richardmurray

FORUM POST

See the KAICENET here

THE VIDEO https://rmhreblogs.tumblr.com/post/724825535721652224/amp-kai-aka-kaicenat-info-on-his-esocial

@ProfD and many people become very untactile in their lives before they become seniors

Do you Stretch with your significant other?

@ProfD Well, I will answer this question as I always do. First, how do I define black people. The problem with people when they answer questions like this is they answer without first defining the elements of the question which is why replies to their answer go into argument. However you or others define black people is void in my answer cause i told you how i define black people in my answer. I define black people in humanity as those of a phenotypical range of skin regardless of their heritage or culture, an element of melanin production which is visible can be a rigid determinant, but the skin of humans nor any other physical factor determines friendship or foeship. Now your question didn't specify geographic scope, which is something I will define for my answer. Black people live throughout humanity ,all over the earth. My answer will not go into how to unify the global Black populace or how to solve problems involving the global non black populace. Black people live in every continent. My answer will not go into how to unify the black populace in any one continent or how to solve problems involving the non white populace in any continent. Black people live in every country in every continent. My answer will only go into how to unify the black populace in all countries or how to solve the problems involving the non white populace in all countries. I will answer, a very reduced form of your question, based on how I define black people the following question, and it is not applicable to a black populace in another country. How to unify Black people in the USA plus solve the various problems with the non black populace in the USA? To Unity, How is unity defined in a group in relationship to a country/government? It is unity of agenda. When the USA was founded the overwhelming majority of nonblacks in the USA had one agenda to the government of the usa, to live under it and prosper. All groups have infighting but the nonblacks share one agenda. Before the usa was founded in the british colonial form, Black people of any geographic descent were split into three groups each having an unbridgeable agenda to the british colonies and later to the USA: Destroy/Leave/Live in. In the film shared by Troy https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/10393-the-film-uptight-1968/ A great example of the problem in the black community in the usa is present. A character tries to convince the others they shouldn't do violence. Now many will say that is wise but I oppose that. why? If you are in a group of your phenotypical race that wants an action you do not like the only thing you can do if you truly want to support them is to leave. Not make a scene and chastise or try to preach and tell them wrong, just leave. The IRA wasn't a majority of irish in ireland nor were they particularly liked by a majority in ireland, but they didn't suffer irish not interested in their cause, and they had an agenda in relationship to the british empire, which was to not be in the british empire. In modernity, I have been fortunate to know multiple black people in the usa in each group as well as the modern group, individual. But I repeat what I have said in here so many times, over and over. Find your group and go to your goal with them and let other groups be. Don't chastise, don't speak ill. Wanting to be president doesn't make you a slave. Wanting to leave doesn't make you a fool. Wanting to destroy doesn't make you crazy. Wanting to do for self doesn't make you a traitor. The Unity the black populace in the usa need is in embracing its history, its true self, stop trying to mirror whites relationship to the usa, and embrace our own. If those four groups: Leave/Destroy/Prosper in/Be for self can act without meddling in the other groups affairs, then the non blacks negative influence in the usa will be lessened over the entire village.

@ProfDyes:) and no we only disagree on assessment of the past and the only reason why it matters is cause if the black community anywhere will act unified in the most positive manner when most in a black community comprehend the past somewhat similarly so that most in the group is influenced to act to the future similarly. We both know firmly the past can not be changed and to learn from it. We also both know that one of the great causes of dysunity is how black people assess our past and i can prove it anywhere. Look at south africa, the whole schism between winnie mandela side nelson mandela came because nelson mandela suggested that the movement was about reaching some synergy with whites and winnie mandela correctly said that wasn't true. Yes, the black people in south africa during and pre apartheid never were trying to kill all the whites so to speak , but the idea was never to become something with the whites which most whites themselves don't even want. At the end of the day, mandela took the desire of two minorities, a minority of whites plus a minority of blacks and put the whole populace of south africa , under that tiny populace's vision, which has proved disastrous. I argue only those two minoriites have benefited from it and sequentially mandela was wrong but to this day, that minority of whites plus minority of blacks stand on a hill and try to make it seem their assessment of the past that mandela spearheaded it correct. It goes back to why Frederick Douglass was booed by a black crowd speaking the composite nation speech. Douglas embraced the move from the south. He liked the phenotypical ranged groups mixing. He was convinced that would lead to something positive. Your words Profd are similar to his. But my point is Douglass and you are wrong. I am not suggesting the black people who stayed in the south were correct, they were wrong too. I am suggesting what few are maybe willing to say, that both choices were wrong. The exodus out of the south and the determined to say in the south were both wrong. Yes, cheap retrospect, but both were wrong and I think many black people , adults/parents/guardians/mentors are as I type preaching a terrible lie about some coming together and the potentials of the exodus to black youth, who are living life and making choices based on these lies.

@Troy And add the black community of tulsa beforehand. the usa and the british colonies preceding it always had some positive black spots, always, but the problem is the larger black community. Comprehend in every single major city a section, a black "opulent" region, exists. This post is about communities black people live in, falsely called ghettos which are for white jews <but no problem it has been repeated enough to just go with it>, aside the many splintering historically within the usa or the english colonies preceding it. Minorities in any community make poor storytelling for the larger community. of course, no one knows till the critical moment, but the point is the idea will be in your head and was in the head of many black people then and it was acted upon. I referenced you Troy not to suggest I knew what you will do in the 1800s south but to reject @ProfD assertion, that leaving the south was the correct decision. I argue, leaving the south or staying in the south, in cheap hindsight, have been proven to be the incorrect choice. Both black sides went the wrong way. Both were wrong, not one was wrong, both was wrong, and the results are clear. yes but I wish you would had added without power. White power in the usa comes from white people killing or harming those not white and giving out free opulent opportunities to their own. Giving uneducated, no monied whites, land from the native american, great paying jobs hunting black folk or imprisoning black folk, made white power.

@ProfD this very forum proves that black people's interpretation of our history conclusions from our history are so varied, nothing should be assumed. I oppose that historical view. Jackson Mississippi shows how individual the black community was even one hundred and fifty years ago. @Troy said it best Alot of black people did the same, and that goes back to my point about individualism in the black community in the usa as something stronger in itself, but also the damage to the black community that jackson misssisippi showcases. Jackson shows how the black communities first splintering made two impotent groups: one group is fleeing a region of greater violence for regions of greater non lethal persecution. I argue NY/Oklahoma/Illinois/California overall are more abusive in non lethal ways to black people than the southern states. The southern states kill more, but the northern states it can be argued are more restrictive to black people's growth. the other group stayed knowing the whites will not change but they will have fewer cousins around to make a united front. PRofd, you sinfully in my view, suggest that the black community who fled the south was on the path of growth or betterment. prince george county in maryland, martha's vineyard in new england/baldwin hills in los angeles. all regions of the usa have a black one percent community that is totally disconnected to making fiscally poor black people lives better. the white community of georgia wouldn't even support the likes of stacy abrams enought to be governor, and you think black people can just flood into georgia? if white people act violent in georgia, what do you think black people should do ? ask for it? white people don't have the means to repair the damage they made. No one does really. I extend that thought to the native american who also is warranted reparations that are impossible to grant.

@Troy yes and yes and yes, I want to add Evers was not merely brave but comprehended that most black people have always lived in the south in the usa so the splintering regionally is black people defeating ourselves. Comprehend I am probably killed by whites back in the south in those days. So don't think I don't comprehend why people left. But, you can't have your cake and eat it to... and you made me think of immigration itself. The USA in my opinion has an immigrant culture that is based on the Black DOS experience, meaning what. The north/midwest/west whites did not want black people from the south, that is why all the riots but black people came anyway cause overall it was safer with whites in other regions than the south. But, that culture of immigrating to a place that don't want or like you and trying to outlast the dislike or unwant from those in power I think is dysfunctional , harmful but has become the standard in the usa to all communities. I prefer to use the word disconnected to garveyism and the modern continental black american community. The modern black community in the usa is individualist, and seeks a positive integration side whites never seen before. This goes against garveyism at its core, which is very communal and is also segregationist.

@Troy I made an ass out of myself. you didn't write anything that I viewed anyway that opposed my position straightly. I assumed you wouldn't see the timeline for black people in the usa after the first exodus as inevitable. ok, I figured in a book about history one will approach it temporally. I assumed incorrectly by chapter four he is out of the 1800s. yes but the 1900s was inevitable for me. And I am one who praises those high moments in said century but if I am most blunt in assessing the black community in the usa, then the problems stemming from the 1800s were massive and couldn't be undone with the strategies or movements in the 1900s. the word we:) well yes, usa fiscal capitalism has always been based on the model of slavery that the usa instituted. Where the enslaved has no legal route out or .... poor person has no legal way out. Where the wealthy are public abusers of the law while publicly act above the law which the usa didn't invent but when you have inescapable slavery which the usa instituted which is uncommon, you create an abrasive situation financially. And yes, when the white wealthy fight in the usa, it is for all the marbles. The Native American community has been in a come if blacks get pneumonia. The amsterdam news can be used. The amsterdam news was once wholesale black owned, harlem based, had an online page for years. What it says is that absent money ala the arabs using oil money to manipulate systems it will take great ingenuity which is honestly not common. Yes , the question is when will more black people in the usa realize the first splintering made all the rest inevitable. To me, most black people in the usa know we are splintered but too many black people in the usa think the other splinterings past the first could had been prevented or should had not happened and disagree. I think that is black people in the usa trying to turn a bad gamble, the first leaving of the south into a good strategy. I comprehend why black people did the first exodus out the south but it was a bad move in cheap but clear retrospect. Black leaders pushed for our community to splinter from the brick we were in the southern states, thinking with less density we could thrive in small sections in multiple places but that is a flawed strategy to me. It puts too much weight on smaller black populaces in very hostile and sometimes more hostile places in the usa, ala the black community in nyc. These are in depth questions. I want to say that. Each one is a long essay. I will start and say each membership organization has to be looked at individually first. Second, the simplest answer is both. All membership organizations that have rules for membership are by default unifiers side splinters. why? by default their membership nature excludes while includes. This includes nation of islam, the black church as well. Again it is cheap retrospect but I argue the biggest tent black organization for descended of enslaved was and is the garveyites. Cause being a garveyite doesn't require you be employed or owning a business or been enrolled in a college or taken a pledge to a private club or speak english/spanish, all being a garveyite requires was black descended of enslaved which is the entire DOS populace in the american continent <canada to brazil > and the desire to find a true home, and the ability to work side other black people to get it, preferably in africa but Garvey wasn't that limited. The fiscal poorest black person can be a garveyite. Third, the two organizations you mention have examples of unifying black people in various places or parts positively so i am not suggesting a black hate with my prose. Fourth , overall the problem is the black person who has no money, never went to college, never owned a business, never had employment is barred from most of said organizations and thus a splintering:)

Know the queen

The tiniest variance makes a story other. I am not suggesting Life Size = Cool World= Barbie ... but I am suggesting that Cool World <barring the lust themes and sequentially audiences that will not see it for that> plus Life Size <barring the TV movie audience limitation > are the same movie as Barbie 2023 <barring BArbie's global brand nature> What is my point? The current hollywood strike is about maintaining a domestic film industry in the usa amidst the simple financial reality that shows can be made cheaper outside the usa, global sentiments to what is funny or good or entertaining , among those who can afford global communication entertainment <which is not most or a good chunk of humanity> , is similar, and places outside the usa have learned to open up financially profitable creative opportunities for artists while the usa has fewer and fewer financially profitable creative opportunities by the day. https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2386&type=status I don't know what will happen but the Barbie movie reflects these realities. Life Size if in theaters , based on its own financial returns which are very good for a tv movie prove, it could had been better received by the financially profitable opportunity was closed. Cool world is likewise, for the ratings system financially is about limiting audiences for certain work , that is the effect of all ratings systems in media, limit exposure, sequentially profit, based on a tag or label. The following was the comment to the ny times article writer. @mattfleg one thing you didn't mention is cool world in your article https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/24/us/politics/barbie-movie-newsom-gaetz.html I think the plot and themes, not the results necessarily, are similar and did the film Life Size mirror barbie but suffer from not being a brand ? https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/life-size-remember-when-tyra-banks-and-lindsay-lohan-did-the-barbie-movie-first/ar-AA1ezVmZ?ocid=socialshare Life Size wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-Size

I have never read the book @Troy but I will like to know how much does he discuss the black community in the late 1800s in the usa and before the multiple migrations up and out of the south plus the multiple additions of other black people. Cause based on what you say, the splintering he is talking about is not geographic but organizational and I oppose that angle of perspective. The reality is the black community in the usa at one time was circa 90% southern from southern maryland to florida to east texas to oklahoma, for rarely better or usually worse, and when black people flew out the south : for all the various reasons that I will recite if someone needs me to, that is when the real splintering began. The dysfunctions/disorganizations/..splinterings during and after the first migration and onwards was inevitable. I oppose the historical assessment that they were not. I know you, Troy, oppose that position and I assume the writer based on your presentation of his work. But I stand on my assessment. I have written poems about my love for the HArlem of Yore but I will be a liar if I think the problems the black community had in harlem didn't exist when we moved into harlem in droves in the first place. Black people ran out of the south with our tail between our legs, impotent while suggesting inside our community it was the correct thing to do , and paid the price ever since for the truth that it wasn't. Hindsight is cheap but hindsight isn't false.

@Chevdove yeah, it was shakespeare in the park https://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/richard-iii-about/14430/

well you answered @Pioneer1

topics Cento poetry series tenth round Advice to new artists, questioned from rtnnightmare Dates- astrological side various dates of note; Lammas day If You Made It This Far: is hollywood going the way of the automotive industry, why kechant sewell left the NYPD, presenting Lackadaisy Rhapsody ode from flapperfoxy, calligraphy journey with onewithbear, Kobo Writinglife science fiction and fantasy interview, Black Leadership question https://rmnewsletter.over-blog.com/2023/06/07/30/2023-rmnewsletter.html Subscribe if you like what you see for next week

@Chevdove and add there is an acting community that wants the universalism of casting. I saw richard III with danai gurira as richard III and various other actors who would not be cast in the characters of the play. Creatively it was fine, but the issues isn't creativity it is culture. Some people will never want that aracial casting standard. so.. we will see how entertainment industry goes from here in the usa.

current discussion https://www.facebook.com/groups/lifewrite/permalink/3385753695070025/ Text - if you want to read here A CURE FOR "INCELS"? ## Hannah's note said: "Dear Steve. I wouldn't go with you if you were the last dog on Earth." ### I'd had a crush on "Hannah" (not her real name) for years, and finally asked her to "go" with me (our middle school version of "going steady.") And at the end of the next school day, as promised, she passed me that note, all the girls in class giggling at my humiliation. I felt like a crushed bug. We all know what it feels like to get our guts kicked out, and that was my first. The most painful thing is that we'd been perfectly friendly up until the moment I told her how I felt. And then…devastation. My introduction to the "friend zone." Now, strictly speaking, the "friend zone" is that place where one friend wants more from the relationship than the other one. The first time I heard the term was used by a woman to describe HER situation. It's painful. But we've all been there, or "put" someone else there - THEY wanted intimacy, and WE weren't interested. Somewhere in the early 21st Century, this term started indicating something nastier: guys used it to describe being rejected by women AS IF IT WAS THE WOMAN'S FAULT. As if they themselves hadn't done the same thing to others. This doesn't pass the Three Gates, not at all. Not honest, not kind, not useful. And these embittered men (the female version is the "there are no good men" crowd) lumped together on the internet, wove their conspiracy theories and decided to blame women for their lack of sexual success, and in so doing totally missed the game. There's an expression that from time to time Life gives you a "cubic inch of opportunity. You either grab it, or its gone forever." This moment, with "Hannah" was a turning point in my life. Even in the midst of my pain I could FEEL that there were two choices I could make. I could blame her…OR I COULD PROMISE MYSELF I WAS GOING TO MASTER THE GAME. And somehow, I DID see it as a "game", even then. We all watched the popular girls and guys gravitate toward each other, picking each other out of a crowd, and we have two basic choices: we can resent them and give up, become embittered and resigned…or DECIDE TO WIN. As simple as that. I decided to win. I wanted, frankly, to be ADMIRED BY THE MEN I ADMIRED, AND DESIRED BY THE WOMEN I DESIRED. Life changing. And from that moment on, there was a part of my mind that was constantly watching and evaluating. High school was better than Jr. High…I was starting to figure it out. And by the time I got to college, as Sherlock Holmes used to say, "The Game was afoot!" I was operating by instinct, really, but things were starting to work. And then work better, until I was pretty popular. Got married. And thought we were happy… Until my marriage blew up, and I found myself alone, in an apartment in Vancouver Washington a thousand miles from any friends, broke, with nothing but my dog, a television set, a bed, and a Glock 9mm. NOT a good combination when you are spiraling toward depression. I needed to change. FAST. I was lost. No idea how to approach women. Adrift. AND THEN I GOT ANOTHER CUBIC INCH OF OPPORTUNITY, an inspiration birthed by desperation, and GRABBED IT. And that insight BLEW EVERYTHING WIDE OPEN. ### I am now celebrating my 25th anniversary with my wonderful Soulmate, Tananarive Due. In fact, I'm flying to Atlanta next week to celebrate. She and I have talked deeply and extensively about how we were lucky enough to find each other. And I realized something: A CRITICAL step in being able to find love was having TOTAL confidence that I could ethically and enthusiastically satisfy my sexual needs whenever I wanted. I mean that. "Sex," in addition to being ecstatic fun for its own sake, is also the "test drive" for a deeper connection, a place where two people are learning about each other, communicating on deep and often non-verbal levels. And in most modern relationships if you can't make each other happy on that level FIRST, you'll never get to what we really want: deep, lasting connection with a life partner. And I decided that, now that I'm an old married guy I'm "out of the game" and on to the next level…why not share everything I'd learned after decades of pain and struggle? Every squirrel in the forest finds a partner. WHY NOT YOU? So I set out to write a book that would teach guys EXACTLY how to "get out of the friend zone" in life. This is NOT a "speed seduction" book, filled with slimy manipulation techniques. Those, and the "how to make a man fall in love with you" books and courses are about "hacking the human mating drive", FAKING being a healthy vibrant potential partner. The men and women who pull those tricks deserve each other. Here's a hint to you: that sort of manipulation and blame simply doesn't pass the "Three Gates," the basic spiritual laws of personal evolution: "Is it True? Is it Kind? Is it Useful?" The "speed seduction" people are interested in one thing: "Useful". Too often, they don't care about lying or cruelty. And this leads nowhere. Yes, you can get some sex, but you are literally tearing your own heart apart! You don't have to steal sex…or con someone out of it. You can simply learn how to stimulate that desire like a healthy animal. Women want sex too. And if you can put your behaviors and beliefs in alignment with your actual nature, they'll want it with YOU. Not "all" of them of course, but honestly…how many do you need? YOU know lying and manipulating and blaming aren't right. That's just your fear of loneliness short-circuiting your brain and ethics. You KNOW that there is a better way, a more natural, healthy, and fun way. You know this, but can't understand why the True Path has been out of reach. Over the years I've coached thousands of people in different aspects of personal development within the LIFEWRITING and FIREDANCE systems. Even created the wonderful SOULMATE PROCESS class. But this first step, gaining sexual confidence, is something I've NEVER addressed directly. It is time. ## While this was deadly serious, I also had a lot of fun with it, and this is necessary because we're taking a deep dive into an empowering view of human sexuality, one that treats men and women as equal and complementary aspects of the same being. That's the "Beast with two backs" after all. So I mischievous chose a title that I knew would turn off anyone who took themselves too seriously, or had sexual hang-ups that would inhibit growth. So the title is DELIBERATELY PROVOCATIVE and NFW. Let's just call it CENSORED: The Ten Commandments for escaping the "Friend Zone" in 100 days." by "Professor B" And yes, I deliberately chose not to put my name on the cover, for LOTS of reasons…trust me, I'm still gonna take heat for this. Am I serious about that? Deadly. IF YOU WILL FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS, in 100 days you'll see the world very differently, and know EXACTLY the path you need to follow to enter a world of joyful intimacy. And know exactly how to spend minimal time in the "Friend Zone." You'll read a chapter a day for the first ten days, then create a program taking 5–10 minutes a day to actually heal your attitudes, actions, and beliefs. And to help you…we added the exclusive ANCIENT CHILD MP3 for the healing of emotional wounds. We give you ALL the basic tools you need to clear out any negative emotions, fear, lack of clarity, resentment…ANYTHING that stands in the way of loving and accepting yourself so deeply that you radiate that "special something" that attracts others. That "I'm a healthy, happy person, and if you spend time with me, you are going to SHARE that joy." No tricks. No lies. No deception. Just honest human communication and the healthy desire for passion and connection. That's my pitch. This first edition of CENSORED is the beginning of something new, I can feel it. I don't believe there is anything quite like it. And I'm inviting you to join at a special 1/2 price (compared to our other courses) rate. Join the FIREDANCE group and brainstorm with us about how to make it even better. But I can promise you something: If I didn't have this information, I'd be lost. And I'd pay a HUNDRED times the price to learn it, no exaggeration. Yes, I've made big promises. But this is a critical issue for millions of lonely guys. I used to be one of you. I feel your pain. And this book is a "message in a bottle" back to my own younger self. A guide for my son, just setting out. And a specific handbook for the young men, neurodivergent, heartbroken and confused who just want to be good decent human beings…and get laid. This was the door out. Try it. Read it. Follow the instructions. And if after thirty days you don't believe its worth at least TEN times what you paid for it, your money will be happily refunded. The "Friend Zone" isn't hell or purgatory. There is no need for guilt, blame, or shame. "Incel" originally just meant someone who wants sexual connection without having it. FORGET what the trolls on either side of the gender divide say about it. I'm hewing to that original meaning, and to HELL with the immature men who think women have some obligation to sleep with them. Sheesh. That is POISON. Part of being an awake, aware, ADULT human being is knowing how to satisfy our hungers ethically, honestly, and responsibly. And yes, that includes sexual hungers. We all have them. Let's be honest about how to satisfy them, shall we? To get YOUR copy of CENSORED: The Ten Commandments for escaping the "Friend Zone" in 100 days. just go to: WWW.INCELCURE.COM Simple as that. Download. Read. Use it. And in 100 day…you will see the world differently, I promise. And sex…bountiful, passionate, frisky and joyful…will no longer be a mystery. Guys…it's time to step into the 21st Century. I promise…the ladies are cheering us on! Namaste Steve www.incelcure.com MY COMMENT every squirrel in the forest finds a partner:) that's a good line I was going to call Steven Barnes Steven Player Barnes but then halfway through I realized he is Steven Hitch Barnes 🙂 Had fun reading this too. In seriousness, you spoke truth. The key is all the people who wanted intimacy with you who you rejected that you don't think about while alone. funny ain't it:) Yeah, I am fortunate, I have always been liked by females and I was lucky in talks with my parents, about these issues, that I learned to not treat relationship failures as a symbol of me, when i caused someone else's relationship failure.

@Chevdove good point, i do not know is the beginning of wisdom, needs to be in polls in the future. I hope i remember:) hmm interesting point on who leads and who gains.