I need a space to write and I'm to the point that I Dont' care that anyone reads this. In fact, I welcome it, and hope that if you read this, that you'll give me some insight that maybe I'm overlooking... Or maybe I'll help bring you insight to your life. Who knows?
But I ahve a lot to think about right now. A lot to wrap my head around.
I just watched a documentary on a spiritual life coach/shaman/whatever you want to call him. I'll call him Paul but not tell you the last name. Or the film or anything of that nature.
Paul, I would consider, is an intellectual genius, much like a few of my favorites. His method is perhaps a little extreme, and it opens the world for a lot of problems, and some of his beliefs I don't think are 100% applicable, but the show is about one of his workshops and I think people go to workshops so that they can experience the extreme and from those extremes change their lives.
So there's the intro to what I want to explore here. . .
People only seem to change drastically for the better when tehy've experienced something drastic and extreme. --I don't want to believe in that 100% but perhaps it is true. The alternative that rolls through my mind is that people change in those extreme moments, but they also change in the day to day, little by little. However, I know from observation and experience that those "Changes" of the day to day tend to be cyclical. We change a little--just enough--and that pushes us into the next phase of the cycle and then that causes us to generate some correcting action which pushes us a little back and yet pushes us over the limit and then we somehow return to normal. --I've talked about cycles elsewhere...
I don't want to believe that we only change after drastic events, because then it would beg the argument that we should push ourselves to do extreme things at the first sign of trouble and that those extreme things cause us to learn and grow and make ultimate decisions about who we are and what we want to be. . . A sort of... I'm having a bad day, life seems to suck right now, so IT hink I'll go do something spontaneous and outrageous and force myself to do something that I Wouldn't normally do and then somehow --through that process--I force myself to learn and work my way out of it.
And sadly...I KNOW that that works. I KNOW that that is a real thing. take for instance the count of monte cristo...escaping the prison without the ropes rather htan with the ropes. Or take any professional athelete, and all of these life coaches, that I like ET, or even Alan Watts...all of the people I look up to as having obtained the formula for success;; Michael Jordan, or Mohamad Ali or outside of the world of sports, Eminem or T.I. or Justin Timberlake, or 50Cent, Katy Perry...they all took what they were doing--they took their passion, and they took a giant leap with it. They said: I'm not good enough right now, but I'm going to work at it and work at it and work at it and not stop working at it until I'm teh greatest. --To me, that isn't a "gradual change every day" it's a spontaneous life changing moment where they say to themselves : IT STARTS NOW. and then they go do it.
So.
I KNOW you can change this way. You can change by making the spontaneous decision. And I think you could even argue that that is the ONLY way. That ALL of the most successful people are only successfull because they took taht leap of faith into what was their passion and they gave themselves no way out--that's how extreme they took it. They gave themselves no Plan B. They just kept going forward with all that they had and said screw it to everything else.
But I wnat to believe that there is another path. That there is a path for the rest of people where they have plan Bs where they manage the risks to a T. They have plans for their plans and backups for those plans and all of those plans point to success. I want to believe that that is a real thing because it makes logical sense. it makes compelte sense that that is the way life is. That it actually requires both. That you have to take a spontaneous leap and that that leap is extreme enough for you to realize that you are scared and that you need to come up with a plan for your plan for your backup plan.
So I guess I want to be real with myself and...whoever reads this blog... and say that one of the reasons why I don't take a leap into these things that I'm passionate about: Film Making or Life Coaching or Homesteading, is that I worry about the consequences of such if I do it RIGHT NOW.
I fully intend to work on a feather film or series before I die. I always have and always will retain that goal. But, when things got hard for me, I took a break from it. I'm only now regaining my footing, regaining my focus and only now am I build up enough--after being destroyed--to face it again.
The life coaching... I want to make that a career. I'm sick of working for someone else, Im sick of being the smartest guy in the room who is ignored because he's a nobody. I'm sick of having to play politics in my workplace just to survive. to SURVIVE. I don't want to survive. That wasn't ever really my goal in life...survial was a side effect of everything else I Wanted to do. I wanted to LIVE and to live I guess you have to survive. But you also have to do so much more.
I want to do homesteading, and at one point a few months back I had a 5 year plan to get me going. OF whcih I'm only following through with about 1/4th of it. So at this rate, ya, in 20 years perhaps I'll be living that life. But this is bullshit. Why am I not doing it now?
I've also been made aware of a hidden desire of mine--not really hidden, but it's in so much conflict right now that I really don't know what to make of it, and it is that I want to get married some day and have 1 or 2 kids. I want to be a dad. I want to be a husband. but and here is where the doubt and all the barriers are that hold me back: I don't want to have a shitty marriage. I don't want to have kids get in the way of my relationship with my wife. I think a marriage relatiuonship--my wife--ought to be the very best relationship in my existence, and yet my other personal beliefs would indicate that perhaps a wife is a wife, and that I could have a best firned or colleague or mentor, or student that is my greatest relationship--and my personal beliefs don't want me to be held back or isolated into thinking that my marriage is going to be the best relationship ever---so I conflict. I fight againt the desire for this relationship--marriage- to be the best of the best, when it shouldn't have to be.
I joked with my roomate--and I'm actually stating to think the joke is my subconscious creeping out--that what I really need in my life is a saleswoman. Someone who can sell me, can sell my ideas, can pitch everything and redescribe everything and be a part of my life--because I lack those skillsets. I have too much ethics to persuade and manipulate people and because of that I draw the line extra close and it does take manipluation and persuasion to sell people things so I haven't learned those skillsets. So I need a girl who will sell everything I can produce, and then I can fuck her in the office and sell her everything I know about this etheral universe that I seem to understand that just clicks and makes sense--the things like that if you take that spontaneous jump you will succeed...
There are things that hold me back. True.
and yet, there is this fantasy, this vision that I cling to and I think it is the main thing that is holding me back.
It's a vision that goes liek this...
"wouldn't it be nice if..."
I had these spectacular relationships where I was respected and lookd up to and yet that I Was beat up just enough to give me a challenge and keep me growing and yet hta tit was done in the right way to make me not so stressed out about it and panic about getting side tracked...I hate it when people yell or scream at me when I don't know why they are upset with me--and I hate when they yell and scream at me and I do know why they are upset with me but I know that it was an accident or that I don't have the control to chagne it.
And yet... wouldn't it be nice if they DID yell at me more and they knew and could consciously recognize that they were just using me and abusing me--and the nice part would be if they cmae back to me after and apologized and said "thank you for letting me use you as a yelling board"--gee, that would make my life complete I'd probably cry a little inside knowing that someone was using me for something useful and that they recognized how valuable I was after.
Getting back on topic...
I want to believe that these little changes that we make every day acutally ammount to something more than the cycles that we keep going through, and yet I look back at my life and I see that I'm very cyclical. I go through good graceful periods where I'm floating on air, people are complimenting me and building me up and respect me and helpful to me and I'm in that golden position that I love to be in where I can say anything and be accepted or people come to me for advice and I don't have to bullshit with them to feed their ego--I Can just say it and they're receptive to it.
And then I get full of myself, or things start to get too good, or I miss a step here, don't get enough sleep there, and I'm cranky one day at the most inopportune moment and I Get passed up for great things because of it and the next thing I know I'm increadibly upset. I'm upset that I had thigns going for me and a simple mistake or because I push the limits too far, I'm somehow the lowest of low, a criminal. And I don't feel I deserve it. Sometimes it's merely a moment like this, right now, where I pause to really think about htings so I can make some greater discoveries and climb higher, and because I'm pausing to rethink, that is when I get passed up, I miss my train or whatever good fortune was supposed to happen to me.
And then I'm bitter and disgusted by everything and cynical and I get upset that I got passed up ro missed the thing. Then people start to avoid me and I push people out of my life because I'm annoyed by them and then I hit a socalled rock bottom where I realize I have no one or nothing.--that happened to me today actually. I realized I had a funny joke and no one to tell it to. No one who would respect it, not one who would laugh at it, no one who wouldnt think I'm crazy for laughing at it... and so I hit that point and then push myself to pull out of it and I do whatever needs to be done and get a few moments of golden floating on air where people finally respect me again. And this cycle happens over and over and over and I just live through life. I accept these bullshit things that happen to me when people pin things on me. I accept when people come to me for advice or they flatter me when I don't wnat to be flattered.
It's all really weird, but I never really seem to progress anywhere. I just get more hardened and solidified in where I'm at. Things become more refined and more defined. These arguments I've lived off of for so long--they don't get a chance to change because it's like I'm drawing a cirlce and I keep drawing over the line over and over and over and it gets more bold each pass I take till that's all you can see in the picture is this giant bold cirlce that really is insignificant in the whole painting.
All of this really trips me out.
.
.
.
...
.
.
........
.
.
.....
.
.
This entire blog has seemed to be building and working towards some central point--It would seem to me, looking over it as a whole--that I keep going around in a cirlce and get so so so so close to what is at the center of it all and the anticipation builds up as I get closer because I Think 'this is it--this is the time that my intellect finally reaches the center' but it never does. and I am left to wonder why that is.
In fact, perhaps it's not working towards the center at all. Perhaps it is exploding from teh center and I only think that I'm getting more centrifugal when really I'm exploding outward, going further and further from the center and that that is really what progress is--that the thing in the center is so old and so long past that it is irrelevant and that what matters is the present and that in the future the future is what matters. Don't worry about what's at the center, worry about what's at the outer edge--and since the universe is always expanding, don't worry about the actual outer edge, because you'll never reach it--worry about the present, where you are presently.
And...sadly...
that's what it always comes back it.
If the whole theme of this blog is gravity forcing us to fall towards some central point-- whether we are actually moving/falling, or whether we are in a state of equalibrium with the verticals and that we are still falling as much as we are being pushed up (but still falling mind you!). . . perhaps that's what hte central point is: that only this present moment matters. only the fact that I'm sitting here typing away at 100 words per minute on this keyeboard not carring about spelling not caring about who is going to read this later not worrying about anything.
It almost gives me a little bit of anxiety really because I don't know that this is an appropriate use of my time. I could be out, right as we speak, working towards getting laid, or making money to eat, or going out to eat, or whatever else--just to survive. OR I could be doing something enjoyable--but am I not enjoying this? am I not enjoying exploring myself through this writing? I am. . . and it is better than merely surviving. Fuck surviving. I am enjoying this.
But I always find myself returning to 'on task' because the real thrill of it all is that at some point if I keep doing this process I think that I'll make GRADUAL progress and reach a new territory. That's where the thrill is, that's where the excitement is,tthat's what so fun about writing on this blog--that I keep making that circular pass so close to the center that I think maybe this time I'll touch it--and the anticipation builds up and I convince myself that it will happen but it never does. and I don't even know if it ever will. I don't know enough about hte laws of this etheral world to know if it is actually possible for my path to touch to that central point.
What is it that is holding me back?
The thing that holds me back from film making for hte rest of my life is that I fear not making a living at it. I fear it. I'm afraid of it, I'm afraid I'll die of starvation and I know I can't work if I start to starve and so I won't REALLY be film making, I'll be starving. Those feelings of hunger will surpass those feelings of me actually doing something. but not just that. I'm afraid I'll be alone. I'm afraid that I'll have to sacrifice my friends and family and that I'll have to play politics--fuck I hate politics. That the politics will give me the opportunities to create films but at the expense of being fake, not connecting with people--really--because everyhting will be fake. I'll be feeding people's egos just so that I Can do my "passion" which--IS that my passion? No apparently not. Apparently film making is not my passion because it's not what makes me itch it's not what makes me tick.
There . I think I've settled that. Film making is a skill. it is a hobby. It is something fun I like to do, but it is not what I am passionate about, otherwise I'd put up with the politics to do it. I'd sell my house and invest everything I've got into this dream if that were the case. But it's not...
So what about life coaching? The thing that holds me back there is that I'm not assured of the consequences of my actions. I know that I could change people, I know that I could bring insights to the world, but to get started, of course, I'm scared of starving. I'm scared that I will not have enough clients or enough sales to earn a living. I'm scared too, that what I teach, one day, I'll decide isnt' correct. That I only thought it was. And I think that seperates me from a lot of other life coaches--they are confidence and self-assured that their view of life is the correct one. they are convinced that life is all about having sex and the chase and thrill, or they are convinced that life is about earning money, or they are convinced that life is about worshiping this being outside of yourself that may or may not be real and that is the beauty of it. They are CONVINCED--they appear so anyway--that they know exactly what life isa bout, and that gives them the power to sell what it is they are selling.
Me, what I have is original. Sure.
What I have is extreme. Yes.
What I have is well-thought out. Absolutely.
What I have I believe in. Almost entirely. But I doubt. I doubt myself. I doubt that I have it 100% and I'm scared to say : I only know 50% or 10% or whatever % I'm at right now. I think I only have 60% of the picture, if I'm being accurate. I have 60% of it. And I jhust don't know if that is enough to invest my life in it because I don't know enough--and sadly, these other guys--they know less than I do! But somehow they have something I don't have.
Ethics. That's another thing that stops me. And it's related to the 60% I do know. . . I could make up the other 40% and sell that, but it would be unethical. Plus, the 60% I do know, I'm only 90% sure of it. I'm leaving myself open to the possibility that I'm 10% completely off the mark, and I'm leaving myself 40% that I don't know and can't teach and yet that may or may not be the crucial 40%--that scares me.
10% I'm wrong
40% I don't know
60% I do know
90% I'm right.
I want the statistics to work more in my favor. That's all I want.
I just took a break and came back 45 sec later and realized that really, I'm wating around for a breakthrough moment that can propel me int that "it starts now" mode. --it's not realyl waiting. It's building. I'm building myself towards that.
And you know what. I guess maybe I am making some progress--I'm learning more and more. I'm getting more insights all hte time, some that give me more power to get closer to that moment and other that have me alter my course a little.
So the vision is:
I have a gorgeous wife. We live on a homestead. We have 2 kids. I write, blog, and offer workshops. I interact with people online and in person. I make money from my book/lifecoaching/skillsets--just enough to pay taxes, and buy things I'm too lazy to homestead for myself.
That's the vision. When the kids are old enough they can leave if they want and I'll have enough money to get their foot out the door, or they'll have enough in them to leave.
See, that's the funny thing about me and kids...
I want kids because there is a bond there--a relationship that only parents have with their kids--because they have extra years to establish that relationship with them that the rest of the world does not. . . and yet I wouldn't want to have that forever. I'd want them to grow up and move on and leave home so I could have an empty nest with my wife--we could have experienced the kids together and experienced the love of the relationship again as well.--I don't think that's weird, but I Think it's weird that I think that now where most people are like: I want kids so I can have them forever...
... Maybe this is a male thing>?
Honestly, I think the thing I'm most passionate about is searching for the perfect relationship.
If I find it, I worry that I won't be satisfied because there will no longer be a need to search for it. Or perhaps it won't be that way at all. From my experience though, the perfect relationship cannot be found, and I'm90% sure of this. The perfect relationship has to be built over time, step by step, little by little, small progress by small progress. 10% of me says that you can just stumble upon it. That you can find someone you just click with, and everything works out, but 90% of me says that you find someone who likes you a lot and you don't let them go. Or you find someone you like a lot and you don't let them go, no matter how shitty they turn out.
And that leads me: what is holding me back from having this ideal relationship that I speak of where I get married...
Well, the reason is that I haven't found anyone who likes me enough to not let me go. And I haven't found the motivation within myself to find someone I really like and will never let go. I've found people who I thought it would work with. I've found people who I know if I stuck with them that I could influence them to morph into exactly that perfect relationship--but I'm lazy. I'm SOOOO lazy. The moment that I see things are going wrong with the relationship I realize: "fuck. I could have anyone. Why am I messing with this chick>?" Sometimes I even doubt myself "fuck. I dont' know what I was thinking. I can't just pick someone and make a relationship out of them" --and yet, that's the ONLY way I can see it.
Either I pick someone and never let them go no matter what.
Or
They pick me and I come around to realizing that they ARE the perfect relationship for me.
So... I'm passionate about it. I want this. But the thing holding me back is I'm lazy. Fear or laziness are at the root of everything in your life why you aren't free or satisifed. Sometimes knowledge, but very rarely. Having knowledge I can say that...that knowledge is useless if you're scared or if you're lazy. and I have fear and laziness. just look at me!
All in all, I don't know what I'm really passionate about. I know I'm not passionate about making money, because I realize money is useless when it's being stored--a fortress full of gold is of no use to anyone anymore than a fortress full of stone or a field of bare sand is useful. There's no purpose in these things. The purpose is generating revenue and accumulating stuff, not the stuff itself. and I'm not interested in that.
What I am interested in is relationships. Forming new ones, maintaining old ones. Building on old ones if possible. improving them. Benefiting from them.
I'm interested in experiences. Experiencing new things, reexperiecning things I enjoy or am still wrapping my head around.
Life is tripping me out.
Monday, February 2, 2015
Thursday, January 1, 2015
What makes a Man?
I've never really had an interest in this topic until recently, upon reading a few interesting articles and watching some videos here and there on the subject. I posted one article, and my comment to that article on my other blog, 3blindbarren The article is by a guy whose pseudonym is Dr Nerdlove (a harp back to dr. strangelove I assume?)
Basically, I think that Dr Nerdlove did a good job of explaining why this is an interesting topic:
Men of previous generations (pre 1960s) were different than our definition of men now. Post 1960, men, as a whole, have become more effeminate and things that we once thought of as "manly" have been put under threat. Men are no longer the sole breadwinner, they are expected to be assertive and aggressive but not so assertive that they are offensive--this seems to remove dominance from the list of traits that make up a man. --read Nerdlove's article for a good recap of these things.
What Nerdlove's article does is narrow down the argument to two concepts, an either or statement: Men are different, but similar, from women (which I call the segregation argument), or men are equal to women in all ways except their sex--that gender is made up and all humans are humans (which I call the equality argument).
---Ok, I wrote the intro 3 paragraphs a few weeks ago but never finished/posted this article... [Sept 3]
I think I prescribe to the equality argument when it boils down to it. Men and women, these days, are or should be equal in every way to men: in a capitalist system and in a socialist system, men and women ought to be paid the same amount based on skill level. They should be required to work and earn a living for themselves, which...right now I believe the minimum requirement is somewhere around $16K/year. Men and women should be accepted into public offices and organizations based on skill. Men and women should do equal share of housework. Etc. etc.
--More... [Oct 6]
Culturally, I thought I knew what everyone thought about gender: what is a man and what is a woman? But when I thought about it more, I realized I only knew what people said in the moment and that there are a few discrepancies that people don't realize. Like: not all men are macho--a macho man is confident--confident men hold themselves a certain way, they "cool" and calm...but...macho men also have tempers--when they're mad they'll "growl" the way a dog growls to scare away enemies. No.... Not all men are like that. Look in the movies (Because movies are good reference points for stereotyped/not-real-but-not-unreal characters), there are several "Men" played by Brad Pitt or George Clooney, Matt Damon or Will Smith, who don't "growl" who aren't over-buff, who might be a little nerdy, who aren't 100% confident, so on and so forth.
So thinking about that, I realize there are two parts to this:
P1 "What Makes a Man?" --From the cultural perspective; or better put: what universal traits would everyone agree on make up a man?
&&
P2. "What Makes up a Man?" --From a universal truth perspective of how it OUGHT to be in an ideal world of peace equality happiness and so forth.
--I watched a speech by Emma Watson who talked about, I think, the P2 What makes up a man. (she professes to be a traditional feminist, if you're wondering)
And she sounds like she could be a prominent figurehead for the feminist movement into the future...
But I feel like someone needs to tell her (and everyone else) that before we can get from here to there, we need to start with P1--we need to figure out what people presently believe, and then when we find the common ground that everyone agrees on, we can then present an argument to them to get them to agree on what the P2 universal truth of what men OUGHT to be.
I spoke to a good friend about this topic briefly and something he said made me really REALLY dive into this.
He said: "A Man takes care of his own."
I've investigated this statement and think it's true: a man takes care of himself, his possessions, his reponsibilites, his family, etc etc.
That got me thinking. What makes a woman though? because don't women do the same and doesn't society do the same? --And I don't think so.
Soceity expects women to take care of themselves and their kids, sure, but women aren't all held up to the standard that the way men are. They aren't as pressured to go out and find a job--there aren't as many stigmas attached to women without jobs as there is with men without jobs--among other things.
[continue:1/1/2015]
I don't know what I have said above--I'm not even going to read it, I just want to post this article.
Society as of 1/1/2015 believes that Men are: "Bearded, Tough, Working a Hard Job, at times Cutthroat, Emotionally Distant, Domineering, Muscular, and Physically Attractive." If you don't fit that as a male, part of society will always consider you a boy.
However, in my experience, if you fit that, all the "boys" will hate you and all the "men" will want to get rid of you.
Society as of 1/1/205 believes that Women are: "Curvy-thin, Clad in Makeup, Working hard to look good, Always Cutthroat, Emotionally Sensitive, Dominant, Fit, and Physically Attractive" and if you don't fit that as a female then part of society will never consider you a real woman.
But all of this is preposterous, and superficial. These are all surface attributes that don't target the real deal.
Now, I don't agree with this 100%, but a better way for society to express their differences between men and women would be to make the following statement:
"Men take care of their own. Women are taken care of." --Because it highlights that really, all these superficial traits indicate that men are supposed to take care of everything--run the world, politics, conquest, take care of their body, take care of their possessions, etc. and that women are some form of possession--that they should be owned by a man, that they should be the best possession--become the most valuable gem that he keeps in his treasure chest.
Interestingly, it also reflects a deep-rooted truth about society: that they are solely focused on DragonLust--Gather up the riches of the world into your stronghold and defend it against everyone. Become the greatest so that you can add that title to your storeroom. Amass everything there is, wealth, beauty, knowledge, fame, respect, power, etc etc. And to what end?
Basically, I think that Dr Nerdlove did a good job of explaining why this is an interesting topic:
Men of previous generations (pre 1960s) were different than our definition of men now. Post 1960, men, as a whole, have become more effeminate and things that we once thought of as "manly" have been put under threat. Men are no longer the sole breadwinner, they are expected to be assertive and aggressive but not so assertive that they are offensive--this seems to remove dominance from the list of traits that make up a man. --read Nerdlove's article for a good recap of these things.
What Nerdlove's article does is narrow down the argument to two concepts, an either or statement: Men are different, but similar, from women (which I call the segregation argument), or men are equal to women in all ways except their sex--that gender is made up and all humans are humans (which I call the equality argument).
---Ok, I wrote the intro 3 paragraphs a few weeks ago but never finished/posted this article... [Sept 3]
I think I prescribe to the equality argument when it boils down to it. Men and women, these days, are or should be equal in every way to men: in a capitalist system and in a socialist system, men and women ought to be paid the same amount based on skill level. They should be required to work and earn a living for themselves, which...right now I believe the minimum requirement is somewhere around $16K/year. Men and women should be accepted into public offices and organizations based on skill. Men and women should do equal share of housework. Etc. etc.
--More... [Oct 6]
Culturally, I thought I knew what everyone thought about gender: what is a man and what is a woman? But when I thought about it more, I realized I only knew what people said in the moment and that there are a few discrepancies that people don't realize. Like: not all men are macho--a macho man is confident--confident men hold themselves a certain way, they "cool" and calm...but...macho men also have tempers--when they're mad they'll "growl" the way a dog growls to scare away enemies. No.... Not all men are like that. Look in the movies (Because movies are good reference points for stereotyped/not-real-but-not-unreal characters), there are several "Men" played by Brad Pitt or George Clooney, Matt Damon or Will Smith, who don't "growl" who aren't over-buff, who might be a little nerdy, who aren't 100% confident, so on and so forth.
So thinking about that, I realize there are two parts to this:
P1 "What Makes a Man?" --From the cultural perspective; or better put: what universal traits would everyone agree on make up a man?
&&
P2. "What Makes up a Man?" --From a universal truth perspective of how it OUGHT to be in an ideal world of peace equality happiness and so forth.
--I watched a speech by Emma Watson who talked about, I think, the P2 What makes up a man. (she professes to be a traditional feminist, if you're wondering)
And she sounds like she could be a prominent figurehead for the feminist movement into the future...
But I feel like someone needs to tell her (and everyone else) that before we can get from here to there, we need to start with P1--we need to figure out what people presently believe, and then when we find the common ground that everyone agrees on, we can then present an argument to them to get them to agree on what the P2 universal truth of what men OUGHT to be.
I spoke to a good friend about this topic briefly and something he said made me really REALLY dive into this.
He said: "A Man takes care of his own."
I've investigated this statement and think it's true: a man takes care of himself, his possessions, his reponsibilites, his family, etc etc.
That got me thinking. What makes a woman though? because don't women do the same and doesn't society do the same? --And I don't think so.
Soceity expects women to take care of themselves and their kids, sure, but women aren't all held up to the standard that the way men are. They aren't as pressured to go out and find a job--there aren't as many stigmas attached to women without jobs as there is with men without jobs--among other things.
[continue:1/1/2015]
I don't know what I have said above--I'm not even going to read it, I just want to post this article.
Society as of 1/1/2015 believes that Men are: "Bearded, Tough, Working a Hard Job, at times Cutthroat, Emotionally Distant, Domineering, Muscular, and Physically Attractive." If you don't fit that as a male, part of society will always consider you a boy.
However, in my experience, if you fit that, all the "boys" will hate you and all the "men" will want to get rid of you.
Society as of 1/1/205 believes that Women are: "Curvy-thin, Clad in Makeup, Working hard to look good, Always Cutthroat, Emotionally Sensitive, Dominant, Fit, and Physically Attractive" and if you don't fit that as a female then part of society will never consider you a real woman.
But all of this is preposterous, and superficial. These are all surface attributes that don't target the real deal.
Now, I don't agree with this 100%, but a better way for society to express their differences between men and women would be to make the following statement:
"Men take care of their own. Women are taken care of." --Because it highlights that really, all these superficial traits indicate that men are supposed to take care of everything--run the world, politics, conquest, take care of their body, take care of their possessions, etc. and that women are some form of possession--that they should be owned by a man, that they should be the best possession--become the most valuable gem that he keeps in his treasure chest.
Interestingly, it also reflects a deep-rooted truth about society: that they are solely focused on DragonLust--Gather up the riches of the world into your stronghold and defend it against everyone. Become the greatest so that you can add that title to your storeroom. Amass everything there is, wealth, beauty, knowledge, fame, respect, power, etc etc. And to what end?
A Perfect World
I just woke up from a weird dream/nap that I think was my mind solidifying a few concepts for me.
It's weird how our minds work while we sleep, compartmentalizing data and building connections to other experiences as emotions in an attempt to make sense of things and improve memory.
Well...
I think it has finally dawned on me that there is no way for our society to go from a where it is now to a perfect state. There isn't going to be a second coming, a christ-like savior isn't going to come, religious soldiers aren't going to kill every non-believer, and I can provide you logical reasons why not. No amount of believing in that kind of thing is going to make it happen. The only way for it to happen is to stop believing and start doing--beliefs, hopes and dreams never accomplished goals like planing, decision making, work, and taking action. But Religion isn't the answer.
Politics isn't either. In fact, religion is just another breed of politics. People believe in a candidate, they hope that their candidate will amass enough votes, that the population will believe in them enough and their cause that they can take office and then they have faith that their candidate has the moral gumption to do what they say and is intelligent enough to make good decisions and so on and so forth. Every election, in our democratic republic, is another revolution, it's another hopeful second coming, and each go around the candidates get stuck in either failing to be popular enough to amass the necessary votes even though they have brilliant ideas, or getting the votes but being so bogged down by their impossible promises to people and the red tape and their opposition that they can't make the necessary impact that they need to to further society. Politics isn't the answer either because it's too caught up in being politics.
Technology, as we've proven recently, isn't the answer either. We've accomplished various goals through technology but at specific costs that negate any advances we've made. America, one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world, hasn't really improved the lives of it's citizens. Sure we can provide everyone with food, but we still have starving children here, most people are either malnutritioned or overweight. We have essentially built a society where we spend our time coming up with the cures to the things that plague us, except that the technology isn't free so we charge for it, and everyone who deals or sells a "cure" is essentially bartering their version of a cure for another version of a cure and no one really has the cure for anything, even the rich who you would think have the means to live a perfect life--yet they are so preoccupied with maintaining wealth that their wealth becomes a sickness or burden for them and no one has been able to cure that sickness as of yet (and in my opinion never will). [and no I'm not saying wealth is sickness, I'm saying that getting lost in the complicated realm of obtaining, maintaining, and dispersing wealth is a sickness. )
It's nice to have hopes that one day the world will wake up and we'll all be cured, that we can live in a golden age of peace where everyone is nice, caring and emotionally connected, where we don't have want of food, lack of water, shelter, clothing, that we can be free of unfair biases, that if we want something we have the complete--unhindered--ability to accomplish that thing.
But this dream I had seemed to spin the tapestry for me clearly:
If we want to live in a "perfect" world, one with all those things above: people are free to do whatever they want, they aren't hindered by others, where conflicts are easily resolved because we have all the tools to resolve them, there is no hunger, no want. Sure, in this world there will be conflict, there will be hardships like inclement weather and bad times, but people will pull together and make it through. People may be angry but they'll be emotionally mature enough to make amends for anything their anger does to others and resolve the conflicts they have with those who make them angry.
It IS possible. . .
We have all the knowledge we need to do it. We know the "science" of conflict, we know how to cure world hunger and resolve all of our water problems throughout the world. We have the means of curing 99% of the worlds diseases.
But what we don't have is people.
We don't have real people.
We don't have emotionally mature, physically mature, and mentally mature people to do it.
We would almost be better off if we took a few of our "best" people (not our smartest or strongest or bravest or whatever, but overall best--physically, mentally, emotionally) and left this world to start a new one.---but again, that wouldn't work because it would cost too much, too many people would stick their fingers in the pot and put their own spin on everything and add their own requirements to the point that it wouldn't work.
All of this is depressing, I know. But let me give you the hopeful side of things:
We can build a perfect world within ourselves. we can be happy, and at peace individually or among a very select group of individuals. All it takes is the know-how, desire, and the determination to see through to the end.
It's weird how our minds work while we sleep, compartmentalizing data and building connections to other experiences as emotions in an attempt to make sense of things and improve memory.
Well...
I think it has finally dawned on me that there is no way for our society to go from a where it is now to a perfect state. There isn't going to be a second coming, a christ-like savior isn't going to come, religious soldiers aren't going to kill every non-believer, and I can provide you logical reasons why not. No amount of believing in that kind of thing is going to make it happen. The only way for it to happen is to stop believing and start doing--beliefs, hopes and dreams never accomplished goals like planing, decision making, work, and taking action. But Religion isn't the answer.
Politics isn't either. In fact, religion is just another breed of politics. People believe in a candidate, they hope that their candidate will amass enough votes, that the population will believe in them enough and their cause that they can take office and then they have faith that their candidate has the moral gumption to do what they say and is intelligent enough to make good decisions and so on and so forth. Every election, in our democratic republic, is another revolution, it's another hopeful second coming, and each go around the candidates get stuck in either failing to be popular enough to amass the necessary votes even though they have brilliant ideas, or getting the votes but being so bogged down by their impossible promises to people and the red tape and their opposition that they can't make the necessary impact that they need to to further society. Politics isn't the answer either because it's too caught up in being politics.
Technology, as we've proven recently, isn't the answer either. We've accomplished various goals through technology but at specific costs that negate any advances we've made. America, one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world, hasn't really improved the lives of it's citizens. Sure we can provide everyone with food, but we still have starving children here, most people are either malnutritioned or overweight. We have essentially built a society where we spend our time coming up with the cures to the things that plague us, except that the technology isn't free so we charge for it, and everyone who deals or sells a "cure" is essentially bartering their version of a cure for another version of a cure and no one really has the cure for anything, even the rich who you would think have the means to live a perfect life--yet they are so preoccupied with maintaining wealth that their wealth becomes a sickness or burden for them and no one has been able to cure that sickness as of yet (and in my opinion never will). [and no I'm not saying wealth is sickness, I'm saying that getting lost in the complicated realm of obtaining, maintaining, and dispersing wealth is a sickness. )
It's nice to have hopes that one day the world will wake up and we'll all be cured, that we can live in a golden age of peace where everyone is nice, caring and emotionally connected, where we don't have want of food, lack of water, shelter, clothing, that we can be free of unfair biases, that if we want something we have the complete--unhindered--ability to accomplish that thing.
But this dream I had seemed to spin the tapestry for me clearly:
If we want to live in a "perfect" world, one with all those things above: people are free to do whatever they want, they aren't hindered by others, where conflicts are easily resolved because we have all the tools to resolve them, there is no hunger, no want. Sure, in this world there will be conflict, there will be hardships like inclement weather and bad times, but people will pull together and make it through. People may be angry but they'll be emotionally mature enough to make amends for anything their anger does to others and resolve the conflicts they have with those who make them angry.
It IS possible. . .
We have all the knowledge we need to do it. We know the "science" of conflict, we know how to cure world hunger and resolve all of our water problems throughout the world. We have the means of curing 99% of the worlds diseases.
But what we don't have is people.
We don't have real people.
We don't have emotionally mature, physically mature, and mentally mature people to do it.
We would almost be better off if we took a few of our "best" people (not our smartest or strongest or bravest or whatever, but overall best--physically, mentally, emotionally) and left this world to start a new one.---but again, that wouldn't work because it would cost too much, too many people would stick their fingers in the pot and put their own spin on everything and add their own requirements to the point that it wouldn't work.
All of this is depressing, I know. But let me give you the hopeful side of things:
We can build a perfect world within ourselves. we can be happy, and at peace individually or among a very select group of individuals. All it takes is the know-how, desire, and the determination to see through to the end.
I do not prescribe
I think this should be mentioned before it's too late:
I am different. I am unique. I am my own person. I think for myself. I serve myself and have no masters. I am not a stock character. I am the protagonist of my story. I am comfortable with this, even though each day I HAVE to venture into new territory.
At times, being different bogs me down. Have you tried this before? It's not easy!
I am no on drugs, I do not take pills, I am not addicted to anything--at least not anything typical.
As such, I realize that at times no one can help me but myself.
At times, I realize that I may not have anyone in my life that can relate to me.
At times, I have no avenues for relieving stress because I haven't invented them.
When asked if I thought it was a good idea to go see a therapist, I realized: The only thing a therapist can do for me is be a sounding board. Their job is to help me think of a solution for myself, they can't tell me what to do and how to live, and if they did, it wouldn't be the life I want to live--it would be the life they want me to live.
...
But
...
Don't you see? --I can use anyone with a listening ear as a sounding board and save myself $75-125/hr! The only difference is that some people are shitty listening ears because they want to tell me what to do and how to live, or they want to be validated themselves for having similar experiences. . . That's fine. If it's free I can't complain about it too much, right? I can always turn it down.
But the benefit of one of these free people actually makes it worth more than a therapist: they can connect. A therapist can't exactly be your friend the way a real friend can be your friend. SO. No offense to you well-wishers, but don't recommend me a therapist, recommend me a friend or be a better one yourself.
I know I do not prescribe to society's pattern. I don't work to accumulate wealth and power. Nor do I attempt to be the most famous or the best at anything in particular. I work to be happy and keep on living. At times I'm the best, but I don't care about that--nor do I want to be the best because of the added stress that it brings.
I don't rely on others to make decisions for me, and I'm not comfortable with others making decisions for me without me knowing.
This is a good thing for the people around me, and for myself, and here's why:
1. I get to take all the risks and chances--I eat the leafy plants, if you will--and if they're poisonous, I'm the one who suffers but not the rest of the tribe. --so learn from my mistakes and follow my successes.
2. I present an alternative path through life that is well-thought out. I prove that there are other ways than the status quo. This is great for opening discussions and exploring things that most people overlook.
3. I can be real. I am what a whole human is. No alterations. No chemicals, not additives, nothing abnormal. I'm all natural. Anyone who experiences life will get what I get, plus whatever else they add. If you work out more than I do, you'll have bigger biceps but you won't be natural. If you take prescriptions, you'll be like me, except whatever side effects those prescriptions bring. If you take hard drugs, you'll be like me...but probably trip out a lot more.
Let me recap at a different angle:
I experience emotions. I thirst for knowledge. I crave intimacy. I get hungry and thirsty and experience pain.
But overall I'm positive. I'm happy. I'm intelligent. I'm ambitious. I'm handsome, even.
I am able to make decisions on my own and face the consequences of those decisions.
I'm basically you. Minus the things about you that I am not.
I don't really know what I'm getting at here but I suspect the summation is that because I am original and dont' prescribe to the status quo, I am what it truly means to be human.
Thursday, December 18, 2014
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.
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.
Monday, December 8, 2014
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.
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.
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Chats with Courtney: Helping Others
I made the above diagram to help explain the topic of our discussion:
Kyle: Courtney, I need you to spot check the logic behind this.
Courtney: Okay? What's the topic?
K: Helping people.
C: Oh, I like helping people!
K: Good, because I want your help. First off, is it fair to say that you can break people into two categories: Need help, or don't need help?
C: Sure that's basic.
K: What about can you also overlap those with: Want help and don't want help?
C: Sure.
K: is there anything I'm missing?
C: I don't think so. --I could be wrong but I don't think there are any outliers to this.
K: Ok, so where they overlap you get 4 categories of people: A) People who don't want help and don't need it. B) People who don't want help but need it. C) People who want help but don't need it, and D) people who want help and need help. With me so far? (see diagram above)
C: Yes.
K: Well, this is the part I want you to really spot check to make sure I'm not missing anything: People who fall into category A, if you try to help them and they don't need nor want your help, they will probably resent you and maybe withdraw from you.
C: I can see that--You might find someone who is a pushover that avoids conflict, but by and large most people will probably do that.
K: And if you try to help someone in category B, who don't want your help but need it, then they might do the same thing--there is the potential that they'll change their mind after it's over, but they'll resent you the whole way and maybe withdraw from you and it will definitely change the relationship, but hopefully your help will improve their life and in time they will see it.
C: That sounds right. Particularly with friends I have had whose kids got into drugs and they had to do some drastic things in order to get their kid to get back on the right path. The kid resented them but it was for their own good...
K: --With category C, you can help these people, but they don't really need you to do it. They'll appreciate you, but when it comes down to it they are either letting you help them because they want you to feel integrated to their life, or because they are lazy.
C: That sounds like the best so far... minus that it's a drag if they are lazy.
K: Yes, I agree. That's the best of the four categories in my opinion but the potential is there that they are merely relying on you because they are too lazy to do it themselves.
C: Right...but what about the last category?
K: So category D... People who need help and want help. I think on the surface these sound like the ideal one, because when you help them, you are doing a good thing, plus they want your help and will appreciate you--BUT, the problem is that if you help them, then they never learn to do it themselves. They never learn to figure things out on their own and they become dependent on you into the future. After all, what motivation would they have to do it for themselves if they could get you to do it for them?
C: I agree with that...mostly. But I don't think EVERYONE would become dependent...some people naturally want to do things on their own, and they just need a little help in the present.
K: Possibly...but those people are far and few. In fact, the only person I know of who is that way is myself...and I'm not so sure that I'm ALWAYS that way.
C: Right...Well cool. This all makes sense to me so far. What prompted this?
K: I went through a bit of depression a week ago--actually, it was a month or two spiraling down into depression and a brief stint of depression when it all culminated--and it was all related to this topic. I just couldn't shake this feeling that people were taking advantage of me, or they weren't appreciating me enough or valuing me enough, or that they were becoming dependent on me and not giving me time to take care of myself and expecting too much from me, or when I'd try to help them because they needed help they'd resent me for it and withdraw from me and reject me. It wasn't a good feeling, and at the time I didn't have an objective perspective of this to make sense of it.
C: And you do now?
K: Yes. Now I realize a few things because of this: First, I realize that I shouldn't get involved with category A people--I already knew that, but it's easy to forget sometimes when you get lost in your mind. Second, I realized that if I intend to help category D people, I need to accept that there is a very real possibility that they will become dependent on me and that I will have to carry my load, plus their load--I can't hold out for them to suddenly not be dependent on me because it may never happen, and at times they may be ungrateful because they feel entitled. So if I intend to help people who need my help, I need to make sure that I am comfortable with helping them forever with that thing, and if not, then I won't help them.
C: That seems fair...though doesn't that become a little frustrating when you see people who need help but you can't help them because of that?
K: Absolutely! And that's the same for category B people--They don't want your help but they need it, and if I decide to help them then I have to accept that they will probably resent me, not be grateful for it, and may even end our friendship because of it--temporarily or permanently. --Or they could also become dependent on me with or without the resentment still there. Helping people who need it is a difficult thing for sure! I like what pitbull says "Ask for money, get advice, ask for advice, get money twice."
C: Which means...?
K: If you ask for money, people ought to just give you advice on how to make money, because if you give them money they keep coming back and they'll be ungrateful either way--ungrateful because you didn't give them waht they want and ungrateful because they start to feel entitled. Whereas if they come asking for advice on how to make money, you can be a little more liberal, give them advice, give them money to help get started, and then they can make money because they take the advice to heart.--money twice.
C: Oh, I get it. Cool. What about the other category, what are you going to do about those?
K: Category C?... I have decided to do a situation check: if at the time I feel like helping them, I'll help them, if not I'll say no. --Mostly that is based on the situation of if I am busy doing something else.--I love to help people, and if they want my help and want to involve me in their life, then sure, I'll help them, do them favors, give them advice, etc etc. --If I like them that is. In fact, all of this is contingent on me liking the person, and I'll admit that I'm partial to people. I'm not going to help someone if I don't like them--I have to first find something about them I like, which is difficult with some people.
C: Kyle, you're so selfish.
K: No, I'm a very loving and giving person...if I like them. And I like and love more people than you might think.
C: I'm just kidding. I've seen you and the way you love. It's very free and warm.
K: That's why I went into a sort of depression though... At times I don't have control over who I love. I fell in love with a girl at the grocery store who I only talked to periodically and knew very little about, but I knew that I wanted her to get over the things she was going through--and I felt bad when I'd check out and could tell she was having a bad day.
C: I think you're just abnormally empathetic...Plus, like I said, you love freely and don't let things get in the way of loving--which is very admirable.
K: Thanks. So now that I am able to wrap my head around what is bothering me, I have a plan for how to resolve it. I know better in what situations to step in and help or give of myself, and in what situations I simply cannot help. --I'm okay with people being dependent on my sometimes--I'm able to get my needs met pretty quickly and so from that point I can help others in exchange for whatever...but with other things I definitely can't allow it to happen. Understanding this has made me a whole lot more at peace with life and feeling like I am in control again, which is great!
C: Good to hear! I love you Kyle, you're such a good friend and an inspiration. Thank you!
------------
Closing notes:
After writing out the conversation again, I realized something interesting:
Loving people, giving of yourself, and helping other people is always going to be more drawback than good. You may never get thanked, you will either be sapped dry by their dependencies, or they will feel entitled to you. The only people who will consistently thank you and appreciate you are those who don't need your help--so you may face the thought that "you're not needed." But hey, that's okay! It's good actually. To not be needed and yet still wanted in their life is a wonderful thing. People who are fully independent and capable and yet want you in their life are the best lovers, trust me. They have no ulterior motives, and even if they are lazy, that's okay too because if you have the time and resources to spare, it's not really a burden on you, and if you don't then you can tell them to do it and persuade them to get off their lazy and do it. I like category C people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)