and focuses less so on WHO applies it, the male or female.

If we could determine a means to have the female potentially apply it, transcending the historical male role - yeah I mean, that would shake up a lot of things, society would be very different (especially in places like sub-saharan African - by all accounts).
 
Last edited:

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,399
Are you familiar with the principles of quantum mechanics?
Light, by example, is denominated as a given frequency on the electromagnetic spectrum, and it travels as a wave.
But when it's measure, it's observed as a particle, called a "photon".

So it's a wave, or a particle - or a wave and a particle?
Wut?

Like "Jealous union".... wut?

Yes I am.
It is A Wave and a Particle.
The Wave being the larger body of the separate individual particles.
Together forming a whole-wave
yet still individual within that larger body of the wave.


held together by what? Could it be Love?
You are So wrong when you said Love is. “Weak force” wut??


There is a type of wave-relevance to the word, "love" - but, frankly - it's a little ghey.

Yes. It is “gay” with merriment and love But is completely SEXUAL!

"Love" is kind of an expression of infatuated vulnerability.
Never gonna blow a disco-sluts head off with that application.
They want MEAN, NASTY, DIRTY etc.

Your first statement above is completely incorrect!
But now we are getting somewhere—-you are not looking for “intimacy”, you are looking at how to attract a
Mean, Nasty, Dirty disco-slut from across the room with one look and absolutely zero effort on your part.
okay, okay, this is starting to make more sense!

Why didn’t you state the objective clearly in the first place?


(note: I will continue answering in a minute BRB)
 
Last edited:

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,399
YEAH YEAH YEAH!!

okay, you may be on to something here because you are pissing me off so bad that I want to hold you down and fuck you myself!

And what I'm trying to generate here is, not placate women etc.
I'm trying to generate a presentation that, first glance, first look - the emotional wave hits her and BOOM - her panties are wet.

You are going to have to be damn MAGNETIC to do that!
See: Animal Magnetism


If we could determine a means to have the female potentially apply it, transcending the historical male role - yeah I mean, that would shake up a lot of things, society would be very different (especially in places like sub-saharan African - by all accounts).

well...I have figured out how to “apply” this.
Why you so behind??
 
Last edited:
Top