1. you want to work towards making a positive difference in the world, and this is a huge priority in your life.
2. far-left politically, economically, socially
3. vegan or truly interested in becoming one (for altruistic reasons, at least in part for animals) --> or, if after watching this 12 minute video, you decide you want to go vegan either right away or transition over some time: http://meat.org/
4. are critical towards bdsm --> or, after reading the section of my self-summary on the topic (part 6), you decide that you are now critical of bdsm
i could not date someone without the above four qualities.
for friends i PREFER the same, but i'm more flexible.
however, i'm not interested in being friends with people who don't at least have number 1 going on (not having this going on reflects a deficiency of compassion/caring, IMO, which i can't stand... although it could also be due to a deficiency of free time or debilitating physical/mental illness, and if that's the case then i think that's a fair reason and would still enjoy a friendship, as long as the person truly and deeply cares about the suffering in the world) and to an extent number 2 going on (far-left is not necessary but at least left-leaning).
(that doesn't mean i'm unfriendly to people who don't meet my friendship qualifications. i'm still friendly and sociable with people like that. when i say i don't want to be friends with such people, i don't mean that i won't make friendly chit chat with them if we're in the same place at the same time. i mean that i don't want to cultivate a deeper friendship where we make an effort to spend time together. this is largely because i have only a small amount of room in my life for socializing, so i want to spend what little social time i have with those i have a deep affinity with. if i was less busy i would be interested in having friendships with people even if they didn't meet any of the above four criteria. i hope this explains why i'm so exclusionary... it's not because i'm a jerk.)
people with 1 and 2 going on aren't very hard to find in real life if you know where to look, but those with all four going on are very hard to find, which is why i made this ok cupid profile... to find the unicorns.
that's really all you need to know about me for now! the rest of this incredibly long profile is not really necessary to read. but it might be fun. :)
UPDATE: i made this profile a few years ago when i was looking for another romantic/sexual partner. i'm not looking for that anymore, because i'm very busy these days. i barely have time to see my friends and have been neglecting them. so even meeting people from ok cupid for friendship isn't something i'd have time for right now. i'm leaving my profile up though because i expect sometime in the future i won't be this busy anymore!
feel free to send me a message though, if you think we'd make good friends, because maybe we can meet down the road. :)
ok... this is a VERY LONG "self summary". i promise the rest of the sections will be much, much shorter.
TO MAKE THIS CONVENIENT, I'VE PROVIDED A TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR THIS SECTION (see below).
i hope the length of this section doesn't make me seem self-obsessed. i just want to make sure i get across who i am very clearly so that i attract those who are compatible with me (and don't attract those i'm not compatible with).
despite how it might seem, i'm facinated by other people, and would love to learn all about you! all your opinions, interests, values, your struggles, triumphs, goals, dreams, your life story... everything.
ok... now here's the "table of contents" (fuck, i'm probably the only person on here with a table of contents for their self-summary! i'm such a nerd)
1. making this world a better place
2. anarchist-socialist / anarchist-communist
7. polyamorous (even if you're not poly, if you share my core values and passions, i'm eager for us to be friends.)
i want to use my life to make the world* a better place (while having fun and connecting with others along the way). i'm only interested in those who want to do the same. this doesn't mean you have to have it figured all out yet. the problems are so huge, so complicated, and thus figuring out what to do often takes a long time. so even if you're not doing anything right now, that's ok as long as you're trying to figure out what you want to do to make a difference. or, perhaps you're too depressed or too busy with obligations (i mean true obligations, not hedonism and not overtime at a job for the purpose of earning enough to live in luxury) to do much or even anything right now. that's ok with me as long as you either (1) devote a bit of your time to making the world a better place and you sincerely wish you could spend more time doing this and the only reason you don't is because of your obligations or mental health struggles, or (2) you plan to make this (making a difference) a priority in the future when you overcome your depression and/or have the time.
i guess what i'm really looking for is people who CARE. caring means that political and social issues are more than a mere "interest" to you, something to have stimulating conversations about. it means that you want to do something about them, and that this desire burns strongly enough in you to affect the direction you take and choices you make in your life.
* ("the world" doesn't necessarily mean fixing everything everywhere... focusing on local issues or a single cause that means a lot to you counts, as this is all part of the world. but it has to go beyond kindness towards the individuals we interact with.)
i'm an anarchist. not a lifestylist, though. to be clear, i'm an anarcho-socialist. all true anarchists are socialists, but there are many people identifying as anarchists who are not socialists, so i think it's important to clarify. (rough synonyms include libertarian-communist, anarchist-communist, libertarian-socialist.)
i believe capitalism (and any type of class-divided society) nurtures the uglier elements of human nature, which is a major reason why people are so often quite sociopathic and scummy. and i believe anarchism nurtures the better elements of human nature, and that we'd by much more friendly, kind, compassionate, cooperative, etc. under such a system.
i recognize that capitalism is a system that is incompatible with democracy and which perpetrates massive suffering on all of us, some of us much more than others. poverty is the obvious example, but capitalism also fuels, perpetuates, and enhances various other forms of suffering such as war, domestic violence, gang violence, sexism, racism, homophobia, ableism, depression... this list could stretch on and on. anarchism holds a solution to poverty and paves the path to put an end to the other forms of suffering.
anarchy does NOT mean chaos! it's about true democracy and a lack of hierarchy or domination. this means i'm against the centralized authority and centralized bureaucracy that existed in the USSR and in other supposedly socialist (ha!) nations throughout history. i'm also against the pseudo-democracies (or "elected dictatorships") that we find in capitalism, such as canada. i'm for true democracy and real active participation of every person in decision making.
although reforms can improve our current situation, i believe that to create a decent society we need revolution (illegally expropriating the means of production and putting it under workers' democratic control, obliterating the state and replacing it with democratic assemblies and councils, etc.). elections and/or pressuring the government or employers to make nice won't get us anywhere that's good enough.
i used to be really into parecon, which is short for participatory economics. parecon is an economic model for society that is too complicated to get into here, but it's compatible with the combined ideals of socialism (in that it's based on equity) and anarchism (in that it's based on democratic self-management of workplaces, the economy, and society).
but i'm less into parecon than i used to be. i now see certain problems with it. but overall i think it's a system worth fighting for, although i'd prefer something different. i now accept communism as a viable alternative to capitalism. (when i first made this profile, i didn't really get the difference between socialism and communism. parecon is actually a form of socialism, not communism, because people's entitlement to consume is generally based on the extent to which they work. communism is "to each according to their need." i'd be happy with either socialism or communism, but would prefer communism. but i think our best bet is some sort of communism-socialism hybrid.)
i'm a vegan. mainly because i disapprove of the imprisonment, torture, and murder of animals, but also because of concern for the environment and human hunger. (regarding the latter, i'm referring to the fact that it takes lots of grain to feed farmed animals, to the point that by conservative estimates 8 pounds of grain go into every pound of beef. obviously a lot more people could be fed if the vast majority of people were vegan. and it's generally the rich who can afford to eat animal products, anyways. so eating meat and even dairy is kind of like food theft.) as for health reasons, the money saved on food, and the deliciousness -- these are just a welcome bonus: the (vegan) icing on the (vegan) cake! ;)
here is the short 12 minute video that inspired me to go vegan: http://meat.org/
i'm anti-oppression. that means i'm opposed to racism, sexism, homophobia, ableism, etc. if you're not also opposed to these things, i don't see how we could really be friends.
my views on feminism require more explanation, as some of these views are rather uncommon these days.
i'm a feminist. i have some major issues with many aspects of so-called "third wave" feminism. (and can we really call it a wave? it's more of a trickle. and can we really call it feminism? many aspects are anti-feminist, in my view.)
the "third wave" is awesome for being intersectional and anti-oppression in focus (i.e. not just focusing on white middle class straight women, as was the case in the first wave and early second wave). but i'm really disgusted with much of what falls under the so-called "sex positive" aspect of it. now i do consider myself sex-positive, very much so. but what is called "sex-positive feminism" is usually defined as including not just a positive attitude towards sex but also things which are or can often be oppressive: sex-work, pornography, and bdsm.
i have critiques about sex-work (prostitution, stripping, etc.) and pornography. i know that some people (females and males) do have overall positive experiences as sex-workers, but they are the exception. sex-work i see as mainly hyper-exploitative, psychologically harmful, and physically dangerous.
so my critique is not of sex-workers but of sex-work. just like my critique of sweat-shops does not lead me to have any critique of sweat-shop workers.
some stats that led me to this opinion on sex-work:
- 70% of respondents reported using substances to detach emotionally while turning tricks.
- 52% percent of respondents reported that turning tricks was physically painful
- 76% reported that turning tricks was emotionally painful.
- Seventy-seven percent of respondents indicated that their self-esteem had decreased since entering prostitution.
- 65% percent of the women indicated that their enjoyment of sex in their personal lives had diminished since entering the sex industry.
(Kramer, Lisa A. “Emotional Experiences of Performing Prostitution.” Prostitution, Trafficking and Traumatic Stress ed. Melissa Farley. These stats are on pages 191-192)
- 67% of those in prostitution from five countries met criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD at a rate similar to that of battered women, rape victims, and state-sponsored torture survivors.
- Of 475 prostituted people […] when asked what they needed, 92% said they wanted to leave prostitution.
(“Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder” by Melissa Farley, Isin Baral, Merab Kiremire and Ufuk Sezgin. Feminism & Psychology, 1998, Volume 8 (4): 405-426.)
- 89% of 854 people in prostitution in 9 countries stated that they wanted to escape prostitution immediately.
- 95% in the Canadian cohort said this.
(Farley et al., Prostitution and Trafficking in Nine Countries: An Update on Violence and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder; 2003. )
as for porn, i think it's fine if people enjoy looking at sexual images. but there are still issues with porn. being photographed or filmed for porn is a type of sex-work so the same problems i mentioned about sex-work apply to porn. and many forms of pornography are toxic in terms of how they shape viewers' conceptions of sex, gender relations, how women should be treated, etc.
although i do feel strongly about the sex-work issue, for some reason (perhaps not anything very logical) i'm only somewhat repelled when people have the opposite view. however, i feel much more repelled when people are pro-bdsm. see the next section for details.
some people reading this might notice that these opinions are shared by radical feminists. but i DON'T identify as a radical feminist because there are other opinions common to radical feminism that i disagree with, often quite strongly. despite these disagreements, radfem has given me some valuable insights.
i'm opposed to bdsm. i define bdsm as the sexualization of dominance and/or abuse. consensual ass-smacking, hair-pulling, biting, and other mild acts done WITHOUT the intention of causing pain or degradation, but rather as an expression of passion or simply out of the enjoyment of the sensation, does not qualify as bdsm to me. but the same acts done with such intention do qualify as such.
so being anti-bdsm is not being anti-sex, but rather about being anti-dominance and anti-abuse -- even in fantasy form. it's also not about being anti-kink. i'm pro-kink. there are many ways to be kinky besides dominating or degrading or reveling in purposeful infliction of pain. (why can't we expand our sexual imaginations beyond domination and violence, as if this was the only alternative to "vanilla" sex?)
i find the sexualization of violence and slavery really troubling... we should be working on feeling outrage and compassion in response to those things, not on feeling pleasure and desire in response to them!
bdsm nurtures those parts within ourself that fetishize abuse, and both results from and reinforces our empathetic disconnection and compassion deficiency. this can be disconnecting from compassion for others OR for yourself (or for your former/younger self... disconnecting can be an attempt to avoid pain from past trauma, but is really a betrayal to your younger self and counters healing). and if we delve into pleasure from fantasies or roleplays in which we're the victim of abuse, this not only reinforces deficient self-compassion but can weaken compassion for others in similar scenarios to that which we fantasize about.
so much of the suffering (both real abuse and the failure to act to stop it) in this world stems from disconnected empathy and deficient compassion, so we should not be doing anything that so strongly reinforces that... we should be doing the opposite instead, working to build and strengthen our compassion!
psychological experiments and observation has revealed that responses can be created or strengthened by linking them to rewards and/or pleasure. sexual excitement and orgasm are both very pleasurable and thus can be very powerful at conditioning people in particular ways. so it makes sense that sexual fantasies and roleplays about abuse and oppression can weaken compassion for abuse and oppression through associating it with pleasure.
our sexuality is not a separate/discreet/isolated piece of who we are. it is not irrelevant to the rest of you. those of us who find sexual pleasure in domination, enslavement, or pain will find connections to this in non-sexual elements of who we are.
this doesn't mean that a person who is turned on by bdsm can't be compassionate and caring in various ways. (i've known some very caring/compassionate people who are turned on by bdsm.) but it does indicate that the compassion and caring have failed to permeate certain corners of ourselves and/or that we are too easily able to distance ourselves from that caring/compassion. for example, somebody can know that rape is traumatic and feel a lot of compassion for those who've been raped, but during the moments of deriving sexual pleasure from a rape fantasy that compassion is largely if not entirely dissociated from (even if you're imagining yourself in the victim role). if compassion and caring was not largely dissociated from, that pleasure would be impossible.
dominance and abuse are rampant in our society via the forces of capitalism, patriarchy, racism, homophobia, imperialism, dictatorships and pseudo-democracies, abusive families, and so on. moreover, dominance and power-over is generally glorified by the mass media and most cultures via the worshipping of the rich, of macho men, of people of high status and influence, of exploiters, and so on. the sexualization of dominance and abuse by some people is just one of the many unfortunate symptoms that people experience as a result of living in a sick and toxic world. therefore, i don't think people who are turned on by bdsm should be ashamed that this arouses them, since they did not choose to be exposed to a society which conditioned this into them. but i do think that we should attempt to overcome it within ourselves. by this i don't mean that we should repress the pleasure we feel from bdsm (since repression doesn't get rid of anything). i recommend transformation, not repression. transformation is possible through healing/combating the internalized toxicity that bdsm desires are rooted in and by improving our love,compassion,empathy,caring - improving it both in terms of how strong it is and how consistently we are tuned into it.
this website sums up most of my reasons for being critical of bdsm: http://antibdsm.blogspot.com/2011/07/critique-of-bdsm.html
i'm polyamorous. i'm currently involved in a romantic-sexual relationship with a man. i hope this doesn't scare you off from dating me. and if it does, please at least be my friend! i need more true friends with good values. :)
my interest in a woman is NOT so that i can get her to have a threesome with me and my partner. not that i would mind … but there’s no pressure to do that! i’m looking for love with a woman. period. it would be nice, though, if the two of you could be friends and we could all hang out together. :)
there is no limit in polyamory on how many partners you can have. but i think two serious relationships are all i want or could handle. it's simply a matter of how much free time i have. i already have a partner, and am looking for one more partner.
i’d like to explain my philosophy and approach to polyamory to you. for me it’s not about avoiding genuine intimacy with my partner(s). and it’s not about having one “real” relationship, and then someone on the side who is less important and/or just for sex. it’s about a new understanding of love. have you ever found it strange that our approach to love in romantic/sexual relationships is so different from our approach to love in friendship relationships and family relationships? i of course don’t mean the sex part (hahaha)… i mean the notion that you can only love one person at a time, and that if you love person A and then fall in love with person B, it must mean that you no longer love person A. in friendships, we have many friends at once and most of us don’t feel jealous or insecure about that. and in families with more than one child, the parent(s) love their children equally and the kids don’t mind sharing their parent(s) with their sibling(s) because they are not placed in a hierarchy of parental love. (of course there are many sad exceptions to this, but i’m talking about in general.)
i really think romantic/sexual love can and should be approached in the same way. i believe that the heart is an infinite place… and thus love – whether it’s manifested in relationships based on romance/sex, friendship, or family – doesn't decrease when divided between more than one person. i believe you can love more than one person at a time and not have your love for either person diminish in any way.
one of the fundamental characteristics of class societies is private ownership, and i think this has an impact on our approach to romantic/sexual love. the monogamous arrangement stinks too much of ownership to me, and i think this infuses such relationships with a host of unnecessary problems and unhealthy dynamics.
i actually believe that so much of the misery people experience in their romantic/sexual relationships is due to the brainwashing of a monogamous culture. i could go on a rant about why, if you're interested.... despite this, i know that monogamous relationships can be overall healthy and beautiful.
even though i'm into polyamory i'm not beyond feeling jealous or insecure. on the contrary! afterall, i was born into and socialized in a monogamous culture like everyone else. but for me, these jealousies and insecurities are something i want to face, confront, and work at overcoming. i’ve experienced my share of jealousies and insecurities… but i’ve always worked through it.
any other partner i got involved with, if they experienced any jealousy or insecurities, i would want them to be able to talk openly with me about it, and not feel like this was something they had to hide from me… i would not at all judge them or look down at them for those feelings, and being familiar with such feelings myself i would be very sympathetic. i would also want to be able to do what i could to help them feel better, while respecting my own boundaries.
one of the things i value most is compassion and/or caring. in myself and others. i want to cultivate more compassion within myself, and i try to act compassionately even when i don't necessarily feel it emotionally.
agape and metta are suitable words for what i'm trying to describe here.