They say that the way to a woman’s heart is through laughter. I believe, for most that is true, and today I realized another level reflecting what that truly means.
—

Earlier I was on the phone with someone. She, like many believe I take life too seriously. My usual laughter about the things that upset others, does not negate what they perceive. I indeed take life seriously, and in comparison with how they want in that moment, it is too seriously. I do so, because simply … I love life.

Imagine that someone claims to love you, but never takes you seriously.

When we love someone we are appreciative, accepting, understanding, and supportive of them. If we ever find ourselves stressed out by someone we love, that moment of stress is our resistance and is actually the absence of love. It is to shun what we otherwise would embrace, if we loved in that moment. It’s a delusion to think we can love while rejecting that object of our love. We only reject the things we hate / dislike, even if we only hate it for a moment.

All stress comes from resistance.

The person who worries about life is often perceived as one who takes life too seriously. Imagine that you tell someone you are going to try to achieve some goal, and their first reaction is to laugh. You might perceive them to be not taking you seriously. Their second reaction is to worry, and that reflects that they believe you really will try. As such, they took your statement seriously. However, have they truly taken ‘you’ seriously, if they already perceive that you will fail or become hurt if you try?

If we truly (purely) trust and believe in someone, we will not worry.

If you trust your ability to endure and / or make it through, you will not worry about yourself. As such, if someone worries about you, they do not truly (purely) trust you. They have not truly taken you as a person, seriously; they merely took your statement seriously. They believe it, but not in you.

That is what it means to truly take something seriously.

The preceding does not mean that the person who is stressed out by life, does not take life seriously. They indeed take life seriously. Their stress is because they merely do not take themselves seriously. They do not believe in their ability to endure, or get through whatever it is that stresses them out. They worry about the pain, or other things.

When someone says another takes life too seriously, either they do not truly (purely) love life, or they simply mean that the other is stressing themselves out. If the other is not actually worrying, then they are projecting. If they are projecting, then while they perceive the latter, it is actually the former. In other words, they are saying the other is stressing themselves out but the truth is the other is stressing them out, or it would be stressful for them.

They do not know how to handle life well.

Personally, I have literally an  insane amount of love for life, and faith in myself. Therefore, I do not worry about life, and the things which stress out most others, I find amusing. Another assumption some make about being serious is that it must be done straight-faced / stoically. That is a delusion. Amusement does not inherently mean one is not taking it seriously. A person can truly believe another means what they say, and still find it funny. You can ask them to do something with you, they can laugh at the situation and still say, “okay, let’s.”

“This should be interesting.”

When life does not worry or stress us, we do not seek to escape it in any capacity. We will embrace the many levels of it. However, if we find ourselves not wanting to get too deeply involved in life, that indicates worry and stress; an absence of love for life. Those that truly value life, appreciate every level they perceive. That does not mean they will search for / seek every level, they will just appreciate whatever comes. However, some people are flighty. Those who feel the need to always be busy are an example of such. The more we approach that state, the flightier we are.

Avoidance is an act of fear.

Some of us are taught or told that stress is something to be avoided (feared). I do not disagree with that, however, I do not inherently agree either. Personally, I would rather deal with something than avoid it, but if a person cannot truly handle something, then perhaps it should be avoided. However, avoidance never solves anything; it is a temporary measure. If we desire solutions, then avoiding is not conducive to our desire. We must find the resolve to truly pursue desires. In that case, until it is proven that we cannot truly handle it, we should believe in our ability to do so, and actually try to.

Bravery or fearlessness is required.

However, what happens when you have a person that cannot control what they feel, because a large part of what they feel is who they are, and hard-coded into their being? Said person is subject to reaction, and if their reactions are usually negative, they are left to either embrace it, try to instill positive reactions, or simply avoid it. Therein lies what happens with many women.

Women are naturally emotional beings.

They are also inherently driven, due to their nature of desiring. It is for this reason that there are more women in universities than men, because women in general desire more than men do. Desiring something better or worse than what is, is superfluous when we are truly satisfied with what is. Thus, dreams are born of dissatisfaction. If we are not dissatisfied with what is, we merely perceive what is.

That is not solely the case with women.

People in general desire more than they have. That desire births action, joy and misery. Without desire, we would merely die. As such, desire is not absolutely bad nor good. It is a necessary function of life, and it just is. Desire is a major topic in Buddhism. The understanding is that desire births misery, but it does not state that desire is bad. It proposes the irony of, if we ‘desire’ to not be miserable, then we should strive (desire) to remove desire.

It is not possible to remove all desires and still live, because desire / fear are necessary to live. However, in Buddhism transcendence is key. We return to this plane of existence because of our desire for material existence (our fear of not existing). In removing all desire, we cease to exist materially (perceivably, we die permanently). However, that is beyond the scope of this. The point of this is simply my realization of why it is that she, or you would rather play than be serious.

She or you, just do not want to be sad, and if you are not playing then you just might be, because you do not purely love life. That is only the case if you would ‘rather’ play than be serious. Playing, is a part of life. So a person who would rather not play, also does not truly love life. Such a person tries to limit their experience, not wanting the perceivable bad that unavoidably comes with the good. And if he can perpetually put a smile on her face, he will undoubtedly win her heart. For she appreciates dreams more than reality, and would rather live the fantasy that is weaved.  — Such women are more prone to perceive life to be magical, construing it to be a gift, instead of perceiving it to just be, life.

Regardless, of if that is what it is.

That is why some women consistently end up with men that lie to them. It’s not that all people lie so much, but rather, they are attracted to the fantasy; addicted to being ‘happy’ even if it means things are not real / fabricated / a lie. They do not really want to know the truth regardless of what they delude. The proof is in their actions, lies appeal more than reality. If you are such a person, to prove it just pay attention to what happens when someone tells you the truth, versus when someone tells you something fantastical. If the truth seems like a chore, then it even more so the case.

A rock is a rock, but it can still be valued.

Fortunately, I maintain at least dual views on all things. I perceive life to just be life, and something to be cherished. Both views contribute to my love for life. However, because I love life so much, I prefer to not ‘exist’ in fantasies, and I am not the type to weave them. People dream based on things I say, but the things I say transpired in actuality. They even dream about the way I say it, though I speak calmly and am almost always relaxed. Simply put, I am not a man many woman can love, or that will win their heart. I used to be one who could sweep a woman off her feet, but that is no longer the case. It stopped being the case, when I began to truly love and appreciate life in all its flavors.

And I have no desire to win the hearts of many.

Fall in love with me? If it happens, so be it; I will appreciate that part of life if it comes. Until then, you either love me or you do not, and I am satisfied with your love or absence of it. Maybe one day, I will be able to perpetually put a smile on the face of a woman I love. Maybe one day my conversations will tickle her fancy for fantasy. Maybe I will merely interact with women that love life, truly; or solely with women that have a kind of stillness and are less reactionary. They do exist, after all most who would read this are very much like that.

Since, if you were not this would be too serious / deep.

Nonetheless, you can figure out how much you are such a person, by simply asking yourself, “is there anything about life that bothers me?” The more things about life that bother you, the less you love life. Such is also reflected if you ever desire to change aspects of life or the world. If so, then you do not solely appreciate / love life; you do not purely find it to be beautiful. Ironically, I even love (appreciate) the things I find to be ugly ‘in’ life, but nothing about life itself do I find ugly. All of life is beautiful to me, the death, sadness, pain, joy, etc.; I do not wish that any of it did not exist.

It is because of that many perceive my love for life to be to an insane. “How can he enjoy knowing people are dying? Does it not sadden him?” I can, do, and no, it does not. It’s a part of life, and life is beautiful. Sanity to most people is finding much of life to be ugly; irrespective of the fact that all of life has a purpose. Sanity is to discard around 50% of existence. For everything most people enjoy, they have an opposite that they do not. Sanity is arrogantly finding life to be wrong, instead of accepting it; because most actually enjoy being stressed-out by it, and so they resist ‘life’ itself, as if, they can actually win. I take it seriously, but it still amuses me, lol.

How could that not?

Despite my perception, I do not interact with women who truly love life. In fact, I have never met one. They all enjoy living fantasies to some degree. Perhaps, women cannot ever be so extreme. If so, that’s fine since I do not think they should be. A still woman in my eyes is one who has lost the very thing that I find to be beautiful about women (their energy). So despite my preferences for myself, I actually prefer for women to not be like me.

Society is fine as it is.

You are fine, as you are. We either fit, or we do not. — I will never stop loving life, in all of my capacity; I will never stop appreciating all of its beauty. However, maybe one day I will just be more diverse in the things that interest me; and maybe one day you will take life more seriously. Should some day, we be able to “live” together; I sincerely look forward to truly interacting / sharing with you.

- Prasand J.

The way to a woman’s heart is through laughter,
unless she truly loves life / you
which then, the way is through yours
for truly being yourself will make her smile.

We often delude that it’s possible to evolve with someone who’s different. Yet in actuality, a ‘difference’ is a lack of unity; and due to conflict we individually, internally, grow against that person or because of that person. — Depending on our observation we may find that beautiful, and appreciate being inspired by them. That’s fine; but regardless, we have not grown nor evolved ‘with’ them. That growth is our own progress within ourselves, fostered or contributed by the person who’s different. As such, due to the exposure of something different we have grown as a person, but have not evolved as a person.

To understand evolution, let us imagine a butterfly.

It lives, it flies, it eats, and is eaten. There are millions of similar butterflies doing the same thing, yet none are exactly the same. There are various deformities, like the color of their wings, size, etc. If the habitat of the butterflies is typically yellow, but the butterflies are generally orange, then the butterflies with deformities closer to yellow have a greater chance of survival (camouflage).

With each generation, natural selection (predators) will cause there to be a larger group of butterflies that survive. Each generation will have been pruned to a degree that yellow butterflies will become dominant. The genes will lean to yellow so much (warped redundantly), that it will eventually consistently produce yellow, and orange will be virtually extinct (dormant or recessive gene).

In turn, the predators will require better eyesight, or skill to differentiate the butterflies. Those who have it will eat well (thrive), and those who do not will starve in comparison (ultimately perishing or become extinct); a inverse natural selection. If two predators with good eye-sight reproduce, they too will warp their genes to a degree that those genes will purposely produce offspring with greater eye-sight. If they mate with a predator with poor eye-sight, by chance they may produce an offspring with greater eye-sight; but the probability is lower.

That is evolution.

Evolution is the perpetuation and growth of traits to promote well-being. It is the development of what exists, not the creation of that which doesn’t. As such, by definition when we grow as a person we are de-evolving. This isn’t inherently a “bad” thing, most people prefer to grow as a person. That can be an innate desire, but is usually a learned desire. Regardless, with everything there are pros and cons. If we interact with someone who causes us to diversify ourselves, we become conflicted.

eg. Jane loves fashion.

She drinks it, eats it, sleeps it, breathes it; but she’s dating Harry who hates fashion. Harry is a sports fanatic. Any sport, all sports, if they compete with physical prowess he enjoys it. Jane is completely uninterested in sports, and Harry couldn’t give two shits about fashion. Though because of the lack of unity in the relationship, they decide to expose each other to the variation. After many attempts, and approaches, they finally learn to appreciate each other’s interests.

That is a beautiful thing.

For that’s how we’re taught to perceive it. Besides how we are taught, it’s beautiful in the sense that Jane and Harry loved each other enough to overcome themselves for love. — However, in the duration Jane doesn’t realize that while she’s expanding her horizons she’s belittling the self that existed prior. She may still love fashion, but where she gave 100% of her time to fashion, she now gives 60% of it, and 40% goes to various other things. It’s still a large number, hence why in her eyes she still loves fashion. Yet, the mentality that’s required in order to implement that is: we must perceive that which we once valued, to be some degree less significant than it used to be. In other words, it’s become in some ways insignificant.

That’s the birth of insecurity and doubt in ourselves.

Granted, in actuality insecurity is born the moment we first experience pain (thus at birth), but for the sake of this situation if we didn’t know insecurity prior to that moment, we will have learned it because of that moment. In actuality, that insecurity is just one of the many added to the list throught our existence, and it’s significance / effect on us decreases or increases based on the momentum or weight it gains. — Regardless, in expanding our horizons, we lose our focus, become insecure, and doubt ourselves; but in being focused, we lose our exposure, become complacent, and know nothing but ourselves. Inevitably, the stance we take will have cons as well as pros. In the end, it comes down to preference. What we desire to do is all that matters.

Nonetheless, we can only evolve with someone we are similar, and nature itself through natural selection mandates the importance of that. Only someone with whom we are similar (truly loves us) will support and perpetuate us (thus foster our happiness); and we’ll only know insecurity with someone we are not similar, but they will foster the happiness we are taught to perceive (thus, mental happiness, and not actual). If you care to prove it to yourself, simply try to quantify your happiness. If you can, put actual numbers on it, then it’s because you have something tangible to base those numbers on. As such, if you can’t, it’s intangible and not actual / true happiness.

Since childhood, most of the things we’re taught are in defiance of or reject evolutionary relationships. So we spend our lives applying those things, creating / manipulating ourselves, until we lose sight of ourselves, and then must find ourselves. it’s only when we become tired of the stress, and conflicts, that we seek accordance, and allow us to “be” ourselves. In other words, it is then that the spice of life no longer interests, because the spice comes at a price; and that price is,

ourselves.

- Prasand J.

Do you want to evolve?
It’s not wrong to say, no.

“We can dance with circumstances and possibilities … but when will we take the chance and be free to be ourselves?”

I’ve been playing with that thought for a bit, as recent relationships came crashing to an end due to fear and the inability to be honest with each other. The inability to share ourselves and become true lovers. I can understand what causes it, be it due to experience or second-hand … the past or present … and even know that we hide because true vulnerability is utterly terrifying. I’ve even justified it saying that we can’t be ourselves with certain people because we weren’t meant to be, and that when the bond is true we couldn’t stop them from seeing through us … or stop them from bringing out our true selves. That in such a situation the only thing we can do to prevent it is to run away. However, the one thing I can’t grasp is “why don’t people want to be themselves?” Is being ourself such a hell?

I mean, this isn’t in regard to the person who’s unpopular staring at the other side of the fence … unable to perceive the good on their side, and the bad on the other … or any situation of the like. That is elementary, and I’m not referring to or speaking of the basics of psychology or stolen identities but rather those moments where we believe or delude that we “want” to tell the truth, but don’t allow ourselves to and make it so hard just to utter a few words. In those moments, we’re afraid to be rejected, or more so we’re afraid that they wouldn’t accept it … us. Afraid to lose them. That much I understand, but what I don’t is … “is living a lie so grand?” How does one justify being accepted for a lie? If we’re hiding ourselves, then we’re lying. Since the person who we show is not really who we are … if anything it’s just an inkling of who we really are.

So I guess some of us would justify, “if they can accept me with the volume turned down, maybe they can accept me with it turned up.” Maybe for those of us who hide … it’s a trial run. However, do we not realize that things are only as bad as we percieve them to be? We just don’t think about it I guess, as we’re lost in the moment of illusion carving our delusions. Do we care so much about “being loved”, that we’ll accept love even if the person they are loving is not us? If we take a sec to think about it in that moment, we’ll see that we aren’t really being loved. We want to them to accept “us” as we are, even if that is not “us”. Wtf? So I guess people just want the feeling, the energy. So we’re afraid to let someone in, and proud of an identity which is not real or proud of something which doesn’t exist.

That just doesn’t make any sense to me. I mean, I can see the reasons and that social standard of sanity (which is just insanity to me) … but I can’t justify doing it personally, nor can I rationalize loving you for who you are not.

So seriously … how do you?

- Prasand J.