Ask CosmoLady anything, she has lived on 6 continents!

[Scarface F]

Can we discuss short weapons too?
I know you already did somehwere, but I don't recall the details.

What are your favorite models and why? I prefer revolvers, for example.
What brands you consider overrated and underrated?

[CosmoLady]

Unfortunately I can't see the videaos

That film sound very interesting! Is there chance to see those scenes somehow?

The first video was unique, but I have a few other links, maybe you can see these?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfhdCOZ_54A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-_sWs_SHbU

I strongly recommend watching Spring Breakers though,
it is about the crisis of young American women away from home in university,
and still wanting to escape their miserable lives and "experience something different".

Can we discuss short weapons too?
I know you already did somehwere, but I don't recall the details.

What are your favorite models and why? I prefer revolvers, for example.
What brands you consider overrated and underrated?

Revolvers are great because they are very simple and very reliable, and can stay loaded in a drawer forever.
Often they are a perfect first gun for anyone learning to shoot.
Revolvers are great for basic home defence in close environments.

Automatic pistols are more complicated.
If they stay loaded and unused for a long time, the magazine springs wear out.
So they need to be shot more often and thus cleaned and stripped more often.
(And small pistols are even more sensitive to dirt, neglect, brand of ammunition, etc.)

I have never bought any revolvers, I inherited,
mostly small, short-barreled Smith & Wesson revolvers from the 1950s-1970s, a few from the 1990s,
mostly the "Bodyguard" and "Centennial" types, without exposed hammers.
The "Airweights" look the same but are much lighter.







I wrote about my favourite rifles as well in the Gun Porn thread:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7889435

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7890222

[CosmoLady]

...

So I watched Kids (1995) again recently and Ken Park (2002) for the first time,
and the films were not very enjoyable, and not meant to be,
but I appreciated the worst-case-scenario realism,
and I noticed several prominent American and modern themes and archetypes:

Ken Park:

-the boy who commits suicide (for no real reason); teen male suicide, pointlessness, hopelessness is very common in America;
like in Kids, the skater subculture is incidental, like a surrealist, absurdist visual symbol of an already-dying generation.

-the same boy who films himself doing so, as if wanting to be noticed; foreshadowing social media and a Pandora's Box of evils

-the attractive married middle-aged woman who has an affair with an underage boy,
while he is her daughter's boyfriend and another girl's partner as well; I can relate to these many simultaneous relationships

-she is unsatisfied in her marriage to a seemingly loving, decent man, but more importantly,
someone who can get sex will get it, as much as possible, from as many people as possible,
and her young daughter already seems to be learning from her

-the same middle-aged woman who brings them all together for a friendly gathering, thus living a lie with her husband and daughter; profound lying is widespread in the US, this is a cultural problem

-the abusive brutish drunkard unemployed father always attacking his sensitive son,
making his life hell, as a consequence of his own personal failings;
this must be a common story with many boys,
the father cannot see himself or the damage he is doing to the next generation, is not a real father

-the abusive brutish drunkard father who absurdly promotes hyper-masculinity while struggling with his own repressed homosexuality and making his son's life hell, forcing him to leave, eventually whining that "nobody loves me",
except for his wife who pathetically tolerates him and smokes and drinks while pregnant

-also the fat old man who goes to cheap prostitutes was funny;
he can barely stand the sight of his fat old wife, but can he see himself?

-the religious fundamentalist father, who seems odd at first, but is truly a violent quack, this is another American archetype

-his repressed daughter who unsurprisingly turns into a secretive sex fiend with many partners, I can relate, another archetype;

-and the absurd, comical and disturbing "purity" ritual/incestuous marriage where she becomes her father's property,
and he becomes the guardian of her nonexistent innocence, another example of religious fundamentalist quackery

-the psycho child, living with his grandparents
(Why is he a psycho? Why is he living with his grandparents? Where are his parents?);
not an uncommon arrangement in the US; a certain generation of adults were terrible parents

-the same psycho child who hates and eventually kills his kind, loving grandparents for no reason, the psycho archetype,
personification of pure evil; now you know where school shooters come from

Kids

-the chronically truant, aimless, delinquent skater boys with absent parents, like Beavis & Butthead but much worse,
always getting high, getting wasted, stealing, having sex, spreading disease, already dead inside,
their future vagrancy and miserable death is implied.

-the promiscuous delinquent urban girls with absent parents,
who seem to have no interest in life except partying, getting high, getting wasted, sex with random guys, etc.

-and the younger kids who are learning from them and already inevitably going in that direction

[calxpal]

You mean that you want to be more assertive, confident, and self-assured without being disagreeable?
I know that you are a sweetie, and women tend to be more agreeable than men, because men prefer agreeable women.

As a single young woman, in some/most situations, it helps to be nice and agreeable.
But do not be a doormat either, or people (including men) will walk all over you, take advantage of you, disrespect you.

You will have to decide in which situations to be nice, tactful, and diplomatic,
and in which situations to be unyielding, blunt, direct, and surly.

Some disagreeability is necessary in life,
is the inevitable result of inner strength and the ego-strength to keep to your principles and convictions.

You are under NO obligation to cooperate with, agree with, or do something that violates your conscience, convictions.
This will make you disagreeable. You decide in which situations you want to be temporarily more diplomatic.
But never compromise your fundamental principles or violate your conscience.

If you are conscientious, intelligent, firm and consistent, then you will be respected and liked by the people that truly matter.




You might try to dress and behave more conservatively, less "quirky and unique",
but if you are in a very artsy liberal environment, this may have the opposite effect, they may begin to see you as "square".

Do they see you as inferior physically/aesthetically or emotionally? (probably not intellectually, you seem smart to me)
What kind of people see you this way, in what environment?
How I answer will depend on your response.

Of course this is from my recollection so it may not be 100% accurate, but a number people see me as either physically or socially inferior or both immediately even when I'm the best person possible towards them, many people refuse to include me in their social group or outings despite me never doing anything wrong. The people who are most harsh towards me and most commonly see me this way are VERY often liberal rich white and rich mexican women and occasionally men (but less oftenly so, although mexicans are rare where I live now), more often people who are higher in attractiveness than me (I apologize if this offends anyone but I have to be honest here, I know a lot of attractive people are nice and not stuck up ofc). I have actually found less well off attractive people though do not typically treat me as lesser than them. But ofc I CAN'T generalize as less attractive people have been rude to me too at some point.

The most common environment I have these negative experiences are school, work, and in public places that tend to attract the groups I mentioned. But specifically these experiences are WAY more common at expensive places and in richer areas, but happen elsewhere too. I have also found these experiences are more common at places where I don't match up with the people who typically frequent there (more of an outcast) especially when I'm either less attractive or less social than the average person in the environment.

I kind of feel bad writing this though because I honestly try my best to be inclusive of everyone and not judge others regardless of their background and what they look like, but It's hard when you've had repeated bad experiences with certain groups of people. But this is one reason I'm asking is so I can try and connect with more people from different backgrounds without being seen as a "bother". Now I could consider avoiding these groups but that would be legitimately mean and not like me, and I also am bound to encounter them where I live and when I go to school.

Anyways I'm really sorry if anyone is offended by this, you can disagree and I know not everyone has had the same experience. I also know not all rich people are pretentious like some that I've encountered. Please don't be disrespectful though.

But yeah I have found I have to be less friendly and open at times especially when interacting with said groups, and it has worked for avoiding unjust criticism recently but it's not really like me tbh. I probably push a few good people away at the expense of avoiding my well-being taking a big hit from rude ass pretentious comments.

But ultimately one of the big reasons I'm wondering as well is so I can increase my odds of getting the opportunities I want and I believe I deserve instead of immediately being labelled as "inferior". Because unfortunately I know I will encounter these types at interviews and in every day life.

The dress thing is complicated because yes like you said.....how your dress is perceived really depends on a lot of things I've learned and dressing fun and professional can both be good or bad depending on where you're at.

But yes it probably is true though that those who do respect me are the ones that matter more than the others.

[CosmoLady]

Of course this is from my recollection so it may not be 100% accurate, but a number people see me as either physically or socially inferior or both immediately even when I'm the best person possible towards them, many people refuse to include me in their social group or outings despite me never doing anything wrong. The people who are most harsh towards me and most commonly see me this way are VERY often liberal rich white and rich mexican women and occasionally men (but less oftenly so, although mexicans are rare where I live now), more often people who are higher in attractiveness than me (I apologize if this offends anyone but I have to be honest here, I know a lot of attractive people are nice and not stuck up ofc). I have actually found less well off attractive people though do not typically treat me as lesser than them. But ofc I CAN'T generalize as less attractive people have been rude to me too at some point.

The most common environment I have these negative experiences are school, work, and in public places that tend to attract the groups I mentioned. But specifically these experiences are WAY more common at expensive places and in richer areas, but happen elsewhere too. I have also found these experiences are more common at places where I don't match up with the people who typically frequent there (more of an outcast) especially when I'm either less attractive or less social than the average person in the environment.

I kind of feel bad writing this though because I honestly try my best to be inclusive of everyone and not judge others regardless of their background and what they look like, but It's hard when you've had repeated bad experiences with certain groups of people. But this is one reason I'm asking is so I can try and connect with more people from different backgrounds without being seen as a "bother". Now I could consider avoiding these groups but that would be legitimately mean and not like me, and I also am bound to encounter them where I live and when I go to school.

Anyways I'm really sorry if anyone is offended by this, you can disagree and I know not everyone has had the same experience. I also know not all rich people are pretentious like some that I've encountered. Please don't be disrespectful though.

But yeah I have found I have to be less friendly and open at times especially when interacting with said groups, and it has worked for avoiding unjust criticism recently but it's not really like me tbh. I probably push a few good people away at the expense of avoiding my well-being taking a big hit from rude ass pretentious comments.

But ultimately one of the big reasons I'm wondering as well is so I can increase my odds of getting the opportunities I want and I believe I deserve instead of immediately being labelled as "inferior". Because unfortunately I know I will encounter these types at interviews and in every day life.

The dress thing is complicated because yes like you said.....how your dress is perceived really depends on a lot of things I've learned and dressing fun and professional can both be good or bad depending on where you're at.

But yes it probably is true though that those who do respect me are the ones that matter more than the others.

Great post!

So you have difficulty being included in certain cliques, or being treated decently by women who are members of those cliques,
especially if social/economic class and attractiveness and sociability/extroversion are involved.

Well you cannot change your social class or afford an expensive wardrobe probably, so forget about that.
Also, the upper-middle classes and upper classes have been socialised differently than you have.
So I think that they will always recognise you as an outsider, even if you are very attractive and extroverted.
They may treat you better or worse depending on other things, but you will always be an outsider for them.

And that is fine,
you do NOT have to be part of their group to be happy or successful in life. This seems like a high school clique almost.
You encounter them at school, work and certain public places because you are "on their territory" in a way.
Of course you are allowed to be on their territory,
and you know that you "will encounter these types at interviews and in everyday life."
Be aware of them and be the best version of yourself, but do not expect anything good to come from them.
They remind me of some of my annoying neighbours actually.

Does your sister get along well with the same people in the same environment?
They may treat her better for various reasons, but I doubt that she will ever be accepted into their clique either.

If you were very attractive, but still not part of their class or social group,
you would still be excluded, disrespected, harassed or even bullied.
Many women feel threatened by the presence of an attractive woman.
So I don't think that your attractiveness is the MAIN issue.
You can still improve your appearance of course, this is helpful in life generally,
but this will not guarantee "acceptance" by this group.

If you were very sociable and outgoing, but still not part of their class or social group,
again you would still be excluded, disrespected or bullied.
Many women feel annoyed or threatened by a sociable woman who is not like them.
So I don't think that your sociability or extroversion are the MAIN issues either.
You can always improve your social skills and behaviour, this is helpful in life generally,
but this will not guarantee "acceptance" by this group.

The only way that you might be "accepted" by this clique, if they have never met you or if they don't know your background,
is if you grew up in their environment, and convincingly act, talk, dress, and look like they do.
But then you would be a chameleon at best, or living a lie at worst, not being your true self.
Most people cannot live a lie for long, they will be miserable eventually.

So I would say,
try to find your natural social-economic environment, where you can fit in much better,
for work, leisure and socialising, instead of trying to fit into a group that you are not part of, and will never be part of.
No need to avoid them totally, but do not expect success or acceptance among them.

Living in your natural habitat is the best thing for your own thriving and happiness.
Be conscious and perceptive of your environment, and be part of your own natural habitat not a hostile/alien one.

Another metaphor: know your caste. There are castes in the West too, they are somewhat less visible.
Don't want or expect to be part of something that is not you.

Don't worry about school though, just get through it, school is temporary.

Improve your appearance, behaviour, and social skills as much as possible,
but don't expect anything good from this group of people or their environment or the workplaces that they dominate.

I am sometimes disrespected by the same types of people, which is somewhat frustrating,
but I don't care to be liked by them or accepted into their clique, so it doesn't really matter to me.
(And I don't care to be part of their group either because I am too much of an individualist anyway.)

[Oghuz]

Apologies for the late reply. I am finding it more and more difficult to post because of constant travelling.

Thank you, what do you think about the regime in Iran?
Are the leaders of Iran rational and practical, or still revolutionary, radical, Islamist?
Is the Shia Islamism of today just a facade for the authoritarian state to keep the support of its traditionalist people?

Both elements are present in the current system. There are highly educated and rational players in government, then there are radical revolutionaries in IRGC who would fire missiles or send combat drones to anyone they see as a threat. They have practically launched missile strikes at almost every country in the region including on US bases if you remember. This contrast is because the revolution in Iran was initially stirred by USSR-supported leftists. Monarchist/Shahi Iran was the front-line ally of the US against the USSR. Shahi military was large and would get top-notch weaponry from US in bulk to create a front against the Soviets. So the KGB was supporting Marxists or socialist groups against the Monarch. When USSR got economically weaker and their foriegn operations started to hamper, the revolution was hijacked by religious clergy. Some accuse that religious elements were backed by US, UK because they considered them as an even more effective defense line against USSR's advance in oil rich lands of ME and also UK in particular thought that Mullah in power means free oil. Shah himself claimed this. But after coming to power the Shia clergy nationalized the entire hydrocarbon sector. The current system in Iran is a result of this odd combination of Principalist Islamists and Socialists, it shows up in Iranian society as well.

Shia Islam has always been a political tool of Iranian monarchs in the early modern period to strengthen the concept of nationhood. Iran was converted to Shia Islam by Iranicised Turkic warrior clans in the 15th century to create an exclusive identity different from the Ottomans. My own origin is from one such lineage. This new Shia theological identity included pre-Islamic components practiced in Persian empires so it was more of a native socio-political system. This cohesion worked well because the same Ottomans who were conquering and colonizing Arabs, NAfrica, Europe, could not move an inch into Iran over centuries. Ottoman advance in Europe was hindered because of never-ending bloody wars in the east with Iran otherwise Ottomans would have been able to throw their entire military weight to the west. Principalists/idealists in the current Iranian system have a secret fetish or fantasy of returning Iran to that age that they deem glorious though it is impractical in today's world.

Iran was certainly Islamist, revolutionary, aggressive, and expansionist in the 1980s,
but now I think that Iran is rationally asserting its interests as a regional power.
Iran can see the "big picture" with the US and Iraq, Syria, Russia, China, Afghanistan.

The biggest beneficiary of American ME's policy post 9/11 has been the regime of Iran. Americans removed Baathist Arab nationalist Saddam, Shia Iraq fell into Iranian control. US/UK tried to take over EU's oil supply by causing civil war against secular Assad so that they can pass Qatari-EU LNG pipeline through Syria into Turkey, Iran gained entire Syria, they already had Lebanon in hand with Hezbollah militia. US-fueled Saudis attacked Yemen to establish control over Red Sea, the shia dominated Yemeni nation now serves as a forward base for Iran. So regime kept on winning, now they are eyeing Shia Bahrain and Shia militant nation of Azerbaijan interestingly. Their strategic doctrine revolves around gaining ground during chaos. They learned this thing from US itself, when a country in the neighborhood goes weak due to a war you caused yourself, you enter their market and system starts to follow the hand that feeds from the outside.

Western media hardly mentions the Chinese-sponsored peace deal between Iran and the Arab states,
and I heard that the Gulf Arab states are refusing to help escalate the American/Israeli conflict with Iran.
This is a sign that Iran is rational and working with its neighbors as part of a larger anti-Western coalition that is forming.

Case of $$$. Western alliance which is basically US/UK has nothing economic to offer to any country anymore. West does not support a self-reliant industrial economy in its allied countries which could enable the government to decide its allies, business partners and its own socio-economic future. They rather provide digital debts that discourage industrialization, so while HDI and consumerism, service sector increase the government becomes reliant on cash inflow from outside because they are practically generating nothing at home. Many countries saw this model be disastrous for Europe while the Anglosphere grip over EU got stronger and stronger. Not to mention the strategic weakness such a system causes. Compare this to independent trade with booming industries of China, Russia, Iran, India, Turkey, Korea, Indonesia, Japan, Vietnam etc. So most of these oil-rich sheikhdoms in Persian Gulf are now looking to the east for the future, a shift in policies. Meanwhile, they are scared of tri-alliance between Russia-Iran-China, they just do not want to become a US front against this alliance. Have you noticed Saudis being extraordinarily quiet over Iranian-Chinese actions in red sea i.e Iran from Yemen and Chinese from Djibouti? Amusingly 99.9% people on internet have no idea that Iranian vessels paint the target for Missile strikes out of Chinese navel base in Djibouti.

[QUOTE=CosmoLady;7943012] Will Iran get nuclear weapons eventually?
Would Iran use them for an unprovoked offensive strike against US bases or Israel,
like Saddam Hussein did with Scud missiles in 1991?

This depends upon how we perceive it. Iran is a pseudo-nuclear armed already with 60% enrichment that can be taken to weapons-grade 90% in underground facilities in few days if need be. This is a modular nuclear capability or doctrine. The missile delivery and UCAV system of Iran top notch so the regime does have means of triad (land, sea, air) delivery. I do not think Iran will strike anyone, my uneducated guess is that the regime wants inner stability to strengthen its grip over the country first, inner chaos does not suit them at all so they will avoid confrontations at the strategic level at all costs.

(I think that Iran allowing the dissatisfied people and cosmopolitan liberals to leave is a good thing for the regime,
perhaps this will create a more unified traditional culture over time?)

I am not in particular a classist or a eugenist but most of the regime people are from the middle or lower working classes of society so they are principally in favor of ideological appointments over meritocracy or intellectual elitism. A tough meritocratic system builds society because the best possible brains are at work. Because of the regime's very brutal crackdowns, Iran has faced a massive brain drain, I previously talked about the Iranian American community being one of the highest per capita educated group in US, I think 2nd highest earners as well, what is the government doing to rope these people back in? I mean with a literal debt-free ~2 trillion USD GDP PPP, the government can afford elite technocrats but they would rather have ideologically loyal people of humble origin to work for them. Iranians are ancient and proud (some say arrogant) people who aspire to a high standing in the world, this socialist egalitarian or anti-meritocracy system is not suitable for Iranian society. Saying that, the government in some sectors has worked well in recent times. Iran now ranks very high in the world in STEM R&D and graduation output. The country has an expanding industrial and defense base. They are also trying to improve birth rates to ~3.0 (2.1 currently). They are importing massive workforce from neighboring Irano-Turkic sphere countries to help growing industrialization and population. But my own assumption is that this government will self-destruct with the death of Supreme leader who has cancer, the next government or system will have a very strong foundation of a nation to build something upon. Let's see what happens.

[Oghuz]

- What are your travel plans for this year?

- Has your family ever done business with the Safrican Giant Denel?

- How close do you feel to South African Nationalism regardless of racial groups?

- Very nice to know about your gun collection, I like ladies who know their guns. I am a fan of S&W 648/48 which I guess you have? In my house, we have the following:

My god old Mark Webley IV. I have to get Czech bullets for this beauty. Good muzzle, classy design.



Beretta 92FS with full automatic sear, that's my wife's weapon, she finds my webley's trigger a bit hard to pull or thats her attempt to look more feminine.



Beretta 1301 Gas action for home defence. That is our recent purchase.

[Incal]

Kids

-the chronically truant, aimless, delinquent skater boys with absent parents, like Beavis & Butthead but much worse,
always getting high, getting wasted, stealing, having sex, spreading disease, already dead inside,
their future vagrancy and miserable death is implied.

-the promiscuous delinquent urban girls with absent parents,
who seem to have no interest in life except partying, getting high, getting wasted, sex with random guys, etc.

-and the younger kids who are learning from them and already inevitably going in that direction

That's what dr. Gordon Neufeld has coined peer orientation and according to him, it's the reason of "the increasing immaturity, alienation, violence, and precocious sexualization of North American youth." It explains why I always perceived the average US american as immature: they lack role models because their parents are always absent (whether working endlessly, in prison, or dead).

I had this movie for a while but watched it recently because a friend asked for it (striking my interest): even when quite raw and graphic, it analizes US society thoroughly.

[CosmoLady]

- What are your travel plans for this year?

Every year I am in the US for 4 months, Canada for 1.5 months, Europe for 1.5 months, Australia for 1 month, South Africa for 1 month, Asia and the Pacific for 1 month, and the rest is flexible. I circumnavigate the world twice annually by air going west!

I have no special plans for this year,
except for more time in southern Spain in late spring and summer (I am in Europe during the warm part of the year),
I am expanding my business (real estate) there and buying and selling property.
Spain is an excellent place for real estate investment in Europe.
I might be in southern Portugal and Madrid as well.
This will be for business, not much time for tourism.

Sometimes I might travel somewhere unexpectedly though.
For example, I visited Vietnam in February for about 1 week for a business meeting,
and this was only planned about a month before.

- How close do you feel to South African Nationalism regardless of racial groups?

I am not nationalistic about South Africa, which is a political-economic-social disaster.

In South Africa and many other places,
the centralised state is failing/ending, and a decentralised (post-state? failed state?) era is beginning.
Conditions may become feudal, mediaeval.

I believe that Western civilisation in general is going in this direction despite increasing totalitarianism.
South Africa is simply much further along the path, with an incompetent state currently incapable of totalitarianism.

So I have a more separatist, feudal, tribal mindset for South Africa.
I may be nationalist about other nations though, I have Swedish and Canadian citizenship from my stepfather,
and I have many childhood friends living in several countries.

- Has your family ever done business with the Safrican Giant Denel?

No, except for buying Vektor rifles, which are local copies of the Galil, in South Africa and the United States.
I have been shooting pistols since I was 6, and rifles since I was 8 or 9,
my dad trained me with the Vektor and the Egyptian AKM in the United States.
I left South Africa when I was 6 (1997) and came back when I was 13 and have been visiting regularly since then.
(The very short barrel is available in South Africa not the US)

- Very nice to know about your gun collection, I like ladies who know their guns. I am a fan of S&W 648/48 which I guess you have? In my house, we have the following:

My god old Mark Webley IV. I have to get Czech bullets for this beauty. Good muzzle, classy design.

Beretta 92FS with full automatic sear, that's my wife's weapon, she finds my webley's trigger a bit hard to pull or thats her attempt to look more feminine.

Beretta 1301 Gas action for home defence. That is our recent purchase.

Those are very nice, I do not have any of them!

So you have a Beretta pistol that can fire fully-automatic? I'm jealous!

I have a large collection that was inherited from my stepfather's father and grandfather:
mostly historical small pistols from the 1920s to the 1980s. Most of them are from the 1920s and 1930s.
Most of them are .25 pocket pistols, many are also .32 and .380.
They still function perfectly and are unregistered, mostly in the US and other countries as well.
My stepfather starting buying guns again in the 2000s and I have continued this.

I do not have any shotguns,
or any revolvers except several of the small ones without exposed hammers,
like the Bodyguards and Centennials from the 1950s-1990s.
These are very popular with my girlfriends because they are very simple and easy to use, maintain and understand.

I do not have any Webley revolvers, but I have a few of these little pistols:

Webley M1908 (.380, .32, and .25) from the 1900s-1930s:








I do not have any Beretta products except for several of these little ones, Beretta 418 (.25) from the 1920s-1950s

[Incal]

I have no special plans for this year except for more time in southern Spain in late spring and summer (I am in Europe during the warm part of the year),
I am expanding my business (real estate) there and buying and selling property. Spain is an excellent place for real estate investment in Europe.
I might be in southern Portugal and Madrid as well. This will be for business, not much time for tourism.

Could you elaborate on that?