Would it work better for you if a female discovered it.
The problem won’t go away.
It disproves every book and conversation except that.
It’s your poison.
Thank you.
That has happened to me on many occasions. How does that affect folks (8 billion?) who don’t know of my existence? I am struggling to see the extent of what you consider to be a problem. What am I missing?
Don’t say intelligence! 
Ec,
How many problems are there… in existence?
Just curious.
The first problem I noticed …
Was the sex dimorphic / approach escalation / no means yes problem.
That’s only confined to worlds like this.
The pleasurable exclusive access problem is everything, everywhere.
I’m currently feeling reasonably happy even though I just murdered a billion innocent bacteria.
They call it, “the banality of evil”
Isn’t this problem solved with your other thing about everybody having their own heaven (individual likes) and so you can’t force your heaven on somebody else, so if you were to do the inclusive access solution, it would still maintain the consent violation problem?
…UNLESS everybody synchronizes their likes to be in alignment with the rainbow rule (self=other, us=them) …first? Because if you’re doing/thinking crap that violates self=other, then you’re violating yourself, and you’re basically in hell on earth.
Brains, brawn, and et cetera are their own unique kinds of power, and usually …I don’t know …something something something… it all comes out in the wash.
Especially if you’re a germxphobe.
Ichthus, the question was directed towards Ecmandu.
Ecmandu has demeaned, denigrated, insulted every soul on this forum. His manner is beginning to violate my consent! He is happy to avoid questions that don’t suit his ‘vision’. You aid that process.
If you must: “Private Message” is a thing, you know. Where have I previously heard such rudeness? 
Let’s look at what happened.
What’s blasphemy? I solved it as all of this.
Takes a huge load off the species!!!
I declared that existence has always been blaspheming itself as mental retardation with a tic disorder.
The pleasurable exclusive access problem needs to be solved so people stop getting hurt.
I don’t use names…. I’m somewhat reserved on those…
So I call our heavens the energetic ideal. Something that grants us what we want forever without harming a single being.
I solved the no means yes/sex dimorphic/approach escalation problem by having women do all the first moves. Otherwise it’s no means yes.
I solved that consent violation is the only problem in existence.
You don’t need dichotomies to have otherness.
I’m the first to teach this.
Being the first person to teach this….
You can take off the shackles. Nobody taught this before me.
You’re free to go. You know why? Because everything you have been taught in the past has been a lie.
Do I really want to humor religion after this?
How could I. I’m the first person to figure it out…
Just the stupidest simplest shit.
I’m not going to build a church for this.
I can’t be converted. You’re free to go.
“Private Message” is a thing, you know.
Derleydoo …I know how everybody feels…
I live in the US…
I can feel everywhere if anyone is hurt by my exclusive joy.
So I work to earn joy.
You’re just reframing your understanding of original sin … (better for other ears: fallenness) … in your own words, right? You think there’s a way we were meant to be, and we are not being it. How is that not religious…the way you define religious?
And this is a (these are) real subject/object (s) you’ve named? Maybe use “Ideals” if everyone has their own likes. Are they real/justified likes if they violate self=other, a=a, though? Just because you’re wrong about it doesn’t mean everyone is wrong that there can be a real ideal? (Fricken!!! guh don’t ask.)
This is how I approached the husband I divorced. Maybe not the best solution, but my experience is anecdotal. It also results in people saying “I didn’t ask you to x, y, z… you asked me.” Which is horseshit, given all the freaking data of them wanting x, y, z. But I’m not bitter.
Nobody has to be here. What are you talking about? You haven’t even asked me what I have been taught. In fact some of what you say sounds very similar to some of the things I was taught. Ironically. I don’t name names, either.
Cuz it wouldn’t last very long if you did?
That is because you don’t believe your own solutions (you’re already converted), which is why you wouldn’t build a church on it, & why you call it the stupidest simple shit. Jesus lived & died & built a church on … self=other. He believed in what he is.
If your solutions were real, it would be worth living and dying for. If you fully believed it, you would’ve written me a freaking song on the piano a long time ago (like I stupidly asked for) & posted the vid, we’d have gone to the ocean (which I vaguely remember stupidly asking for), public taste test, the whole thing. Guess it’s a good thing you don’t believe it.
Could it be getting everything you want does not necessarily line up with doing whatever the female initiates? That is why you are in your current situation. And it is also why I am in my current situation.
It’s too bad you can’t apply the rainbow (golden) rule (self=other) to all of your thinking. It would solve all of the wonkiness. If I wanted it solved, I would apply it. I’m sure the same is true for you.
It’s also hilarious, because you’re doing it on purpose.
It’s so nice to be on the same stupid page.
I know nobody wants their consent violated.
Should that be called teaguism?
No. It’s just that nobody wants their consent violated.
You can have that sentence free of charge.
If you want the teaching of the singularity for that sentence…. Learn under my spirit.
I’m not going to say someone can’t do it better than me or I can’t learn.
All I did was set you all free.
Go from there.
Let’s look at this a little closer.
I want everyone naked.
Others don’t want that at all. They want everyone clothed.
How do you please everyone?
With a problem like that?
You either have to dramatically convert people…
Or you change reality structurally.
This is a problem with Christianity …
I could just decide not to wear clothes anymore and bother lots of people bothered not just by nudity, but male nudity.
I’d be put on trial and after 500 years be Saint Jason.
Is there an end to this charade?
We were already free, that teaching is something we already knew, and we are all each a singularity (unity of consciousness) so there’s nothing you could teach us that we don’t already know. We don’t even need to read a book, much less drop $1.50 in late fees at the library.
But.
It’s the otherness that is interesting.
They say variety is the spice of life.
But it has to be the right variety… or you’re cooking a crock of crap.
“free” always has a cost
Shut up.
Ok. If we already know everything, as you say…
What’s my favorite color?
That’s the otherness and variety I was referring to. Sort of. The stuff we don’t know that nobody could teach us … not out of a book … unless it’s an autobiography (assuming they’re “dead” or inaccessible). Just because everyone is a different spirit/singularity doesn’t mean there isn’t something the same about our spirits/singularities. That is why self=other works, and nothing works long that violates it… it recognizes the sameness despite the difference, and the difference despite the sameness. And we don’t only want to know how to avoid violating (losing) consent, we want to know what respects (wins) consent.
Shared/aligned consents.
If I had to guess your favorite color, it would be all of them, because you don’t want to make the others feel unfavorited 
Ichthus.
You’re ignoring me.
There are people who never want anyone to wear clothes, makeup, jewelry or tattoos.
The are people who want everyone to always wear clothing, wear make up, jewelry and tattoos.
There are people who want no debasement in terms of graffiti and stickers…
And people who that’s the only thing that makes them happy.
These are called mutually exclusive consents.
Self = other doesn’t work.
There are masochistic rape sexuals …
They only get turned by raping people and getting raped by people.
I’m not interested in these people existing.
But I have to think about them because they exist.
They laugh at the golden rule.
Rape is something you don’t want. If you say you want it, you actually just want ….
You’re pretending.
[ not-born-yesterday has left the chat ]
[ not-born-yesterday has joined the chat ]
Regarding mutually exclusive (conflicting) consents, scratch out the ones that violate the golden rule and explain why—all stakeholders.
Are there any absolutes (virtues rephrased as categorical imperatives) in play in the remaining interests?
Graded absolutism is: Determine which absolute respects self=other (us=them) among the absolutes in play in a conflict of interests.
I think it is fair to say that if everyone’s interests are synchronized with self=other (us=them), there will not be what is commonly referred to as a “conflict of interest” — and if there is, the person/group is not synchronizing with all stakeholders, and does not belong in that position.
Take turns… share… etc. It’s not rocket surgery.
You really don’t get what a masochist is.
And how they are the exception to the shit rule…
What you call the golden rule.
“Rape others as I want to be raped”
There are some people you can’t rape.
How does the shit rule work for them or on them?
Sure…. You can violate their consent …. But they are impossible to rape.
How does the golden rule apply to them?
If you’re talking about sexual rape and sexual masochism… And the reason you can’t rape them is because they actually want it…
How are you violating their consent by giving them what they want that you can’t give them because they want it?
It isn’t a loophole… it’s just a paradox. They are equivocating on the word rape.
[ you-are-an-idiot has been booted from the chat ]