3 Pop Songs that Prove Society Still Has Things To Learn

Three pop songs that prove society still has things to learn:
1. http://youtu.be/iD2rhdFRehU
2. http://youtu.be/yw04QD1LaB0
3. http://youtu.be/nCkpzqqog4k


This article was prompted by the thought I had driving to work today: "If an Alien Civilization(AC) were to hear the things we broadcast, what would they think?" --And on the radio I heard these three songs back to back:

Ed Sheran - Don't
Nick Jonas - Jealous
Sam Smith -Not the Only One


It occurred to me that perhaps an AC would hear them and think all we care about is whether our mates are only mating with us or not. --Probably, this AC would think we were foolish because increased mating opportunities brings out quicker evolution, but that's not the point I want to make here.

The point I want to make is that we have a bizarre social belief that goes like this:

If I agree to single out a "mate" (for lack of a better word) then I have to accept the handful of good traits that they have along with all of their bad traits. [but it doesn't end here] Not only that, but I can't accept the good traits of others.

To help wrap your head around this, here is a fictitious example:

MC - We'll call her Mary
Candidate A - Joseph
Candidate B - Gilgamesh


So Mary like that Joseph is a nice, wealthy guy and can provide her with a home, clothes, and he'll be nice, won't beat her, and will protect her.
Joseph likes that Mary is a sweet girl, plus it's cool to have this attractive girl go around the village with him.
Unfortunately, Joseph is lacking in the sexual department. He also doesn't listen to mary very well and he doesn't support her in the things she wants to improve and succeed in. It's very frustrating for her, so she seeks elsewhere for someone who will listen to her.
Along the way, because this is natural for humans to do, she meets Gilgamesh who is a great listener. She is attracted to him and soon learns that he isn't lacking in the sexual department.
Mary likes that Joseph is nice and wealthy--and Gilgamesh is not wealthy, but great in bed and a good listener.
Mary doesn't have sex with Joseph anymore. She still attends village events with him, she still takes care of the house so that Joseph can work in his business of making houses. She is very much publicly his girl.

So the question is posed: Who should Mary be with? Joseph is happy as a carpenter with a beautiful, sweet wife. Gilgamesh is happy as a traveler, with a passionate lover.

The cheap, sleazy answer is: she should be with the one that she loves most--the one her heart tells her to be with.

But I hate that answer because it is about like saying: which should I choose? Choose the one that you choose. --There is no criteria in that answer to determine which is "better" and what decision to make.

And honestly. She should choose both. She gets good sex and passion in her life + she gets wealth and security.

The ONLY problem with this is jealousy. Joseph is FINE just living the life he perceives--the one where his wife goes to village events and he works as a carpenter. But when he finds out about gilgamesh he busts a blood vessel. Why is it such a problem to him? Nothing has changed! absolutely nothing has changed. He can still focus on his work. He can still have the love of Mary. --the only thing that changed was his perception...

To add a kink to my scenario, let's say Mary and Gilgamesh have a son. Woops! Baby Jessie is born.
By social right, Joseph is obligated to take care of Jessie. But by the laws of nature, Mary and Gilgamesh are his parents.
However...when you marry someone, you agree to raise their kids. --In today's society if you marry someone with kids, you have to accomodate those kids--the kids don't just get dumped off, they don't live in another house, and there is no realistic way around it.

So what do you do?
Do you say:
1) Legally, the child is Mary and Josephs
2) Naturally, the child is Mary and Gilgamesh's
3) Obviously it's all Mary's FAULT
4) Or do you reframe reality and realize that NOTHING changed. The child, in many ways is all 3 of theirs.




People focus too much on fault. Fault doesn't accomplish anything other than make people feel justified in their emotions. It justifies anger. It justifies hatred, greed, jealousy, and a slew of other negative emotions. It doesn't solve problems though it only creates them--as we are learning by the function of terrorist organizations: they are created out of hatred and they create terror in the name of hatred, lust of power, and anger rather than love and peace.

Legally--our social system is messed up. Laws should work for the people not the people for the laws. This scenario defies the way we currently think about the laws and I propose we change the laws to reflect real life better. Legally, JOSEPH should take care of Jessie as a son--that is the agreement he made by marrying Mary. It is not fair, but it is as much a decision he made as it is a decision that Gilgamesh made by having sex. --there is always the possibility that a child will enter into the mix.

Option 2 is a moderate argument... it is the truth. But should Mary and Joseph end their relationship because of it? Should Mary and Joseph divorce and should Gilgamesh be forced to take care of the child he can't support? --MANY people say they should. But why? Why throw a child into a scenario that it worse? It would be better to lie and say Joseph was the father than to force the child to have a father that doesn't want him and a mother who can't support him on her own.


Stupid. Utterly stupid.

Instead of creating a black and white world, we should be using all of the colors. Gilgamesh is the genetic father--there is nothing wrong with a child knowing that. Joseph is their Legal father--there is nothing wrong with a child knowing that. Mary, regardless, is Jessie's mother, but if they put the child up for adoption then someone else will assume legal parentship.




Society is much more advanced than 30BC, but we live as though the same rules apply--and worse, we pick and choose which rules we follow--rather than take care of the kid, as is our legal obligation, we divorce the mother, break up with the girlfriend who has sex with anyone without us.
My Gawwwd! these songs sound like little boys who can't handle competition so they whine and bitch about it.

The Sleeping Metaphor

I think the pop metaphor for "awake" and "arise" are probably the worst in all of human history.

The concept that the metaphor targets is that we are asleep, ignorant, unattentive, unobservant, or we're stuck in catharsis and don't care. The idea is that if we would just wake up, open our eyes and look around, that we would make some life-changing observation about the world around us and realize it's time to take action.

I think a lot of this is spurred by religious ideals...

The problem I see with this is that: People don't have their eyes closed, ears plugged, nose plugged, etc. They see everything and subconsciously they know everything that needs to be done.
But they face fear in various forms...they fear being inadequate and having bad consequences happen to them, they face fear of the unknown because with change comes unknowns. They face fear of actually succeeding because they don't know what the next step is after success and if there is no next step then they would lack a purpose.

It's not that they need to wake up, it's that they need courage, they need motivation, they need purpose.

If you give someone the proper motivation--something that they really want--you can get them to work toward that thing and it gives them a sense of purpose to drive them to obtain it.
If you care to manipulate people, you could further convince them that the only way to obtain what they want is to do it a specific way that benefits you--whether it benefits them or not and whether it really gets them what they want.

And THAT is the problem. The problem is that so many people have been trying to manipulate everyone--persuading them that this is "the way the truth and the light," or "if you buy our products, all of your problems will be solved," or "a vote for me is a vote for you."  But none of that is really true. . .

In this moment, I don't know what kind of future I would be satisfied with. There are times when I think I know but I too fear that future...if it happens then what? I think I'm pretty visionary. I know I'm fantasy oriented--I dream up these fantasies that I would like to happen and that would be wonderful if they happened, and sometimes I act on those fantasies, but I too lose the will to continue with them and...my subconscious knows why but my conscious doesn't want to admit it...
I'm not asleep, I'm just scared. I'm scared of announcing something, making it come true, and then not wanting it once I have it because I don't know enough about the thing I desire AND I don't know enough about myself and if I'm capable of wanting it for the long haul.

Big insights right there.
That's what is holding me back.
And yet, it is also what is keeping me from being satisfied with the here and now.

Because I haven't explored those futures, because I haven't put enough time and energy into THINKING (not doing, but THINKING), I can't decide if I've got everything I could ever want right now in this moment because I've reached a state of satisfaction, OR if I would be more satisfied with another situation.

I keep coming back to the drawing board. I keep pulling out my thinking pad and writing down what I think I want, and then I convince myself that I don't want it and that I want what I've already got.

I do feel at peace right now and I'm happy.
If I dream, then I might want that thing and will have to think about its future and determine if I really want it.
No. Sleeping isn't the right metaphor, because it's easier to dream when you're sleeping and we need to dream more and think more about our dreams if we want to advance as a society.