I am a LONE WOLF now

I definitely started the year off as a MGTOW- IBMOR-SYSBM follower but now, I am a straight up LONE WOLF. Basically, there is no bad nor good in being a loner. You can be a very kind person or be a notoriously arrogant asshole, and in both ways you can still remain a loner. Beyond the perspective of stereotypes and other misconceptions, being a loner simply means that you tend to be by yourself for extensive periods of time. The term “loner” in its definition does not imply anything else beyond it. Everything beyond it is whatever you make out of it or what you were thought by society about it. Any other addition to “someone that is alone for extensive periods of time” is not objective but a result of your own subjective and inter-subjective experiences. This definition does not even imply if you like being a loner or hate it.

It is not a personality trait but a state of being, and, arguably, it is a universal state of being, because all of us may be alone for extensive periods of time in various parts of our lives, no matter how intensive our social lives are, if we have social lives in the first place. Thus we are all, possibly, loners. Even in the midst of company you may be still be a loner, because social interactions are only one aspect of living. There’s more into life - everyone’s life - than just a social life. Whatever else you imply about it is a product of your own opinions and experiences, not the basic definition itself of lonerhood.

Now, all of what I just wrote are not a negative criticism. I, too, very much enjoy being alone and at peace while alone. I would even add that for me being alone is the possibly the most optimal state of being at peace, too. All of those who claim that humans are social animals, could possibly ignore the fact that a part of us is also solitary, not only social. It is a matter of extant between the two, and not necessarily a state of dichotomy when the existence of one part prevents the other part from existing. Those who tell you that you are social animal, fail not only as seeing you as an individual that could possibly not only be more solitary than social, but fail at recognizing, in the first place, the natural existence of seclusion as a state of being that could possibly be universal for all living and non-living beings. Interaction is not something that exists eternally, i.e, in every living moment in a person’s life. Interaction is merely a part of life, not the entirety of it. Everyone of us could possibly seek social interactions the same as seeking seclusion for whatever reason.

Thus, the “lone wolf” is not necessarily a state of being that happens to specific people, but I think that everyone, in whatever stages of their lives, were and are loners, and had the “lone wolf” experience, making the possibility of being extensively alone, inevitable regardless of the situation.

As said before, whatever you see in the state of lonerhood is whatever you choose or were taught to make out of it. You could cry in the corner and be miserable about the lack of social interactions, the same as celebrating this state of optimal freedom and potentially stress-free. Nothing else allows nor prevents you from adopting your own perception towards things, not only towards lonerhood. Literarily nothing can force upon you your own decision of perception and how to narrate it. There could possibly be influence, but not control, or, at least, full control. This makes not only seclusion possibly a state of optimality, but generally your own inner sphere of mental life, which you are both the narrator and the main character, as optimal., too

And, because there is much less, or even no, influence upon your own decision of perception, a life that is majorly devoid of social interactions, can become ideal for all of those who seek optimal freedom, independence and one’s own control over not only one’s decision of perception, but one’s other choices regarding the External World, as well. Thus I, share the same happiness and positivity.