kid-A

Joined

• started 81 topics
• posted 2,938 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by kid-A

• 
  26

  Nosferatu's School of Dating - Lesson 2.2 - Building Rapport

  by Nosferatu in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  since many have commented that lesson 2.1 has "no feeling", portrays the individual as an abuser, and all the other negative comments, i decided to cover rapport next.. the unfortunate thing is i can only give you tips on how to build good rapport.

  i will not be giving you magic lines that will make her fall in love with you.

  it's your own personality, your enthusiasm, your wit, your sense of humor, your creativeness, and your imagination that has to do the actual work.. many people will tell you "forget about all these tips, tricks and techniques.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  I do think you have good intentions here. I'm sure there are ex-jdubs that have problems interacting with the opposite sex due to the JW upbringing, but honestly, I have found them few and far between and no more numerous than what one would find in the population in general.

  In addition, I think some of this advice may work in highly specific settings, with a particular clientele, but I can tell you, having lived in major cities in Canada, the US and Europe, there is NO universal methodology for meeting and possibly hooking up with women.

  For example, if a guy used your suggestions in a club in Toronto, they would be mercilessly mocked, slapped and/or bounced. Some of these techniques would have worked in the college pubs in some US cities (with the 18-22 yr old sorority girls), but not in the classier establishments. Similarly, these techniques would get the cold shoulder, or worse, in a city like Paris or Barcelona. I've never been to Manitoba so I have no idea what the club culture is like there, but given the international membership of this board, I think the disclaimer "School of Dating for Manitobans" maybe in order....
• 
  21

  Is the Watchtower happy being stagnant?

  by RULES & REGULATIONS in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  stagnant.

  adj.not moving or flowing; motionless.

  foul or stale from standing: stagnant ponds.showing little or no sign of activity or advancement; not developing or progressing; inactive: a stagnant economy the sunday talks are copy and paste .the watchtower study is the same.ask the preprinted questions and answer.the ministry school is reading the same parts of the bible.the service program has the same dull presentations.the book study has some books being read 3 - 4 times.. is the watchtower society happy with being stagnant and just going thru the motions?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  A very interesting topic.

  I agree with Monkeyshine. Brainwashing is an active process, hence, what appears as stagnation to us, may in fact be a very dynamic process of constant, droning repetition of the same propaganda.

  I would use the analogy of a patient under general anesthesia (the average dub) with the anesthesiologist (WTS) needing to constantly and actively monitor their "patients" and titrate the dosage of anesthetic accordingly. It works remarkably well.
• 
  7

  Yay independence....

  by kittyeatzjdubs in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ahh the joys of living on your own and actually having to give a shit about how much money you have.

  gone are the days when you needed extra money and you could just whip up a nice dinner for lover man, give him a kiss on the cheek, and be all, "sweeeetie.

  can i have some moneeeey?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  Anyone else remember these moments, or anyone still living them?
  
  .....sigh.....alas, those days never seem to end, regardless how much money you make!

  I've got a pretty decent salary, car, mortgage, the works, and honestly, it still feels like I live pay-day to pay-day....In fact, my disposable income now, is way less then when I was making 1/2 this salary!!!!

  I think I'm gonna ditch it all and go on a $ 10 a day hiking expedition through the mountains of Tibet with Brother Tetra!!!!
• 
  104

  Further incite on Dawkin's The God Delusion

  by Abandoned in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i started a thread after i finished the first chapter of this book entitled something like, i'm an atheist.

  i finished chapter three and i have to backtrack a bit, but i also feel the need to explain why since i was so vocal.. first, let me say that i think everyon should read the first two chapters of the god delusion by richard dawkins.

  he brings up some very important points about religion and about science's place in our world.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  "Oh, and for the record, why is the onus on the theist to prove anything?"

  > For the simple reason that the theist is the one putting forth the claim, not the agnostic or atheist. Indeed, these terms only exist in response to the "god hypothesis" put forward by believers. The simple fact is, due to our overwhelmingly religious culture, believers simply "get away" with their claims, without ever being held to account for or provide real evidence for their proposed god. I could stand on a pulpit and claim that a purple unicorn exists, that he has "revealed" holy texts to me and that if all dont repent and serve him, he shall banish all non-believers to eternal torment. I would likely be put in a mental ward. However, a "preacher" need simply replace the noun "purple unicorn" with "god" and everyone believes him and reveres his wisdom, DESPITE the fact he has no greater proof of his "god" then I do for my "purple unicorn"......its all just social construction.

  "I think the onus is on anyone who wants to prove something."

  > Yes I completely agree. And as an academic scientist and researcher, thats what I do every single day in my experiments, by producing replicable, observable and tangible evidence to support or not support my particular theories and/or hypotheses. This is difference between the world of faith and the world of science. To quote Steve Colbert, the religionist only requires the "truthiness" of something, not cold, hard observable facts.
• 
  40

  Nosferatu's School of Dating - Lesson 2.1 - The Approach

  by Nosferatu in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  now that you've done your practice on starting conversations with strangers, it's time to actually approach women.. first of all, let's cover what not to do when approaching a woman:.

  1) never approach a woman from behind.

  you will startle her.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  When taking your target away from her group of friends, don't be afraid to be a tad aggressive with her. If she hesitates to leave the group, grab her hand, give her arm a slight tug, and say "Come on, have some fun!"

  WTF???

  Yes, women just love having their arms grabbed and pulled on by creepy strangers in a bar. I believe thats why BOUNCERS exist. I believe many of these techniques are used by these guys LOL :
• 
  104

  Further incite on Dawkin's The God Delusion

  by Abandoned in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i started a thread after i finished the first chapter of this book entitled something like, i'm an atheist.

  i finished chapter three and i have to backtrack a bit, but i also feel the need to explain why since i was so vocal.. first, let me say that i think everyon should read the first two chapters of the god delusion by richard dawkins.

  he brings up some very important points about religion and about science's place in our world.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  "I don't think that the most logical conclusion is atheism."

  > OK, do you have specific reasons for this sentiment? Given that the onus is upon the theist to prove the existence of some supernatural being, and given that said proof is still lacking, Okkam's razor would dictate that the only logical and coherent conclusion is the non-existence of such a hypothetical creature. I do however disagree with the term "atheism" simply because it suggests a "negation". One cannot "negate" that which does not exist, therefore the word is a misnomer.

  "I am totally opposed to theism based on my experiences with the handful of religions I've personally investigated, but I'm in love with what Hawkins refers to as Einsteinian Deism. That's the idea that there was a god who designed the entire universe, but that he isn't a prayer-answering, smiting, bible-writing, and religion-endorsing god that is so prevalent among "spiritual" people today. He is the ultimate scientist (and I use "he" out of force of habit and not out of any preference or belief into the creator having a sex) and he is fascinating based on what he's done from a building standpoint."

  >Unfortunately, this idea is as much an intellectual and logical dead-end as a more traditional conception of theism. It fails to answer the same questions:

  1) Where did this hypothetical god come from? If there is no answer, it is infinitely more rational to simply assume the universe has always existed (at the very least we have evidence of a universe) then to interject some hypothetical god-creature into the equation. A creature for which you have zero evidence, no explanation for, no purpose for and acceptable means of finding out, given that said deity apparently is mute.

  2) Why would this "supreme scientist" undertake such a bizarre series of experiments? To create some amusements for his/her/its bored mind? Would a being capable of "creating" a universe actually NEED to create hopelessly flawed, mortal, biological life forms prone to infinite barbarism and ignorance?

  3) If this being is responsible for the disaster we call the "human race", his "experiments" have indeed been a spectacular failure. The fact that said being has apparently "left the building" would suggest he/she/it is morally bankrupt and/or could care less about the "results" of their experiments. In either case, why would anyone even care? If this supreme scientist was ever really here, and is now either dead or vanished, what possible relevance can it have to the reality of your life?

  4) Ask yourself this: what motivates my need to interject some hypothetical "creator" into the universe? Am I simply too afraid to accept the ephemeral nature of my biological mortality? Does this hypothetical god serve some psychological construct deep inside my psyche that I simply cannot consider living without? Why does this concept of a deity have such appeal to you? Once you unravel the underlying psychological motivations for these emotion-driven beliefs, you will find the need for deism fading into obscurity.
• 
  15

  Where the hell is Matt?

  by purplesofa in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  feel good video.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnf_p281uu4.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  Overwhelming proof that skinny white men CANNOT dance....ANYWHERE in the world!!!! LMAO!!!!
• 
  28

  Kindness Toward Trolls

  by compound complex in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  dear givers of the benefit of the doubt,.

  i recall that in discussing "love believes all things," the aid book stated that we should give our "brother" the benefit of the doubt until we have good reason to no longer do so.

  that's the gist of it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  Going through the member directory, page by page, for just a few minutes reveals that the overwhelming majority of new accounts here produce fewer than 10 posts.

  This fact can be explained several possible ways. 1) The regular posters somehow "scare off" these newbies. I find this highly unlikely. Almost ALL newbies get warm welcomes unless they are being deliberately provocative. 2) Many many people have multiple accounts. or 3) the majority of newbies or at least a substantial proportion of them are in fact trolls with no real intention of being a regular, meaningful participant on the discussion board.

  Having been here a very long time, I am at the point where I am cynical enough to assume option 3 as the default. I generally will wait until a newbie has established themselves over a period of regular, consistent posting before the "troll alert" lights stop blinking....
• 
  7

  My take on what could transpire

  by Junction-Guy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ok so the wt society is a very wealthy organization, with billions of assets.

  for the last few years there seems to be an indication of downsizing in the printing operations, and the publications are becoming more cheaply made, it is apparent they are losing money on the publications.

  they can no longer charge for them in the usa and other countries, but only on a donation basis.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  I agree the door-to-door work is the most useless, inefficient way to promote a religion in a modern, secular, tech-savvy and "wired" world. However, I dont think having the R+F donate their free time in this useless activity costs Brooklyn any money at all, save for publishing paper versions of their propaganda. In fact, the pay-back for Brooklyn comes not from new converts, but in maintaining the dubs that they already have.

  This begs the question, why does Brookly hang on to this useless preaching mode? Simple reason: CONTROL. Membership as a "regular, jehoobie-fearing "publisher" STILL requires regular service activity and handing in time slips. Failure to do this still leads to punitive consequences such as being "marked" as inactive, or worse, visits from the Elder goon squads. I still argue that the "ministry" is still the most insidious, brilliant method of controlling the R+F that Brooklyn could EVER dream of. Field service "swallows up" ANY free time that a dub drone has left over after the 5 hours spent in the kingdumb hall every single week. Any cult operates on a simple and effective premise: Keep the drones occupied at ALL times, even if the activity is completely useless. I do not think that dollars and cents have ever been a concern for Brooklyn when it comes to "the preaching work".
• 
  155

  MAT 24:14 HAS BEEN FULLFILLED MP3 FROM BETHEL HEAVY

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  warning: the wtbts is becoming more cultish as evidenced in this mp3.

  listener take heed.

  turn on all your cult warning alarms on.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kid-A

  It is with eager expectation and joy in our hearts we now again focus on the preaching work, the important task that will eventually be completed, and culminate in the end of this system of things." ...

  Well there you have it. Edicts published in the CrapTower will always trump any fatwa issued by a lone speaker, "putting down his notes...". The WTS may be religious kooks, but they are pretty savvy "corporation men" who would never shoot themselves by giving the R+F licence to stop preaching. This is a multi-million dollar publishing corporation masquerading as a religion.....how does a corporation survive?: "Advertise...Advertise....Advertise!!!".....The ministry will never be completed, as this article clearly implies.