The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

This is all true, good stuff but not what I am talking about

Lakey, I would agree with you with a handful of caveats that I am not going into now.

This I will say: The direct perception of bodies has much to do with theta perceptics. When I say direct, I mean not magazine pictures but real, eyes, ears, and when appropriate, hands-on.

The early scientology I knew was populated with hot women that grew even hotter with their auditing. Were they centerfold specimens? No. Were they models of hotness? No, not by Madison Avenue standards. They were, each in their own right, downright attractive. In contrast, I have seen or known women who, by body standards, should have been attractive but who were repulsive with case quietly hung out to view. Having experienced the pleasure of a beautiful wife and three daughters, I am certain that women must see something similar in men. Note that some of the finest looking women hook up with men that look like putzes. I would conclude that women have different values than men.

I will paraphrase hubbard from one of his PDC lectures: The preclears body ~IS~ his case.

Is that a total truth? It seems to have been for hubbard. Yet, there is enough truth in the statement that it could apply to many of us. I will add that there is no reason a being has to have a down-tone case. It is likely the high-toned aspects of its case that are messing the being up anyway. If you buy into the tone scale as being some degree accurate or useful, you will note on the scale that bodies do not survive below 0.0 (Death). Nor do they exhibit tones above 4.0 (Enthusiasm). Those extremes of tone outside the body range belong to the being itself.

The way to piss any being off is to identify it as the body with all the junk that bodies tend to throw off. The way you do that is to ignore the being and focus on the body. This can really piss off a woman who is, herself, not being a body.

Yes, man-woman relationships have a lot to do with the sex of the bodies. When a couple of theta beings get together, with bodies in tow, something else comes about. My wife and I could be in the same room, her reading a book, me on the computer, yet we are making love, and quite satisfying it is, too.

Something to think about.

Ted, this is all good stuff, I can't really disagree with anything which you have said and yet it is not really what I am talking about. It is close but somehow is not quite the same as the area I am looking at.

You look at my friend Edey. This boyfriend of hers and I are both about 5'11" and 240 pounds. He is 9 years younger than me but he looks 70 and I look 60, his hairline is receeding while my hair is as thick as when I was 25. My face is much handsomer than his.

Edey has no chemistry with me, and has chemistry with him. Here's the deal, he is active in hiking, snorkeling, bicycling, tennis and a few other sports which she mentioned. His shoulders, chest and arms are buff. She admitted that he had allowed some belly fat to develop but she was willing to overlook that.

The thing is that my more handsome face, more youthful appearance and thick hair have no impact on her. He carries himself with better posture and he is buff in his upper body and he is very active with outside sports.

Both he and I are of above average intelligence. Okay, she is crazy about this guy and eventually wants to marry him. With me, she says she loves me dearly, perhaps her best friend ever, only one girl friend rivals my friendship with her. She says that for a love partner, she never even looked at me. When she started having feelings for me as a spiritual partner, she took a good hard look at me as a 2D, thought maybe she should try it and see if the chemistry would develop but then deicded against that.

Okay, here is what we have.
Two Guys the same height and weight. Both intelligent. I am the talkative type, he is the strong silent type.

My advantages, much handsomer face, much better hair, more youthful look,
more into spiritual nature

His advantages- better posture, buffed upper body, chest & shoulders, is more active in sports while I am more sedentary, he is 9 years younger.

This looks like it should be a tough decision, a very difficult call to make. However, I am not even a player, she is totally gaga over this guy. What attracts her the way I see it is:
He is active and involved with many sports.
His upper body is taut.
He is on a withdraw and is not reaching
He exudes more mystery by not talking too much
My virtues don't count for much in her eyes.

She just called me this minute as I was writing this and told me that he has not called her since the party Sunday. She called him yesterday and does not want to over reach so what should she do? She said she wants to make it official and announce that they are going together but he is not showing much interest in her.

Actually, I am still mocking up having her for my 2D. I have Purple Hazes's opinion that he probably is not that interested in her. I told her yesterday that I am joining a gym and am going to go every day and become very buff.

Everything is starting go my way as I had planned but now she is asking for my advice to help her get this other guy. An awful lot of this crazy type stuff is comming my way these days. If I give advice, I have to give the best possible advice I can give. I could never sabotage her and give her bad acvice. I will not engage in unethical activities such as that and commit overt acts against the two of them, especially her. She is my best friend.

Can someone give me advice?
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Ted, this is all good stuff, I can't really disagree with anything which you have said and yet it is not really what I am talking about. It is close but somehow is not quite the same as the area I am looking at.

You look at my friend Edey. This boyfriend of hers and I are both about 5'11" and 240 pounds. He is 9 years younger than me but he looks 70 and I look 60, his hairline is receeding while my hair is as thick as when I was 25. My face is much handsomer than his.

Edey has no chemistry with me, and has chemistry with him. Here's the deal, he is active in hiking, snorkeling, bicycling, tennis and a few other sports which she mentioned. His shoulders, chest and arms are buff. She admitted that he had allowed some belly fat to develop but she was willing to overlook that.

The thing is that my more handsome face, more youthful appearance and thick hair have no impact on her. He carries himself with better posture and he is buff in his upper body and he is very active with outside sports.

Both he and I are of above average intelligence. Okay, she is crazy about this guy and eventually wants to marry him. With me, she says she loves me dearly, perhaps her best friend ever, only one girl friend rivals my friendship with her. She says that for a love partner, she never even looked at me. When she started having feelings for me as a spiritual partner, she took a good hard look at me as a 2D, thought maybe she should try it and see if the chemistry would develop but then deicded against that.

Okay, here is what we have.
Two Guys the same height and weight. Both intelligent. I am the talkative type, he is the strong silent type.

My advantages, much handsomer face, much better hair, more youthful look,
more into spiritual nature

His advantages- better posture, buffed upper body, chest & shoulders, is more active in sports while I am more sedentary, he is 9 years younger.

This looks like it should be a tough decision, a very difficult call to make. However, I am not even a player, she is totally gaga over this guy. What attracts her the way I see it is:
He is active and involved with many sports.
His upper body is taut.
He is on a withdraw and is not reaching
He exudes more mystery by not talking too much
My virtues don't count for much in her eyes.

She just called me this minute as I was writing this and told me that he has not called her since the party Sunday. She called him yesterday and does not want to over reach so what should she do? She said she wants to make it official and announce that they are going together but he is not showing much interest in her.

Actually, I am still mocking up having her for my 2D. I have Purple Hazes's opinion that he probably is not that interested in her. I told her yesterday that I am joining a gym and am going to go every day and become very buff.

Everything is starting go my way as I had planned but now she is asking for my advice to help her get this other guy. An awful lot of this crazy type stuff is comming my way these days. If I give advice, I have to give the best possible advice I can give. I could never sabotage her and give her bad acvice. I will not engage in unethical activities such as that and commit overt acts against the two of them, especially her. She is my best friend.

Can someone give me advice?
Lakey

never let it be said that someone can beat me to putting foot to mouth.

My best friend from high school has had a black belt in karate for decades. He has ridden a bicycle across the country. He eats vegetarian.

Alan Walter was massively overweight. His accomplishments are legendary.

Is one more attractive than the other?

not necessarily. Just different birds would be attracted. and not for the bodies. for the being.

I think the key is being yourself most fully.

When I went clear, I felt as though I wasn't more myself, but less of the non me had vanished. In essence more of me was visible.

I like active people to hang with. Talking doesn't really rock my boat. I wouldn't be attracted to a sedentary person. I want someone to do things with.

We have a son and daughter in law who aren't physically active. my wife and I take their twins and run them all over the planet. Their kids love us. We support outdoor activities. Their parents support indoor quiet.

if you want to attract a vibrant female, it seems to me, you need to be a vibrant guy.

A couple of years ago I ran into a woman in her 80s, on the ski run, who was into her second set of knee replacements. I like that attitude. I want the person who will grow up to be Ruth Gordon's role in "Harold and Maude."

If you want a sedentary person, you're the right person without any change.

My wife rode a Triumph 500 when she was younger. She jumped horses over cacti. She was a competitive swimmer.

Our child raising attitudes are similar. I take the kids off rock faces, up trees, and she thinks that's great. If I was our daughter in law's husband, I would get nothing but flak. In a million billion trillion years, we'd never be a match.

find your inner Lakey and decide if you are physically active. If you are, then get in shape. If not, look for someone similar.

in essence, you are comparing what he has to what you have, in the way of a body.

You should be looking at "be" and "do." "Have" takes a back bench to "be" and "do" any day of the week.

 

[RogerB]

I am thinking about it. I don't mind being critiqued in a positive way. If I screw up in duplicating someone, I like to be corrected but in your case, I am trying to capture what it is you told me and I am missing by a mile. In such a case, either I have to run each post of mine which mentions you by you personally or just not post about you. I am tending to go with the later because my posts are spontaneous and I may have to wait a day or to to here back from you and often by then my thoughts are stale dated.

I am still smarting about a disagreement I had about Johnny Rafanello's post in detail about the death of his wife Carolyn about 6 weeks ago. Roger criticized me heavily for trying to duplicate Johnny's post rather than just reading it in a detached manner.

This is incorrect Lakey. Go back and read what I actually wrote. My comment was in the vein that you do not have to experience or suffer the what the other person is suffering in order to duplicate their comm. Their comm is one thing, their condition is another. And criticized "heavily"? . . . . Boy, you ain't seen nothin' yet if you are looking for heavy . . .

In actuality, as we are seeing in this current exchange, you too often misconstrue help as being criticism

I told him that Johnny wanted help of some sort and that his post was a plea for help and Johnny was asking someone to duplicate his post from an exterior viewpoint and then tell Johnny what their reactions were. Johnny thought he might possibly gain some new insights on the matter if someone did that.

In red above . . . is this what John has said, or is this your added think on it? It was certainly not stated in the piece he wrote at the time . . . that piece was simply a man itsaing off his feelings about having lost a love.

I DUPLICATED JOHNNY PERFECTLY

I was holding firmly to my opinion about this with Roger and then Candy, you weighed in on Roger's side. Because of that, I figured that you and Roger combined had to be right and so I recanted and said I was wrong.

Lakey, my comment was on the mechanics of communication . . . i.e., its anatomy and formula . . . that is what Candy ack'ed as being correct.

That night I met Johnny and Joan Newton up in Glendale. The first thing Johnny told me is that I got his message totally, 100% accurately right. He said he wanted someone to duplicate him, he was pleading for help, he didn't know exactly what he was looking for and that by duplicating him froman exterior viewpoint and giving him my impressions, he was able to read my comments and get some relief. I WAS 100% CORRECT AND ROGER WAS WRONG.

Well John is like that . . . as he says, everyone is absolutely totally right from their point of view. He does ack another's good efforts.

Your errors here, my friend, are twofold: a) the assumption that because "you were right" I was "therefore wrong" . . . even though I was not commenting on whether you helped John or not or whether you actually did duplicate his condition or not: but instead had commented on the anatomy of Comm and its application of the formula and b) you have altered what my actual communication addressed and the actuality of my then comment to you. You see, you are defending yourself instead of simply getting what is being said.

Candy has pointed it out as did FoTi and I . . . you interpret rather than duplicate. Interpretation is an additive. Candy was a little more exact a few posts ago. She wrote: "So, I'll attempt to correct your misdup = when you insert your own meaning from your own case onto another's actions, it's just that, your reaction."

Hell, look at the self defense on the simple issue of spell checking and proofreading one's posts above! (By the way, I write all my long posts in Word, then copy across into the ESMB message application. If you are using Firefox, your Google toolbar has a spell-check feature that will check your material written directly into ESMB. But I always preview and read the post for errors spell-check cannot see.)

I never mentioned this before due to respect for Roger and all he has done to help people on ESMB but now that you two seem to be ganging up on me again, I think it is appropriate that I mention it.

No, my Dear. Not ganging up! We just simply happen to see the same truths of the situations at hand. . . . . the notion that "we" might be ganging up on you is an interpretation based on the position from which you are viewing things (your condition and mind filters) . . . not the actuality of what is being viewed and discussed.

I happen to have perceived Candy as a beautiful Being, full of love and life for the game and the universe . . . you have continued to defend your view of the bodily and sexual object nature of things. Guess who are in harmony on shared truth

Candy has told you of her perspective and position (that word is worth being sure you get) on the matter . . . but you keep wanting to give her yours, and you haven't figured it out that it might be a not wanted by her! And I'm not talking about wanting to have a physical 2D with her, I'm talking about treating her as and viewing her as only a body and/or a physical/sexual object!

EP and I were the only ones who picked up on what Johnny was asking for and supplied him with help and yet I did not hold true to my own knowingness and I admitted I was wrong when actually I was totally correct. I figured that two highly trained ICONS certainly knew much more than a lesser trained person such as myself and yet all my inclinations had been 100% spot on correct. I learned a lesson there.

Wrong lesson, mate. The lesson here, is to be sure you get and duplicate the communication that is being given to you, and to not alter it to suit your errr, ummm, well you can slot in here what suits

Looking at the 2D as totally spiritual and not a body thing is silly in my opinion and I am sticking to my opinion on this. As far as messing with me and playing around, it is not playing around when you make comments suggesting that what I am saying is just my case acting up. If you are kidding around with me, I should see some humor in what you say but in what you wrote, I did not detect any humor and when what I say is labled case, I think that goes over the line of messing around and having fun with someone. In all honesty that is how I feel.

Well, Lakey, did you know that LRH made a rather clever statement in "Creation of Human Ability" about the 2D? Of course, he was speaking in terms of our higher level operating states, but it is a quote I like: "The second Dynamic is duplication of purposes for and in the future."

And personally, I for one, find a marvelously loving relationship far more fun that the mucky sex thing . . . though I'll admit the occasional bodily "union" within that love relationship is, as my sweet Virginia says; "The icing on the cake!"

Yes, we are still friends, but I just want you to know that I am a bit pissed. You will have to call me and handle my upset and then I am sure the friendship will continue as before probably even stronger once this stuff is cleaned up.
Lakey

Hmmmm, to paraphrase Rick in Casablanca . . . .

Lakey, is this the end of a beautiful friendship?

Rog

 

[RogerB]

Ted, this is all good stuff, I can't really disagree with anything which you have said and yet it is not really what I am talking about. It is close but somehow is not quite the same as the area I am looking at.

You look at my friend Edey. This boyfriend of hers and I are both about 5'11" and 240 pounds. He is 9 years younger than me but he looks 70 and I look 60, his hairline is receeding while my hair is as thick as when I was 25. My face is much handsomer than his.

Edey has no chemistry with me, and has chemistry with him. Here's the deal, he is active in hiking, snorkeling, bicycling, tennis and a few other sports which she mentioned. His shoulders, chest and arms are buff. She admitted that he had allowed some belly fat to develop but she was willing to overlook that.

The thing is that my more handsome face, more youthful appearance and thick hair have no impact on her. He carries himself with better posture and he is buff in his upper body and he is very active with outside sports.

Both he and I are of above average intelligence. Okay, she is crazy about this guy and eventually wants to marry him. With me, she says she loves me dearly, perhaps her best friend ever, only one girl friend rivals my friendship with her. She says that for a love partner, she never even looked at me. When she started having feelings for me as a spiritual partner, she took a good hard look at me as a 2D, thought maybe she should try it and see if the chemistry would develop but then deicded against that.

Okay, here is what we have.
Two Guys the same height and weight. Both intelligent. I am the talkative type, he is the strong silent type.

My advantages, much handsomer face, much better hair, more youthful look,
more into spiritual nature

His advantages- better posture, buffed upper body, chest & shoulders, is more active in sports while I am more sedentary, he is 9 years younger.

This looks like it should be a tough decision, a very difficult call to make. However, I am not even a player, she is totally gaga over this guy. What attracts her the way I see it is:
He is active and involved with many sports.
His upper body is taut.
He is on a withdraw and is not reaching
He exudes more mystery by not talking too much
My virtues don't count for much in her eyes.

She just called me this minute as I was writing this and told me that he has not called her since the party Sunday. She called him yesterday and does not want to over reach so what should she do? She said she wants to make it official and announce that they are going together but he is not showing much interest in her.

Actually, I am still mocking up having her for my 2D. I have Purple Hazes's opinion that he probably is not that interested in her. I told her yesterday that I am joining a gym and am going to go every day and become very buff.

Everything is starting go my way as I had planned but now she is asking for my advice to help her get this other guy. An awful lot of this crazy type stuff is comming my way these days. If I give advice, I have to give the best possible advice I can give. I could never sabotage her and give her bad acvice. I will not engage in unethical activities such as that and commit overt acts against the two of them, especially her. She is my best friend.

Can someone give me advice?
Lakey

Yeh . . . look at all you wrote above about the comparison between you and the guy, Lakey.

It's all body stuff.

You have not once related how, or what, any spiritual relationship or feelings might be involved. You mentioned "chemistry" That's inert shit, mate. "Chemistry" gets activated and sparked on by the spiritual and emotional life-force that flows between the couple involved.

And let me tell you, if you focus too much on the body thing, your awareness/attention gets deviated away from your spiritual life-force being properly employed . . . and no spark of the chemistry. Of course, many quite automatically are commingled with their spiritual life-force, and it does get to automatically sparking the "chemistry."

Have a look at how you can relate with these folks on a more spiritual relationship basis.

AS regards advice to Edey . . . . the best advise to give anybody is to suggest they out and out, point blank seek to establish the truth. In this case, she asks the guy: what kind of relationship do you want to have with me?

One should only play games/have relationships based on the understanding of the truths of the situation.

R

 

[Ted]

Ted, this is all good stuff, I can't really disagree with anything which you have said and yet it is not really what I am talking about. It is close but somehow is not quite the same as the area I am looking at.

You look at my friend Edey. This boyfriend of hers and I are both about 5'11" and 240 pounds. He is 9 years younger than me but he looks 70 and I look 60, his hairline is receeding while my hair is as thick as when I was 25. My face is much handsomer than his.

Edey has no chemistry with me, and has chemistry with him. Here's the deal, he is active in hiking, snorkeling, bicycling, tennis and a few other sports which she mentioned. His shoulders, chest and arms are buff. She admitted that he had allowed some belly fat to develop but she was willing to overlook that.

The thing is that my more handsome face, more youthful appearance and thick hair have no impact on her. He carries himself with better posture and he is buff in his upper body and he is very active with outside sports.

Both he and I are of above average intelligence. Okay, she is crazy about this guy and eventually wants to marry him. With me, she says she loves me dearly, perhaps her best friend ever, only one girl friend rivals my friendship with her. She says that for a love partner, she never even looked at me. When she started having feelings for me as a spiritual partner, she took a good hard look at me as a 2D, thought maybe she should try it and see if the chemistry would develop but then deicded against that.

Okay, here is what we have.
Two Guys the same height and weight. Both intelligent. I am the talkative type, he is the strong silent type.

My advantages, much handsomer face, much better hair, more youthful look,
more into spiritual nature

His advantages- better posture, buffed upper body, chest & shoulders, is more active in sports while I am more sedentary, he is 9 years younger.

This looks like it should be a tough decision, a very difficult call to make. However, I am not even a player, she is totally gaga over this guy. What attracts her the way I see it is:
He is active and involved with many sports.
His upper body is taut.
He is on a withdraw and is not reaching
He exudes more mystery by not talking too much
My virtues don't count for much in her eyes.

She just called me this minute as I was writing this and told me that he has not called her since the party Sunday. She called him yesterday and does not want to over reach so what should she do? She said she wants to make it official and announce that they are going together but he is not showing much interest in her.

Actually, I am still mocking up having her for my 2D. I have Purple Hazes's opinion that he probably is not that interested in her. I told her yesterday that I am joining a gym and am going to go every day and become very buff.

Everything is starting go my way as I had planned but now she is asking for my advice to help her get this other guy. An awful lot of this crazy type stuff is comming my way these days. If I give advice, I have to give the best possible advice I can give. I could never sabotage her and give her bad acvice. I will not engage in unethical activities such as that and commit overt acts against the two of them, especially her. She is my best friend.

Can someone give me advice?
Lakey

I wouldn't doubt if that's the glue in the attraction.

As for the rest of these considerations, it seems very MESTy to me. Kinda weird.

Maybe the best place to start is to come off what you think you know about women and 2D and even yourself from another's perspective. Assume you don't know a damn thing worth a hoot. Start there.

 

[Ted]

never let it be said that someone can beat me to putting foot to mouth.

My best friend from high school has had a black belt in karate for decades. He has ridden a bicycle across the country. He eats vegetarian.

Alan Walter was massively overweight. His accomplishments are legendary.

Is one more attractive than the other?

not necessarily. Just different birds would be attracted. and not for the bodies. for the being.

I think the key is being yourself most fully.

When I went clear, I felt as though I wasn't more myself, but less of the non me had vanished. In essence more of me was visible.

I like active people to hang with. Talking doesn't really rock my boat. I wouldn't be attracted to a sedentary person. I want someone to do things with.

We have a son and daughter in law who aren't physically active. my wife and I take their twins and run them all over the planet. Their kids love us. We support outdoor activities. Their parents support indoor quiet.

if you want to attract a vibrant female, it seems to me, you need to be a vibrant guy.

A couple of years ago I ran into a woman in her 80s, on the ski run, who was into her second set of knee replacements. I like that attitude. I want the person who will grow up to be Ruth Gordon's role in "Harold and Maude."

If you want a sedentary person, you're the right person without any change.

My wife rode a Triumph 500 when she was younger. She jumped horses over cacti. She was a competitive swimmer.

Our child raising attitudes are similar. I take the kids off rock faces, up trees, and she thinks that's great. If I was our daughter in law's husband, I would get nothing but flak. In a million billion trillion years, we'd never be a match.

find your inner Lakey and decide if you are physically active. If you are, then get in shape. If not, look for someone similar.

in essence, you are comparing what he has to what you have, in the way of a body.

you should be looking at be and do. have takes a back bench to be and do any day of the week.

Righto.

Or Ruth Gordon in "Rosemary's Baby." "Best Supporting Actress."

Different strokes for different folks.

 

[Ted]

In keeping with the recent train of thought on musical spoofs, here's one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y54FRMedT_s&feature=player_embedded

 

[Auditor's Toad]

"I have to give the best possible advice I can give. "

Not that you asked.....but......

Oh, boy ! I have dear men friends that are long married to a woman I'd not make it day with. And dear women friends that are long married to men I can't believe they would have ever gone out on a date with. And lord knows many people wonder why my wife could have ever even talked to me way back when.

And, to me, that is how relationships are. And how is that ? Highly unique !
I do know a relationship takes ( and I stole this from where I forgot ) one "no" to cease.

Like most men, I do appreciate physical beauty. And I have long said that physical beauty is 2 % of the whole package while who is home is 98% of the package. And I can tell you some of the women I really really love never won a beauty contest 'back in day' or last week.

My specific little things I like to do? ( and I stole all these from different people and places along the way )

I always feel like my wife has always been better to me than I have to her so I'm always looking for an opportunity to do something to catch up a little.

Her tolerance for a suprise is high, so I like to do things to suprise her - be it fresh flowers, a trip up into the mountains, or a trip away.

I do my best to pay attention to what she likes and do my best to present it to her.

For us Xscn, to me, most aspects of a relationship are like accessing a list...go to what is reading and handle it.

And on 'hooking up'? Hard to put in words but sometimes a person is not really visible to another person. Doesn't matter what one does to get the attention of the other person it just isn't going to happen. Not a matter of 'like' or 'dislike' as it is a matter of being visible as a being to another where they are. That is my opinion.

On "hooking up", I was chasing her so hard I didn't notice she was chasing me. She was chasing me so hard she didn't notice I was chasing her. Once we paid attention to the obvious -LOL! - we got married. Those watching the "chase" thought it was pretty funny

But, hey, I've had so many people say my relationship with my wife ( and hers with me ) is magic because they don't see us doing anything to "work" on it.

And as another poster so beautifully said in words to the effect of " In the same room if she is reading a book and I'm on my 'puter, we are making love".

But I surely wouldn't want to even begin to tell someone else what they "ought" to do to find, begin, or maintain any relationship.

If people ask I do suggest they spend as much time planning their relationship as they do the wedding, ( Stole that, too.)

 

[Auditor's Toad]

In keeping with the recent train of thought on musical spoofs, here's one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y54FRMedT_s&feature=player_embedded

:: I promised myself to refrain from making political comments or C & P of political jokes. I need to keep my promise ::

 

[FoTi]

Lakey, I would agree with you with a handful of caveats that I am not going into now.

This I will say: The direct perception of bodies has much to do with theta perceptics. When I say direct, I mean not magazine pictures but real, eyes, ears, and when appropriate, hands-on.

The early scientology I knew was populated with hot women that grew even hotter with their auditing. Were they centerfold specimens? No. Were they models of hotness? No, not by Madison Avenue standards. They were, each in their own right, downright attractive. In contrast, I have seen or known women who, by body standards, should have been attractive but who were repulsive with case quietly hung out to view. Having experienced the pleasure of a beautiful wife and three daughters, I am certain that women must see something similar in men. Note that some of the finest looking women hook up with men that look like putzes. I would conclude that women have different values than men.

I will paraphrase hubbard from one of his PDC lectures: The preclears body ~IS~ his case.

Is that a total truth? It seems to have been for hubbard. Yet, there is enough truth in the statement that it could apply to many of us. I will add that there is no reason a being has to have a down-tone case. It is likely the high-toned aspects of its case that are messing the being up anyway. If you buy into the tone scale as being some degree accurate or useful, you will note on the scale that bodies do not survive below 0.0 (Death). Nor do they exhibit tones above 4.0 (Enthusiasm). Those extremes of tone outside the body range belong to the being itself.

The way to piss any being off is to identify it as the body with all the junk that bodies tend to throw off. The way you do that is to ignore the being and focus on the body. This can really piss off a woman who is, herself, not being a body.

Yes, man-woman relationships have a lot to do with the sex of the bodies. When a couple of theta beings get together, with bodies in tow, something else comes about. My wife and I could be in the same room, her reading a book, me on the computer, yet we are making love, and quite satisfying it is, too.

Something to think about.

Ted, you're such a beautiful guy.

 

[RogerB]

Originally Posted by Ted View Post
Lakey, I would agree with you with a handful of caveats that I am not going into now.

This I will say: The direct perception of bodies has much to do with theta perceptics. When I say direct, I mean not magazine pictures but real, eyes, ears, and when appropriate, hands-on.

The early scientology I knew was populated with hot women that grew even hotter with their auditing. Were they centerfold specimens? No. Were they models of hotness? No, not by Madison Avenue standards. They were, each in their own right, downright attractive. In contrast, I have seen or known women who, by body standards, should have been attractive but who were repulsive with case quietly hung out to view. Having experienced the pleasure of a beautiful wife and three daughters, I am certain that women must see something similar in men. Note that some of the finest looking women hook up with men that look like putzes. I would conclude that women have different values than men.

I will paraphrase hubbard from one of his PDC lectures: The preclears body ~IS~ his case.

Is that a total truth? It seems to have been for hubbard. Yet, there is enough truth in the statement that it could apply to many of us. I will add that there is no reason a being has to have a down-tone case. It is likely the high-toned aspects of its case that are messing the being up anyway. If you buy into the tone scale as being some degree accurate or useful, you will note on the scale that bodies do not survive below 0.0 (Death). Nor do they exhibit tones above 4.0 (Enthusiasm). Those extremes of tone outside the body range belong to the being itself.

The way to piss any being off is to identify it as the body with all the junk that bodies tend to throw off. The way you do that is to ignore the being and focus on the body. This can really piss off a woman who is, herself, not being a body.

Yes, man-woman relationships have a lot to do with the sex of the bodies. When a couple of theta beings get together, with bodies in tow, something else comes about. My wife and I could be in the same room, her reading a book, me on the computer, yet we are making love, and quite satisfying it is, too.

Something to think about.

Ted, you're such a beautiful guy.

Yep, a class act.

His above is a beautifully written expression of the scenario.

R

 

[Auditor's Toad]

"I will paraphrase hubbard from one of his PDC lectures: The preclears body ~IS~ his case.

Is that a total truth? It seems to have been for hubbard. Yet, there is enough truth in the statement that it could apply to many of us. I will add that there is no reason a being has to have a down-tone case. It is likely the high-toned aspects of its case that are messing the being up anyway. If you buy into the tone scale as being some degree accurate or useful, you will note on the scale that bodies do not survive below 0.0 (Death). Nor do they exhibit tones above 4.0 (Enthusiasm). Those extremes of tone outside the body range belong to the being itself."

Righto. Now I need someone to kindly and gently explain to me why hubbard had all those young ladies of the CMO around him in hot pants and halter tops. Anybody remember that era?

 

[FoTi]

If you've never seen it, here is a free movie I saw last night on Youtube. It's about the 2D - values in life, love, caring and a few messages of maybe what's really important. It's an hour and forty minutes long, so get your popcorn ready.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u0RgCi5T-w&feature=channel

 

[Ted]

"I will paraphrase hubbard from one of his PDC lectures: The preclears body ~IS~ his case.

Is that a total truth? It seems to have been for hubbard. Yet, there is enough truth in the statement that it could apply to many of us. I will add that there is no reason a being has to have a down-tone case. It is likely the high-toned aspects of its case that are messing the being up anyway. If you buy into the tone scale as being some degree accurate or useful, you will note on the scale that bodies do not survive below 0.0 (Death). Nor do they exhibit tones above 4.0 (Enthusiasm). Those extremes of tone outside the body range belong to the being itself."

Righto. Now I need someone to kindly and gently explain to me why hubbard had all those young ladies of the CMO around him in hot pants and halter tops. Anybody remember that era?

My guess is that they would do his biding loyally, without question -- not the same with guys young or old. No sexual connotations implied. Young girls like to wear the hottie stuff. It is likely Hubbard just ignored it.

Again, that's my guess.

 

[Enthetan]

He didn't buy it; he didn't rent it. In true politician fashion, he attempted to get away with it scot-free.

I wonder if the primary source of his enjoyment with Monica was the sex, or the thrill of having so much power over the mind of a young woman that she would willingly let herself be used as a sperm receptacle by somebody who cared nothing for her.

 

[FoTi]

"I will paraphrase hubbard from one of his PDC lectures: The preclears body ~IS~ his case.

Is that a total truth? It seems to have been for hubbard. Yet, there is enough truth in the statement that it could apply to many of us. I will add that there is no reason a being has to have a down-tone case. It is likely the high-toned aspects of its case that are messing the being up anyway. If you buy into the tone scale as being some degree accurate or useful, you will note on the scale that bodies do not survive below 0.0 (Death). Nor do they exhibit tones above 4.0 (Enthusiasm). Those extremes of tone outside the body range belong to the being itself."

Righto. Now I need someone to kindly and gently explain to me why hubbard had all those young ladies of the CMO around him in hot pants and halter tops. Anybody remember that era?

I remember the hot pants and halter tops era. At the time I had two male roommates that were in the S.O. (working in a class IV Org). I remember one of them mentioning it and joking around about it. When I heard that I was shocked....it seemed so out of alignment with what I thought LRH would be about. Sounded to me like he was exploiting young girls.....I didn't like what I heard....it felt kind of shitty to me. I never said anything, but it did bother me.

 

[Ted]

I wonder if the primary source of his enjoyment with Monica was the sex, or the thrill of having so much power over the mind of a young woman that she would willingly let herself be used as a sperm receptacle by somebody who cared nothing for her.

The sex thing goes right along with Power Positions. It's part of the package for a lot of beings both male and female.

 

[Enthetan]

This looks like it should be a tough decision, a very difficult call to make. However, I am not even a player, she is totally gaga over this guy. What attracts her the way I see it is:
He is active and involved with many sports.
His upper body is taut.
He is on a withdraw and is not reaching
He exudes more mystery by not talking too much
My virtues don't count for much in her eyes.

My two cents? You reach too much.

You want her intensely. She withdraws. You are no game.

He does not NEED her. He has lots of options. He'll accept her if she reaches for HIM, but he does not need to make an effort to reach for her. His withdrawal creates a game for her which is exciting. He is the Alpha male, somebody whose capture by her would give her status among her friends.

Observe closely and tell me if I'm making a correct evaluation.

 

[Ted]

Class Acts

Fred and Ginger:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxPgplMujzQ


Fred and Eleanor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWW6QeeVzDc&p=5EA22DB9E6B81F4A&playnext=1&index=9

Fred and Joan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDPLA9_cIEg&p=5EA22DB9E6B81F4A&index=16&feature=BF

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Lakey and the Ladies

Rog, Carmelo, Toad, Haze, Enthetan and Ted have made some wonderful, I repeat W-O-N-D-E-R-F-U-L posts for you, Lakey. Ted is so, so right about “making love”, IMO. Thank you…I learn so much from all y’all.

Sometime back I made my statement re: boys and girls so I’ll not repeat myself here…you can go back and read it, if you wish. http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=470409&postcount=5776

Human beings are not cattle in a pen at the auction. Men aren’t bulls to be sized up and bid on and women aren’t cows to be picked apart and judged.

Sex is getting one’s rocks off and can be lots of fun. It also can be a situation where one or the other…or both…are, in essence, using the other to masturbate.

“Making Love” to me only occurs when you’re “all the way in” and that doesn’t happen overnight, and it certainly never happens unless the other persons needs, pleasures, dreams and desires are more important to you than your own.

My Lady friend is most attractive, ultra “fit”, very desirable to men, whitty and successful, and had suitors more handsome, smarter, fitter and richer than I. So, why me?

There are tangible and intangible reasons as to why me. Our relationship is personal and I’m not about to discuss it in any deep detail here on an open board. It’s my personal “business”, as the saying goes, and is between the two of us and no one else.

I will say this as to "why me" for you Lakey, my friend—from some of what she has shared with me; I listen to her, I talk with her and am interested in her dreams, her concerns, her life and her viewpoint; I respect her and treat her with kindness, always; I am honest with her even when that honesty means that I am not Sir Galahad; she can be “herself” with me and I will not judge her nor rebuke her; I know (most of the time) when not to “push” and when to “put my foot down”.

In my experience, women are less “motivated” by the physical attributes of men than men are of women. Women are emerging from centuries upon centuries of oppression by men. That’s a fact, jack. If you lead with your chin (ego) you stand a good chance of getting “slapped” (rejected). If you lead with your heart (openness) you might still get rejected but, I promise you someday, somehow, somewhere you’ll find Love. And, that’s what women are all about—Love. And, what is “Love” to a women? Hell if I know…it’s as different as there are individual men and individual women. But, once they fall in love with you, you’re the greatest thing since sliced bread and, as long as you graciously serve your time in the toaster, the butter and the jam is most exquisite. Men, by nature, are looking for sex, fun and companionship (devotion). Women, by nature, are looking for love, strength (character) and a committment to the realationship.

Oh, and she also likes my 9 inch Shwartz……….just kidding, folks!

Face