+- Subliminal Talk (https://subliminal-talk.com)
+-- Forum: Men's Journals (18+ NSFW) (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals-18-NSFW)
+--- Forum: Men's Journals (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals)
+--- Thread: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 (/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Discussion-Thread-Vol-8)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Johannesbrst - 08-28-2025
(08-27-2025, 10:18 AM)Shannon Wrote:(08-26-2025, 09:32 PM)Johannesbrst Wrote: Sorry for stirring up such a debacle — that wasn’t my intention. I think the reason for my reaction was that the phrasing gave me associations I normally link with the Andrew Tate style of messaging, which feels very far from what I usually associate with you and your work. Just thought I’d share that in case it’s useful to keep in mind for the future, if you’d prefer to avoid others having a similar reaction.
There is a BIG difference between what I am and what Andrew Tate is. He represents the classic "Alpha Male". I am much more an "Ascendant Alpha". Just because there is some overlap between the two does not mean one is the other. Not even close. But I am not afraid to say it when I see someone do something I don't respect. Going in knowing there will be effort required and then giving up, I can't respect that.
AM7 is going to be designed to help those guys who are green, but one of the biggest reasons we need something like AM7 is that a lot of these guys out there these days are just weak. They're raised to be weak, they are told to be weak, they're sometimes even forced to be weak. They're taught helplessness and giving up, instead of trying harder and figuring out a way forward. That's the problem, and AM7 is aimed at being a solution. But it's those very guys who need it most who are most likely to just say, "This is too hard." and walk away. No real effort, no determination, no resilience, no strength, no drive to succeed. If it's "too hard" they just give up and whine and cry about it.
One of the biggest goals of AM7 is to help guys go from weaker than they could be to stronger. Not physically, but mentally and emotionally. Help them develop their drive to achieve and succeed, and develop resilience and the strength and fortitude to keep going when they want something, even though it hurts.
We no longer live in a world where a man has to "hunt and succeed or starve to death", but we do need males to be men instead of little boys when they're physical adults. Not that long ago, in the United States, a boy was expected to start work at the age of 5 or 6 and he was expected to take a wife, BUILD HIS HOUSE, and start a family around the age of 12. Now, we have guys in their 30's, 40'sand even a few in their 50's, who are mentally and emotionally children because they've never had to take responsibility for themselves, never mind anyone else. Even if they are "parents". Quotation marks, because most "parents" these days don't, and aren't, where I am.
Don't forget that first an foremost, an Ascendant Alpha leads HIMSELF. Provides for HIMSELF. Takes care of HIMSELF. A classical Alpha needs followers, admirers, because his is a hierarchical reality, where he can only be dominant if someone else is less dominant, or not dominant. He will eventually lose his ability to maintain his dominance, because a classical Alpha is dominant for primarily physical reasons. As he ages, his physical ability to enforce that dominance will decline, and he will be challenged and replaced by someone younger and more physically capable of attaining and maintaining that position.
But an Ascendant Alpha does not need to dominate others, or have others follow him. He is his own leader, master of himself, provider for himself, and he doesn't necessarily need or want to lead (or dominate) others. Instead of leading and being dominant because he is physically capable, an Ascendant Alpha leads himself, and others will follow his lead (if he allows it) because they see his strength, and they admire him and what he is and has accomplished. The classic Alpha leads with force and fear, and the Ascendant alpha leads through being worthy of admiration he didn't necessarily want or ask for. He is just trying to be the best possible version of himself, typically for himself or himself and his family and friends.
But both types of Alpha are going to be seeking strength in some form. Classic alpha seeks physical strength primarily and strength of will, emotions, etc. are usually sought, but not primarily, Ascendant alpha seeks strength of other types more than physical. Mental, emotional, wisdom, knowledge, ability, non-physical perseverance, etc. are common.
Strength is to be respected, as long as it is not used to harm. Weakness is not respected. This is universal truth. So when a male starts a journey to become stronger, he gains respect, and as he succeeds, he gains respect. But if and when he decides it is "too hard" and just gives up... he loses respect. A LOT of respect. That is what this whole thing is about.
Thanks for the reply. Just to clarify from the start - I don’t believe you and Tate are alike. What I meant was that the phrasing about “running away as a bitch” gave me the association to Andrew Tate. And while I know you’re a thoughtful person, I still got that association, which makes me think there are plenty of others who might dismiss this kind of language as “just another guy who thinks he’s alpha,” and lump everything about IML into the “manosphere” bucket. I don’t believe it belongs there. That was my main point.
On the deeper part - I see weakness more as a symptom, manifested out of something deeper. In my experience, what’s really behind it is lack of self-belief. And self-belief can’t be given to someone, it has to come from their own lived proof. That’s why yelling at someone to “BE STRONG” can only take them so far - it works as long as someone else is pushing, but once that’s gone, the fuel runs out.
That’s why I think there’s a risk in stopping at simply labeling someone or some action as weak. The more important part is to look at the individual and figure out why they lack self-belief in that specific situation. And once that reason is clear, then encouragement can be placed behind the individual to overcome the challenge - in a steady and secure way, not in a “if you don’t do it you’re WEAK”-kind of way. Maybe that’s also how you’ve designed AM to work, and if so then I guess we agree. But from the way the description read, I got more the impression of a drill sergeant screaming at a cadet, rather than a father who steadies his son after he’s dropped a critical pass for the third time and feels crushed - and then gives him the push he needs to walk back on the field.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - 4Kingdoms - 08-28-2025
https://subliminal-talk.com/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Volume-3?pid=269536#pid269536
Shannon Wrote:Special Note: The models have finally relented and given me the data I need to specify the loop length and usage of the Extreme Hard Cases for DMSI v5.
However... CatMan is still not covered by this... his instructions go even further, and he appears to be a unique case.
Therefore, Mister CatMan, please do not use the instructions for Extreme Hard Cases, I will to calculate your instructions separately.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - London1 - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 01:20 PM)4Kingdoms Wrote: https://subliminal-talk.com/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Volume-3?pid=269536#pid269536
Shannon Wrote:Special Note: The models have finally relented and given me the data I need to specify the loop length and usage of the Extreme Hard Cases for DMSI v5.
However... CatMan is still not covered by this... his instructions go even further, and he appears to be a unique case.
Therefore, Mister CatMan, please do not use the instructions for Extreme Hard Cases, I will to calculate your instructions separately.
Why? What is wrong with CatMan?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Shannon - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 05:35 AM)Johannesbrst Wrote:(08-27-2025, 10:18 AM)Shannon Wrote: There is a BIG difference between what I am and what Andrew Tate is. He represents the classic "Alpha Male". I am much more an "Ascendant Alpha". Just because there is some overlap between the two does not mean one is the other. Not even close. But I am not afraid to say it when I see someone do something I don't respect. Going in knowing there will be effort required and then giving up, I can't respect that.
AM7 is going to be designed to help those guys who are green, but one of the biggest reasons we need something like AM7 is that a lot of these guys out there these days are just weak. They're raised to be weak, they are told to be weak, they're sometimes even forced to be weak. They're taught helplessness and giving up, instead of trying harder and figuring out a way forward. That's the problem, and AM7 is aimed at being a solution. But it's those very guys who need it most who are most likely to just say, "This is too hard." and walk away. No real effort, no determination, no resilience, no strength, no drive to succeed. If it's "too hard" they just give up and whine and cry about it.
One of the biggest goals of AM7 is to help guys go from weaker than they could be to stronger. Not physically, but mentally and emotionally. Help them develop their drive to achieve and succeed, and develop resilience and the strength and fortitude to keep going when they want something, even though it hurts.
We no longer live in a world where a man has to "hunt and succeed or starve to death", but we do need males to be men instead of little boys when they're physical adults. Not that long ago, in the United States, a boy was expected to start work at the age of 5 or 6 and he was expected to take a wife, BUILD HIS HOUSE, and start a family around the age of 12. Now, we have guys in their 30's, 40'sand even a few in their 50's, who are mentally and emotionally children because they've never had to take responsibility for themselves, never mind anyone else. Even if they are "parents". Quotation marks, because most "parents" these days don't, and aren't, where I am.
Don't forget that first an foremost, an Ascendant Alpha leads HIMSELF. Provides for HIMSELF. Takes care of HIMSELF. A classical Alpha needs followers, admirers, because his is a hierarchical reality, where he can only be dominant if someone else is less dominant, or not dominant. He will eventually lose his ability to maintain his dominance, because a classical Alpha is dominant for primarily physical reasons. As he ages, his physical ability to enforce that dominance will decline, and he will be challenged and replaced by someone younger and more physically capable of attaining and maintaining that position.
But an Ascendant Alpha does not need to dominate others, or have others follow him. He is his own leader, master of himself, provider for himself, and he doesn't necessarily need or want to lead (or dominate) others. Instead of leading and being dominant because he is physically capable, an Ascendant Alpha leads himself, and others will follow his lead (if he allows it) because they see his strength, and they admire him and what he is and has accomplished. The classic Alpha leads with force and fear, and the Ascendant alpha leads through being worthy of admiration he didn't necessarily want or ask for. He is just trying to be the best possible version of himself, typically for himself or himself and his family and friends.
But both types of Alpha are going to be seeking strength in some form. Classic alpha seeks physical strength primarily and strength of will, emotions, etc. are usually sought, but not primarily, Ascendant alpha seeks strength of other types more than physical. Mental, emotional, wisdom, knowledge, ability, non-physical perseverance, etc. are common.
Strength is to be respected, as long as it is not used to harm. Weakness is not respected. This is universal truth. So when a male starts a journey to become stronger, he gains respect, and as he succeeds, he gains respect. But if and when he decides it is "too hard" and just gives up... he loses respect. A LOT of respect. That is what this whole thing is about.
Thanks for the reply. Just to clarify from the start - I don’t believe you and Tate are alike. What I meant was that the phrasing about “running away as a bitch” gave me the association to Andrew Tate. And while I know you’re a thoughtful person, I still got that association, which makes me think there are plenty of others who might dismiss this kind of language as “just another guy who thinks he’s alpha,” and lump everything about IML into the “manosphere” bucket. I don’t believe it belongs there. That was my main point.
Your association suggests to me that you're perhaps a bit too sensitively tuned to and affected by Andrew Tate's tactics. Men have been calling weaker men who they do not respect for their weakness "bitches" for time immemorial in one way or another. This is not a breakthrough by Mr. Tate.
And might I point out that anyone who lumped IML into the "manosphere bucket" would very likely not be our target demographic regardless. We really have nothing much to do with "the manopshere". I focus on men because they are my primary demographic and they have needs that are not being met anywhere else. I would also very much like to have a balance of female customers again, but the titles that they would be attracted by cannot be made yet. I don't want to be engaged in the "gender wars", or the "manopshere debate", but I do want to be a force for helping men in a world that increasingly hates them simply for existing. The "reasons" for the feminist movement have been far surpassed, and now the pendulum swings past the balance point into attacking, demonizing, vilifying, hating and even suggesting androcide against, men. That is waaaay too far to be reasonable. I intend to help bring the pendulum back to the balance point. It would be nice if it stayed there, but when the pendulum swings this far past the balance point, it is going to go past the balance point again on the backswing, whether or not I like it. My position is that I would like the pendulum to stop swinging, so we can move on from the same old bullshit about sexism and racism, etc. that we've been hashing out for millennia now. I think we should be mature enough as a human race to be able to move past ridiculous points of contention, like gender and skin color, but so far the human race as a whole seems to disagree. Regardless, I am simply pushing to correct the overbalancing in the direction of harm to men.
Quote:On the deeper part - I see weakness more as a symptom, manifested out of something deeper. In my experience, what’s really behind it is lack of self-belief. And self-belief can’t be given to someone, it has to come from their own lived proof. That’s why yelling at someone to “BE STRONG” can only take them so far - it works as long as someone else is pushing, but once that’s gone, the fuel runs out.
Having created the Alpha Male set for myself, before I ever considered selling it, I'll share with you my point of view on this. Weakness in men is the result of those men being raised and or trained to be weak, or allowed to be weak when they were coddled as boys instead of being given the responsibility they should have been given and expected to embrace and live up to it. It is neither an accident nor a random thing. Weakness in men, as we see it now, is the intentional result of a segment of society manipulating the structures within society to achieve that aim, specifically because the strong men were perceived as a threat to the plans and goals of those who perpetrated this.
I am not yelling "be strong" and getting upset when a male is not man enough to finish AM7. I am providing the tools he needs to become strong, and then losing respect for him when he chooses to fail instead of accept the challenge HE CHOSE AND PAID ME TO START to make that change. Maybe Andrew Tate might yell "be strong", I don't know. But there is a HUGE difference between what you're suggesting and what I am actually doing here.
Quote:That’s why I think there’s a risk in stopping at simply labeling someone or some action as weak. The more important part is to look at the individual and figure out why they lack self-belief in that specific situation. And once that reason is clear, then encouragement can be placed behind the individual to overcome the challenge - in a steady and secure way, not in a “if you don’t do it you’re WEAK”-kind of way. Maybe that’s also how you’ve designed AM to work, and if so then I guess we agree. But from the way the description read, I got more the impression of a drill sergeant screaming at a cadet, rather than a father who steadies his son after he’s dropped a critical pass for the third time and feels crushed - and then gives him the push he needs to walk back on the field.
AM is designed to take a man from a state of more weakness to a state of less weakness. It is designed to take into account his initial state may be complete weakness, that he may be starting with absolutely no concept of what masculinity and masculine strength is.
AM is also a drill sergeant screaming at a cadet in some ways, precisely because of that weakness. Why do you suppose that tactic is universally used in Basic Training? Why is it called "boot camp"? Because you are breaking down the weak and rebuilding it in strength. Weakness is what it is because it is allowed to exist without pressure or requirement to change. AM requires change and growth, and sometimes that meets with resistance because it is uncomfortable. That resistance must be overcome to push the individual to grow and become what they have the potential to become, instead of remaining comfortable in their existing state of weakness which does not match their potential. This is exactly why drill sergeants do this, and exactly why fitness trainers often do it also. It is applying pressure to overcome one's laziness, weakness and desire to prefer comfort over change, growth and improvement.
Given all this... when a male chooses to go on this journey, and he pays big bucks to do it, and then he gives up and chooses to embrace his weakness and fear and desire for comfort instead of the challenge and growth that he started into... that is the epitome of weakness for a man, and I do not respect that. In fact, no "man" would respect that. At that point, said person would need to go back and try again which would be worth some respect, and then overcome the weakness that caused him to quit before, which would be worth some respect, and then achieve his goals, which would be worth some respect.
The very reason that AM sells is because guys are in need of the training in how to become the leaders they must be to achieve their potential in life. Whom they lead does not matter, it can be just themselves. But the very weakness they pay for AM to overcome is what results in that failure to complete it. Giving up is not a masculine trait. Weakness is not a masculine trait. Choosing comfort over growth is not a masculine trait. Accepting failure is not a masculine trait. There is no MAN on earth who has not failed at something, and most likely failed many times in his life. But je does not give up if the goal is important. He assesses his failure and uses it as a step to success, and then he adjusts his effort and tries again. And again, and again, until he achieves his goal and succeeds.
One of the primary differences between a man and a boy, or a boy in a man's body, is that a man will not be deterred by the need to accept personal responsibility or by hardship in achieving his goals. It is at the very core of a man's ability to be a man, not a boy or a boy in a man's body, that he DOES accept personal responsibility, and does so proactively. And when a boy or a boy in a man's body starts doing that, he necessarily realizes that he cannot remain a boy, or a boy in a man's body anymore. He must now grow into being the man he has the potential and responsibility to be, even if only for himself and his self respect, self esteem and sense of self worth. That means he must undertake the journey to making himself that man, and that requires growth and experiencing challenges and discomfort and pressure and stress.
Current society, at least in the United States, encourages boys to become boys in a man's body instead of becoming men. The result is that you see society crumbling. This MUST change if we are going to keep this society from self destructing. And toward that end, I am rebuilding AM6 into AM7, and this time with more emphasis on helping those starting from scratch get started, because just yelling at them to "be strong" doesn't help much if they don't have the understanding or tools to do that. And society in the US has effectively stripped most boys and boys in men's bodies of those tools and understanding, and has rendered many who would be much more "men" than they are needing help or a refresher because of the constant societal messaging that is aimed at weakening and destroying men.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Shannon - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 01:43 PM)London1 Wrote:(08-28-2025, 01:20 PM)4Kingdoms Wrote: https://subliminal-talk.com/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Volume-3?pid=269536#pid269536
Why? What is wrong with CatMan?
Mister CatMan has a rather extraordinarily rare confluence of challenges which have made him the most difficult case I have ever seen for me to successfully influence regarding execution of DMSI and related subliminals. There is nothing "wrong" with him. He is just an extremely rare extreme outlier on the bell curve.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Catman - 08-28-2025
Hello @Shannon!
Thank you deeply for the consideration about "CatMan Mode", haha.
That said, initially, my plan was to use V5.0 for a run, to allow the sub full focus on DMSI and the necessary work to achieve it's goal.
Then afterwards, move on to V5.1, to enjoy the incoming addition of DRS V2 which seems fantastic, by all accounts thus far. I enjoyed DRS V1, I can't imagine V2, sounds great. DRS is a great sub idea.
Would you still recommend such a path for this new "CatMan Mode", assuming it's being based on V5.0? To allow full focus on the goal first?
Or would these instructions port directly over to V5.1 itself? Would there be a different instruction for V5.1?
Just wanted to clarify beforehand is all. I have the possibility of either in front of me, and am grateful for specific instructions. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Also, maybe when you have the instructions, you or Ben can PM them privately to me. That can help us avoid "MOAR POWAR!1!1!1!!" situations...that will no doubt already occur with the new "extreme hard case" situation. I already weep about the incoming posts over time about such concepts...we both know that's going to happen, oof...
Thank you again, truly.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - London1 - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 02:08 PM)Shannon Wrote:(08-28-2025, 01:43 PM)London1 Wrote: Why? What is wrong with CatMan?
Mister CatMan has a rather extraordinarily rare confluence of challenges which have made him the most difficult case I have ever seen for me to successfully influence regarding execution of DMSI and related subliminals. There is nothing "wrong" with him. He is just an extremely rare extreme outlier on the bell curve.
So im interested in knowing who the 0.00001% of people are that extreme hard case is for?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Shannon - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 05:45 PM)London1 Wrote:(08-28-2025, 02:08 PM)Shannon Wrote: Mister CatMan has a rather extraordinarily rare confluence of challenges which have made him the most difficult case I have ever seen for me to successfully influence regarding execution of DMSI and related subliminals. There is nothing "wrong" with him. He is just an extremely rare extreme outlier on the bell curve.
So im interested in knowing who the 0.00001% of people are that extreme hard case is for?
Originally I was aiming for the small pool who include CatMan, but it appears that pool is just CatMan. As a result, I am going to just calculate the instructions for him and leave the extreme hard cases alone, since that is very unlikely for me to actually encounter again. This will speed up publishing v5.1 and save me a lot of time.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Shannon - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 03:31 PM)Catman Wrote: Hello @Shannon!
Thank you deeply for the consideration about "CatMan Mode", haha.
That said, initially, my plan was to use V5.0 for a run, to allow the sub full focus on DMSI and the necessary work to achieve it's goal.
Then afterwards, move on to V5.1, to enjoy the incoming addition of DRS V2 which seems fantastic, by all accounts thus far. I enjoyed DRS V1, I can't imagine V2, sounds great. DRS is a great sub idea.
Would you still recommend such a path for this new "CatMan Mode", assuming it's being based on V5.0? To allow full focus on the goal first?
Or would these instructions port directly over to V5.1 itself? Would there be a different instruction for V5.1?
Just wanted to clarify beforehand is all. I have the possibility of either in front of me, and am grateful for specific instructions. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Also, maybe when you have the instructions, you or Ben can PM them privately to me. That can help us avoid "MOAR POWAR!1!1!1!!" situations...that will no doubt already occur with the new "extreme hard case" situation. I already weep about the incoming posts over time about such concepts...we both know that's going to happen, oof...
Thank you again, truly.
I am going to just not do the instructions for extreme hard cases, since that was aimed at the pool of rare cases that includes you, but you seem to be a unique case, and the chances of me ever encountering an extreme hard case otherwise are not favorable for spending the time on it.
I will calculate the instructions for you specifically, for v5.0 or 5.1, depending on what you prefer to run. The instructions will differ between them for you because of thee extreme sensitivity to certain things you seem to show. The DRS included will make a significant difference in what the results are. Which do you prefer to use?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - London1 - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 06:07 PM)Shannon Wrote:(08-28-2025, 03:31 PM)Catman Wrote: Hello @Shannon!
Thank you deeply for the consideration about "CatMan Mode", haha.
That said, initially, my plan was to use V5.0 for a run, to allow the sub full focus on DMSI and the necessary work to achieve it's goal.
Then afterwards, move on to V5.1, to enjoy the incoming addition of DRS V2 which seems fantastic, by all accounts thus far. I enjoyed DRS V1, I can't imagine V2, sounds great. DRS is a great sub idea.
Would you still recommend such a path for this new "CatMan Mode", assuming it's being based on V5.0? To allow full focus on the goal first?
Or would these instructions port directly over to V5.1 itself? Would there be a different instruction for V5.1?
Just wanted to clarify beforehand is all. I have the possibility of either in front of me, and am grateful for specific instructions. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Also, maybe when you have the instructions, you or Ben can PM them privately to me. That can help us avoid "MOAR POWAR!1!1!1!!" situations...that will no doubt already occur with the new "extreme hard case" situation. I already weep about the incoming posts over time about such concepts...we both know that's going to happen, oof...
Thank you again, truly.
I am going to just not do the instructions for extreme hard cases, since that was aimed at the pool of rare cases that includes you, but you seem to be a unique case, and the chances of me ever encountering an extreme hard case otherwise are not favorable for spending the time on it.
I will calculate the instructions for you specifically, for v5.0 or 5.1, depending on what you prefer to run. The instructions will differ between them for you because of thee extreme sensitivity to certain things you seem to show. The DRS included will make a significant difference in what the results are. Which do you prefer to use?
Im tempted to play with DMSI 5 or 5.1 just for a month just to see what happens then go back to ogsf. Will this be enough time to know if it works for me?
How will I know if im a hard case or have a case like catman?
What specifically makes his case different?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Shannon - 08-28-2025
(08-28-2025, 07:51 PM)London1 Wrote:(08-28-2025, 06:07 PM)Shannon Wrote: I am going to just not do the instructions for extreme hard cases, since that was aimed at the pool of rare cases that includes you, but you seem to be a unique case, and the chances of me ever encountering an extreme hard case otherwise are not favorable for spending the time on it.
I will calculate the instructions for you specifically, for v5.0 or 5.1, depending on what you prefer to run. The instructions will differ between them for you because of thee extreme sensitivity to certain things you seem to show. The DRS included will make a significant difference in what the results are. Which do you prefer to use?
Im tempted to play with DMSI 5 or 5.1 just for a month just to see what happens then go back to ogsf. Will this be enough time to know if it works for me?
Unless you're a normal case, you will not likely see much in just one month. You will know if you're a normal case if you are using DMSI to engance your already successful interactions with and sexual access to women. Normal cases don't need DMSI, but can benefit from it as an enhancer. Nobody who has resisted DMSI in the past qualifies as a normal case.
Quote:How will I know if im a hard case or have a case like catman?
A hard case will be a virgin or have very little experience with women and sex, because it is a struggle for them. They are likely to also be very afraid, consciously and or subconsciously, of sex and relations with women. The Fear Removal Module in DMSI v5.x will immediately kick in, at once preventing them from achieving the end goal, but only because it is focusing them on removing the faer that would prevent it otherwise. Once that is dealt with, the end goal becomes possible. There are various degrees of execution for hard cases.
As for you having a case like CatMan - go buy a lotto ticket. If you hit the jackpot, then you might have a case like CatMan. In other words... you don't.
Quote:What specifically makes his case different?
The specifics get into private information that I doubt he wants me to share publicly. Suffice it to say that his personality, life and experiences have resulted in a state of extraordinarily stubborn fear from one part of his subconscious regarding sex and possibly women, and his extraordinary strength of will and the creativity of this fearful part of him makes dealing with it extraordinarily difficult.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - London1 - 08-29-2025
@Shannon
Why would one choose to run 5.0(without drs) over 5.1 (with drs)? Which is better for a hard case user?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Catman - 08-29-2025
(08-28-2025, 06:07 PM)Shannon Wrote:(08-28-2025, 03:31 PM)Catman Wrote: Hello @Shannon!
Thank you deeply for the consideration about "CatMan Mode", haha.
That said, initially, my plan was to use V5.0 for a run, to allow the sub full focus on DMSI and the necessary work to achieve it's goal.
Then afterwards, move on to V5.1, to enjoy the incoming addition of DRS V2 which seems fantastic, by all accounts thus far. I enjoyed DRS V1, I can't imagine V2, sounds great. DRS is a great sub idea.
Would you still recommend such a path for this new "CatMan Mode", assuming it's being based on V5.0? To allow full focus on the goal first?
Or would these instructions port directly over to V5.1 itself? Would there be a different instruction for V5.1?
Just wanted to clarify beforehand is all. I have the possibility of either in front of me, and am grateful for specific instructions. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Also, maybe when you have the instructions, you or Ben can PM them privately to me. That can help us avoid "MOAR POWAR!1!1!1!!" situations...that will no doubt already occur with the new "extreme hard case" situation. I already weep about the incoming posts over time about such concepts...we both know that's going to happen, oof...
Thank you again, truly.
I am going to just not do the instructions for extreme hard cases, since that was aimed at the pool of rare cases that includes you, but you seem to be a unique case, and the chances of me ever encountering an extreme hard case otherwise are not favorable for spending the time on it.
I will calculate the instructions for you specifically, for v5.0 or 5.1, depending on what you prefer to run. The instructions will differ between them for you because of thee extreme sensitivity to certain things you seem to show. The DRS included will make a significant difference in what the results are. Which do you prefer to use?
Sounds reasonable, and avoids the obvious chance of people doing "MOAR POWAR!!1!" then complaining about side effects and massive overkill anyway.
I suspected the version's instructions would differ due to one having the DRS V2 inclusion, makes sense.
Originally, my plan was to do V5.0 to fully focus for a run on doing the work needed to step up to full execution. As that avoids "splitting the focus" and making DMSI have the best chance to succeed. I remember you've always said the reality that splitting the focus means each program gets less of the pie in your analogy, no matter how you slice it.
I guess what I'm asking is, does V5.0 really have a much stronger focus and aura than V5.1 does? But V5.1 has more overall utility due to DRS V2?
What do you mean about: "The DRS included will make a significant difference in what the results are."? I know DRS V2 can apparently help with anxiety in some situations, which seems logical. Did you mean that or something similar? Or was it just really about the listening regimen being much different which would make sense if it was?
Thanks so much for clarifying and for the regimen that's incoming.
That said, I have seen some things happen in V5.0 in the short time I've used it. A couple dreams relevant, annoying skyrocketing appetite that always happens on DMSI that it causes weight gain even if not careful, haha...heat...some m wood situations, lol...etc. and a lot of motor mouth from others which can be a bit annoying at times even though I'm very social, haha...so it's not a total loss so far! Just to clarify.
EDIT: I just saw your bar story. That kind of thing happens to me too...but since nothing develops I just chalk it up to nothing or making mountains out of molehills etc. Or you take the signal that is "obvious" (it's not obvious ever, and you always need to read way in and risk getting burned) and suddenly it goes wrong and you're in the wrong somehow. That happens too, they switch up. But I do see these things, even on X4A and earlier. Lots of stories I could tell of similar situations, and switch ups too sadly that defy logic to this day. Socially I'm extremely strong due to my background, but I guess there's an invisible wall from that point to romantic/sexual for me. But just wanted to add context after reading your post. That is a somewhat common occurrence to me, that I never really think is a big deal because it doesn't go anywhere even with pushing to make something happen. It's a bizarre experience, this invisible wall. We'll see if we can remove it!
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 8 - Shannon - 08-29-2025
(08-29-2025, 07:47 AM)Catman Wrote:(08-28-2025, 06:07 PM)Shannon Wrote: I am going to just not do the instructions for extreme hard cases, since that was aimed at the pool of rare cases that includes you, but you seem to be a unique case, and the chances of me ever encountering an extreme hard case otherwise are not favorable for spending the time on it.
I will calculate the instructions for you specifically, for v5.0 or 5.1, depending on what you prefer to run. The instructions will differ between them for you because of thee extreme sensitivity to certain things you seem to show. The DRS included will make a significant difference in what the results are. Which do you prefer to use?
Sounds reasonable, and avoids the obvious chance of people doing "MOAR POWAR!!1!" then complaining about side effects and massive overkill anyway.
I suspected the version's instructions would differ due to one having the DRS V2 inclusion, makes sense.
Originally, my plan was to do V5.0 to fully focus for a run on doing the work needed to step up to full execution. As that avoids "splitting the focus" and making DMSI have the best chance to succeed. I remember you've always said the reality that splitting the focus means each program gets less of the pie in your analogy, no matter how you slice it.
I guess what I'm asking is, does V5.0 really have a much stronger focus and aura than V5.1 does? But V5.1 has more overall utility due to DRS V2?
I can only comment based on what I have seen from the models. Both show function. 5.0 shows a more "dirty" result and 5.1 shows a "cleaner" result. In effect, this shows the results of filtering out the negativity as DRS does. I'm not sure how else to describe what the models are showing.
5.0 has focus split with FRM; 5.1 has focus split with FRM and DRS. There is not an even split of focus. That is to say, FRM does not get 50% and DMSI 50% for 5.0, and it's not 33.33% for each for 5.1. FRM is dynamic, and so in the beginning, it will tend to take the lion's share of the focus and energy if you need it; much less if you don't. DRS will take some energy, plus the shield will take some energy, but again,these are dynamic. They power up as needed. This was the best solution I could come up with. Not perfect, but better by far than a simple static division.
Quote:What do you mean about: "The DRS included will make a significant difference in what the results are."? I know DRS V2 can apparently help with anxiety in some situations, which seems logical. Did you mean that or something similar? Or was it just really about the listening regimen being much different which would make sense if it was?
Well first you have the effect of the negativity being filtered out, which results in less anxiety and a lot more comfort executing and growing into the goals of DMSI. Then you have the effects it has on those who would try to control or attack you for daring to stand out, or affect a woman you find attractive. Guys may try to energetically attack you with guilt shame or fear; women may also. Getting this right back from you and you being unphased is not going to go un-noticed. Especially from women you're attracted to who try to "test" or manipulate or attack you for your DMSI aura.
I'm not trying to sell you on 5.1, which is why I simply asked which one you'd like. but I would sure as hell be using DRS with DMSI in some way if I wasn't well versed in attraction, seduction, dating and sex.
Quote:Thanks so much for clarifying and for the regimen that's incoming.
That said, I have seen some things happen in V5.0 in the short time I've used it. A couple dreams relevant, annoying skyrocketing appetite that always happens on DMSI that it causes weight gain even if not careful, haha...heat...some m wood situations, lol...etc. and a lot of motor mouth from others which can be a bit annoying at times even though I'm very social, haha...so it's not a total loss so far! Just to clarify.
EDIT: I just saw your bar story. That kind of thing happens to me too...but since nothing develops I just chalk it up to nothing or making mountains out of molehills etc. Or you take the signal that is "obvious" (it's not obvious ever, and you always need to read way in and risk getting burned) and suddenly it goes wrong and you're in the wrong somehow. That happens too, they switch up. But I do see these things, even on X4A and earlier. Lots of stories I could tell of similar situations, and switch ups too sadly that defy logic to this day. Socially I'm extremely strong due to my background, but I guess there's an invisible wall from that point to romantic/sexual for me. But just wanted to add context after reading your post. That is a somewhat common occurrence to me, that I never really think is a big deal because it doesn't go anywhere even with pushing to make something happen. It's a bizarre experience, this invisible wall. We'll see if we can remove it!
My experience last night at the bar could have resulted in sex with any of those three women, if I had played my cards right. I was intentionally being passive because I am involved, and because I cannot see what they will do if I do it for them. The key in my experience is, don't try to get to sex too fast. You need to match or slightly over-match her position. That takes practice for most guys. But when DMSI gets going full tilt, you should have women approaching you, offering to you, etc. - although it may not be super obvious in most public situations. (Unless she's drunk, at which point, she's really off limits regardless.)
When you run DMSI, you shouldn't be looking for results. Just let it do it's thing. Go along with it when it starts guiding you in a seductive direction, or socially. It wouldn't be by saying "Hey, wanna fuck?" that I would get to sex with any of those three women. It would be through socializing with them, playful banter, and either letting them grow their interest into it or leading them that direction in subtle ways. V was sober, and at work. It would take some time to get her to do anything outside of work, if that was my goal, but I could.
The girl with sharp eyes was drinking shots. I tend to avoid women after they have imbibed alcohol for obvious reasons, but it would have been relatively easy to socialize and have fun with her, if I could find common ground to talk about. Maybe suggest a different venue, maybe suggest a shot I like, etc. The responses she gave tell me that she was already aroused, had noticed me, had concluded she was aroused by me specifically, and that she thought I wasn't interested, so she gave up. I could have taken it further if I'd socialized. And maybe that day wasn't ideal for achieving sex, but there's always the next. And so on.
The woman on the laptop was there with her husband or fiance. I could have managed that one, too, if I was that kind of guy, but it's a lot less direct. And also much less easy to do the same day. Obviously you adjust to the circumstances.
But if you want them to approach you, you need to be fully, or nearly fully, executing DMSI. Even then, not everyone will approach, and they may need multiple exposures to approach.
The results you're getting tell me that you are to some degree executing, which is good news. It would be really helpful if you would start reporting, not only so I can know what's going on, but be able to make suggestions.