How does being loved feels like genuinely I want to experience it but it doesn't look like I'll but I really want to hear about your experiences. How does feeling wanted, appreciated, loved feels like how does someone touching you with love feels like share experiences!

like getting harvested by an archon


you start vibrating

It's terrible: like hanging your head out of the car window. It might feel good for a little while, but then some pole comes along and WHAM! you're dead.

Remember: hope can be lost, and love can leave you, but hatred is always within reach because it comes from within. They can't take that from you.

P75701
thats how i felt when i received the news 3channel was kill

except not really though
i speedran the stages of grief faster than brk can disappear into a back alley with an unattended infant

also thread op reads like a maki post but i doubt it is

>
Muffled scuffling sounds can be heard behind you.
>
Simhguest appears in a brilliant burst of multicolored light.
>

P75729
Maki don't complete sentence.

P75697
It feels suspiciously similar to believing a lie. Because love is a lie. Have a nice day.

It depends on your background. If you're already used to being loved in other ways (i.e. you had a family that cared about you and a stable circle of friends growing up), feeling appreciated by someone special is your greatest asset. You get a feeling of validation that's probably 100x greater than anything you've felt before. Meanwhile, if you were never truly loved in any capacity before, then it can easily become your greatest liability. Being treated with the slightest bit of humanity will quickly make you into a tool if you don't closely watch yourself. And by the time you realize that, you'll feel 100x more hopeless than you did before.

Moral of the story: Enter the positive feedback loop that NTs do when they're in their formative years or perish.

P75701
P75746
P75758
t. autistic virgins who put themselves in a prison of their own mind and will never admit they're the problem

I guess I have felt love on magic mushrooms, and you could, too.

P75844
Shut up ninya.

P75844
reads like historicalfag

>How does feeling wanted, appreciated, loved feels like
Feels weird because the bad object [years of conditioning through childhood till present] in me tells myself that I am unwanted, unappreciated and unlovable so I reject anyone who comes to me with those ideas. You can't have two contradicting ideas at the same time. It messes with your brain.

I'm damn sure I had chances to get a girl who was interested in me in the past but I missed it because I went chasing after TILFs or "career" women who radiated independence and strength in college.

P75854
>TILFs
Tranny I'd like to fuck? Picrel?

P75758
This certainly sounds true, if you make the following assumptions:
- The way NTs are raised is proper, healthy, etc.
- Most people are sufficiently intelligent and self-controlled to implement a healthy parenting scheme.

The latter is manifestly untrue. Half of the population doesn't have a 3-digit IQ by definition. The higher you raise the intelligence floor for anything, the smaller a slice of the population can do it. And self-control is a seemingly similarly-distributed, but entirely independent variable.

So the population that meets both of these standards is vanishingly small. Furthermore, BOTH parents need to meet these standards, not just one or the other. So you have to square our probability that we had one such person, getting an even smaller number.


--- Worked example ---
Suppose 50% of the population is intelligent enough. (very generous)
Suppose 50% of the population is self-controlled enough. (very generous)
The probability that someone is both of these is 25%. (assumes independence)
The probability that both parents are such is the square of 25%, 6.25%.
---

NT households are not 6.25% of households, they are more like 80%. So parental love, good upbringing, etc., do not support our observations.

Instead, here is my hypothesis: NTs are abnormal, unvirtuous people who were raised improperly. Who is the least NT? People raised by strict traditional parents. Who is the most NT? People raised in a "modern" permissive way. What NTs actually are is narcissists, raised with participation trophies, "you are special", "we love you unconditionally", their parents would harass teachers to give them better grades, etc.

NTs are people who have been successfully shielded from consequences long enough that they no longer fear them. NTs are, according to old models of society, latent criminals, but our modern justice system doesn't actually prosecute crime below a certain threshold, so they get away with it. Strict traditional upbringings come from a time when justice was swift and accurate, and even petty theft was punished.

Now, a strict upbringing sets you up for failure today, because your unwillingness to commit crimes (i.e., you are too civilized) ties both hands behind your back. But being a narcissist has no downside, because narcissism is the norm now. Also, being a narcissist, you get some upside by occasionally victimizing someone who was set up for failure by yesteryear's good parenting.

P75698
fuck archons and ganstalkers m8
yung white men can't even smoke kush and get a women without get stalked by archons

P75854
>You can't have two contradicting ideas at the same time.
dumbfuck never heard of cognitive dissonance lmaooooooooo
i hold at least 6 contradicting ideas in my head at any given time, thats one of the perks of being schizophrenic
t. hikari

P75948 this is real

P75888 (checked)
>This certainly sounds true, if you make the following assumptions:
>- The way NTs are raised is proper, healthy, etc.
It depends on how high your standards for proper and healthy are. Most n*urotypicals (as children) can at least say they have parents that don't abuse them or neglect their immediate needs and a source of social validation they aren't realistically worried about being outcasted from (NB: experiencing teen angst is not the same thing as being genuinely isolated or lonely), and virtually all of them can say they at least have one of these. This is more of a recipe for entering a positive feedback loop in life that allows you to benefit from love than many if not most autists can say they had.
>- Most people are sufficiently intelligent and self-controlled to implement a healthy parenting scheme.
>The latter is manifestly untrue. Half of the population doesn't have a 3-digit IQ by definition.
Why do you think a 100+ IQ is necessary to be a satisfactory parent? It really seems to be more about having the life experience to be able to help your kid navigate certain common situations that kids go through, and being able to recognize where they're struggling and how much support they'll need. For that, being reasonably attentive, having basic social intelligence, and not being clinically retarded (70+ IQ) is all that's absolutely necessary. In the case of unwanted children, it's not about a parent not having the capacity to be a good parent, it's about them choosing not to be attentive to their kids' needs, or actively harming them.

>Furthermore, BOTH parents need to meet these standards, not just one or the other. So you have to square our probability that we had one such person,
Sure. But I think we'd agree that the standard, whatever it might be at the baseline for being a satisfactory parent, is higher for the father (or, more inclusively™, whoever takes the role of enforcing rules more often, as this requires more discretion) than it is for the mother. We're just disagreeing on where the baseline is. It seems that I'm talking more about how good parents need to be to make their kid feel human enough to not have their sense of relationships destroyed while growing up, while you're talking more about how good parents need to be for their kids to be perfectly well-adjusted. Big difference.

>NTs are abnormal,
By definition, the majority of people in a given population at a given time can't be abnormal.
>raised improperly.
If they're functioning as adults, can you really say they were raised too improperly?
>Who is the least NT? People raised by strict traditional parents. Who is the most NT? People raised in a "modern" permissive way.
I'm beginning to question whether you actually know what n*urotypical means.

>NTs are people who have been successfully shielded from consequences long enough that they no longer fear them.
When has there ever been consequences for acts against people at the bottom of a social hierarchy?

>But being a narcissist has no downside, because narcissism is the norm now.
When have dark triad traits not been correlated with climbing social hierarchies and overall success?

P75697
It feels like doing the TWO cuz your a sinner too

P76442
>By definition, the majority of people in a given population at a given time can't be abnormal.
I don't subscribe to shrinkology's normativity. It's a cop out to enable them to be a wishy-washy pseudoscience that doesn't offend the majority. History is the missing piece. When you apply a historical perspective, you can easily call a majority condition abnormal.

>If they're functioning as adults, can you really say they were raised too improperly?
They're not functioning. The bar has been lowered so that a certain kind of non-functioning is now considered to be functioning. It's like saying you can't say someone who gets good grades in special ed is stupid.

>When has there ever been consequences for acts against people at the bottom of a social hierarchy?
You are writing the present into the past. Read Hammurabi's code of laws. While consequences were reduced when a higher-status person victimized a lower-status person, they were not zero. This is the most ancient code of laws known to us, and it was not written on a whim, it was codified from Hammurabi's actual rulings.

Democratic republics with excessive permissiveness in the realm of justice are the norm today, but not throughout time. We live in a period of decline, it's worth remembering. Justice creates an environment where excellence can thrive; strict and consistent justice is a very valuable thing for a rising state.

>When have dark triad traits not been correlated with climbing social hierarchies and overall success?
You are again writing the present into the past. You are furthermore muddying causality. The study that found most corporate executives are sociopaths is very recent and probably unreplicated. Past writings reflect that people in positions of power could be characterized as dark triad, but it is more like an occupational hazard; we see this today with police losing their compassion with experience.

The topic of the dark triad is kind of a joke at present, because there is just so much that people want to believe attached to it that people struggle to accept what is true, insofar as it's even known.

Dark triad traits would have gotten you executed in some creative way under Hammurabi. Let's rest it at that.

P75697
>How does being loved feels like
feels like it emotionally cheating on me but it took 5 months of fighting every day for you to admit it

P76616
what