What a load of dangerous nonsense! Two people in a partnership both need to listen to each other with care and respect. If either is upset, better to take time to calm down and have the conversation about what each person needs a bit later on. If they can't do that, or if one person is entirely unreasonable and won't aim to do their best for the other, then they're better off apart.
Finally some attacks and criticism. I was expecting a ton more with Marie-Louise such strong stance vs animus possession. But this video has 85 likes and only 4 dislikes. Your criticism is idealistic, but advocating for a shared position of harsh judgment of overt aggression, ending up with favoring passive aggression (ergo the energy & strategy of your argument here). Also the consequence of another party standing in their difference, is a harsh exile. Is more evidence that you're promoting a strategy of constant threats of exile, in order to keep the peace. This sounds good in theory, but in practice, it becomes constant policing of each other's aggression; and both parties living with a constant underlying fear of other.
@@VisceralGravitas That's a strange response. You read much into what I've said and infer meanings I did not intend. This is what I'm saying:- couples need to be honest with each other and first, each needs to be honest with himself or herself. If there is conflict, that needs to be addressed by open and vulnerable discussion, but not at a time when either party is in the grip of emotion so strong they can't contain themselves. If one party or the other is incapable of this, it might help to have a neutral 3rd party to mediate. I'm not talking about policing anything, but committing to the health of the relationship by having the courage to communicate openly. Underlying fear (covert domination / manipulation) has no place in a relationship. Neither does overt violence.
@@gcrawford9816 You started both replies with rather harsh passive aggressive dismissive judgments: "What a load of dangerous nonsense!" and "That's a strange response. You read much into what I've said and infer meanings I did not intend. *This is what I'm saying"* Also your 2nd reply, escalated with more judgments vs the 1st one. This is highly passive aggressive, and I suspect if you give a 3rd reply, you'll throw in more judgments and reputation destruction. Your theoretical positions are *rewriting how human conflict* plays out, and if we were in person, I strongly suspect that I could push you into emotional reactivity, and you wouldn't be able to follow these ideals you're sloganeering about. And this neutral 3rd party mediation idea, is promoting *policing.* What happens when domestic violence fights go out of control, people call the police and expect them to mediate. You're passive aggressively arguing for this utopian ideal that doesn't work under stress. And I'm highly skeptical you can apply it yourself. and you're role modeling animus possession as Marie-Louise is describing in another clip: "the negative animals mainly manifests as a opinionated resistance against having feelings of love" "the animus is the most frequent possession in a woman that she's suddenly entered by a mood of male determination, cold generalizing thinking, an Impulse towards rash brutal determined action" ruclips.net/video/IROiVEFsOzs/видео.html
editing is consistent w/ the message... you're welcome to make a better edit of your own.... attack the editing instead of considering the message, and countering the message??
I can say the same thing about men. Then i learned it is a bad bad idea. Never talk readonably with a man. He will do everything to not understand. The only effective way of communicating with a man is playing with his emotions. I have never met a man who actually and in practice (not words but actual living) likes a reasonable woman.
@ my experience has been different The issue is what many women (not 100%, just a majority) consider reasonable is not what a man considers reasonable. Men do respond to women emotionally because that’s the language women are good at (i mean this as a compliment). Modern men do tend to be more emotional themselves but overall as a man you are forced into realism by life.
"You've got to keep your pimp hand strong!" Marie-Louisa von Franz.
Truly excellent
It´s is not the editing 🤣 she is German and speeks English, repeating sentences is then a must 🤣 Greetings from a Greek living in Germany
What a load of dangerous nonsense! Two people in a partnership both need to listen to each other with care and respect. If either is upset, better to take time to calm down and have the conversation about what each person needs a bit later on. If they can't do that, or if one person is entirely unreasonable and won't aim to do their best for the other, then they're better off apart.
Finally some attacks and criticism. I was expecting a ton more with Marie-Louise such strong stance vs animus possession. But this video has 85 likes and only 4 dislikes.
Your criticism is idealistic, but advocating for a shared position of harsh judgment of overt aggression, ending up with favoring passive aggression (ergo the energy & strategy of your argument here). Also the consequence of another party standing in their difference, is a harsh exile. Is more evidence that you're promoting a strategy of constant threats of exile, in order to keep the peace.
This sounds good in theory, but in practice, it becomes constant policing of each other's aggression; and both parties living with a constant underlying fear of other.
@@VisceralGravitas That's a strange response. You read much into what I've said and infer meanings I did not intend. This is what I'm saying:- couples need to be honest with each other and first, each needs to be honest with himself or herself. If there is conflict, that needs to be addressed by open and vulnerable discussion, but not at a time when either party is in the grip of emotion so strong they can't contain themselves. If one party or the other is incapable of this, it might help to have a neutral 3rd party to mediate. I'm not talking about policing anything, but committing to the health of the relationship by having the courage to communicate openly. Underlying fear (covert domination / manipulation) has no place in a relationship. Neither does overt violence.
@@gcrawford9816 You started both replies with rather harsh passive aggressive dismissive judgments:
"What a load of dangerous nonsense!" and "That's a strange response. You read much into what I've said and infer meanings I did not intend. *This is what I'm saying"*
Also your 2nd reply, escalated with more judgments vs the 1st one.
This is highly passive aggressive, and I suspect if you give a 3rd reply, you'll throw in more judgments and reputation destruction.
Your theoretical positions are *rewriting how human conflict* plays out, and if we were in person, I strongly suspect that I could push you into emotional reactivity, and you wouldn't be able to follow these ideals you're sloganeering about.
And this neutral 3rd party mediation idea, is promoting *policing.* What happens when domestic violence fights go out of control, people call the police and expect them to mediate.
You're passive aggressively arguing for this utopian ideal that doesn't work under stress. And I'm highly skeptical you can apply it yourself.
and you're role modeling animus possession as Marie-Louise is describing in another clip:
"the negative animals mainly manifests as a opinionated resistance against having feelings of love"
"the animus is the most frequent possession in a woman that she's suddenly entered by a mood of male determination, cold generalizing thinking, an Impulse towards rash brutal determined action"
ruclips.net/video/IROiVEFsOzs/видео.html
wazzup with the bad editing
editing is consistent w/ the message... you're welcome to make a better edit of your own....
attack the editing instead of considering the message, and countering the message??
Talk to women reasonably 😂😂😂. Been there done that and failed
I can say the same thing about men. Then i learned it is a bad bad idea. Never talk readonably with a man. He will do everything to not understand. The only effective way of communicating with a man is playing with his emotions. I have never met a man who actually and in practice (not words but actual living) likes a reasonable woman.
@ my experience has been different The issue is what many women (not 100%, just a majority) consider reasonable is not what a man considers reasonable. Men do respond to women emotionally because that’s the language women are good at (i mean this as a compliment).
Modern men do tend to be more emotional themselves but overall as a man you are forced into realism by life.
Terrible editing I'd rather see the original
The original 9+ hour video is linked in the description... feel free to enjoy, if you're really being honest?