item #2006
i think all genuine people should make people prove there genuine even if it means it would be such an hard task. i just want to be happy like everyone else in this world. i have spoke to many people guess what not many of them are genuine. it saddens and anger's me that some people spoil what can be a wonderful thing. its very very sad or maybe its just not worth us being here. to all the genuine people out there take care and good look in finding what ever it is youre searching.
posted by murmurists at 3:19 pm
4 Comments:
What does it mean to be genuine?
Hi,
Like you, I am here to fall, like a bomb, on the first person to love me. It's a loaded process, yes. But I'm over that period, personally, and I understand myself better these days. What I don't understand, however, is the nature of our own invincibility. They've said so little about it. Yet, I have to ask, how can functionality cede terrain? Take the United States, for instance, it's so simultaneous. Was there some kind of general discussion, or were such limits developed as part of some hidden project, part military thinking, part central planning? To me, such cohesions are frankly astounding. Whilst I tend to resist idiomation, and the way it proliferates and accelerates arsenals of insignificance by comparing them to those of a remainder culture, I cannot help but count upon all of us.
I'm interested in what you think of this.
Cheers.
Being genuine, I think, starts with ourselves. To be genuine to others one must first be genuine to themselves. Know thyself in your self's entirety. What drives you, what are your motivations.
True love (on a human level) is a relationship between two people being genuine with themselves and each other.
What is invincible? Our essence.
Everything is simultaneous in this moment.
I am your iron man. My iron is libidinous in and of itself; it is material. As a separate and separating category of pointing matter, it scratches boundaries onto the reference sheets - paper or otherwise - of both fantasy and reality. Faux of interaction, it plays out, and wears out, a subsistence normality, made from the errors of taboo and the desires expressed by extremity and its liberation. What emerges as apparence reads as repetition seeking the closure of disuse.
Could I, in all this, bring out the ongoing? Could I situate? Where, I ask, is the explorer?
Post a Comment
<< Home