Tag Archives: Mind

Women are Aggressive Communicators

Image

All of the nastiness and aggression that men are accused of can be found in the communication behavior of women.  I have spent a lot of time studying relationship and patterns in relationship and events in the world and how they are allowed or created by how people relate to one another.  Ever since I was a child I was hypersensitive to sounds and communication styles.  I used to get sick to my stomach listening to live music, and I developed a psychosomatic response to the sound of Diane Chambers, Shelley Long‘s character on cheers.  It wasn’t until I read A. R. Luria‘s book THE MIND OF THE MNEMONIST that I truly started pondering my sensitivity to sound.  I have an almost autistic level of sensitivity to sound, Diane Chamber’s timber made my heart race and I became agitated and my eyes dilated and I wanted to kill something.  I am not like other people, my mind is always working.  I relax into philosophy and higher thought, I am not happy if I don’t have a good conversation or learn something new every day.  This caused me to ponder the difference in communication styles between men and women. http://alfrodull.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/the-most-annoying-character-on-tv/

Image

I recently watched this documentary on Seaworld and noticed something interesting, they said that Tillikum was harassed by the two females he was originally put in the tank with, they would bite him for no reason and leave bloody marks on him.  Tillikum was a larger than average male killer whale.  After studying Deborah Tannen‘s male and female communication rituals and coming up with my theory that male and female brains are actually two different type of intelligences with different approaches to life, value systems, and strategies in relationship I found it interesting how similar Tillikum’s experiences were to my own.  Women will henpeck me and provoke me with no provocation on my part just as they did to him.  I began to ponder if this wasn’t because as a large male he represented a potential threat to them so they started testing him or trying to gain psychological leverage over him.

All of the nastiness and aggression that men are accused of can be found in feminine communication rituals and strategies.  When left alone the female mind acts like a parasite to the male mind.  Women are aggressive in passive ways, they are passively aggressive, covertly hostile.  I have always found it fascinating how over time the woman eventually manages to leverage herself to the point where she takes complete artistic control of the relationship and the man while in it is not allowed to be himself or to be interested in what he is naturally interested in.  Women indulge themselves in female pornography, puppies, kittens, babies, but men are judged as bad for being interested in the type of pornography that creates they pornography she enjoys.

Image

As I become aware of the subtle processes and strategies that women use I realized two things, society in general doesn’t detect them because they are considered normal.  Society has been trained not to scrutinize women or look for them to be the cause of the bad.  Society in general has a feminine bias.  Society will blame other things for the behavior of women.  If somebody says, “man that lady is a bitch, she really did a number on me.”  Somebody will respond, “she must have really gotten screwed over by some man.”  Not only is she rescued from her own behavior, blame for her behavior is put on some imagined male scape goat and she is allowed to go on her crazy way, unscrutinized or blamed, working her evil will on the universe.  The ancients didn’t keep men and women separate to protect women, they did it to protect masculinity from femininity.

Image

Millions of years of gender reinforcement create neural myelination that passes down through cellular memory.  Men are insensitive to their own feelings because life is hard and they have to do unpleasant things so that they and their women and children can live, and women have to be sensitive to their own feelings because they need to feel that feelings are valid in order to be good mothers and take care of horrible little maggot poop factories that wine, because babies communicate no analytical data and only emotional data.  Women and men and children are insensitive to men.  Go figure.

Not just that, you can see that women have adopted communication strategies designed specifically to manipulate the male mind which is sensitive to sound.  They speak in a high pitch, with a rapid cadence.  Persian women have adopted the behavior of speaking in low manly tones to communicate dominance and to turn men off sexually.  All of this works on a subliminal level, women don’t realize they are doing it, and neither do men.

Image

Women ask for mercy from their man, they beg for quarter, they start the relationship by asking him to tell her a lie or perform a herculean labor and then when he fails or fails to protect her from reality of the truth she blames him for a situational problem.  Women use leading questions herding men in certain directions.  “Why don’t you play with the children?”  and then when they start liking him more than her, “How come you spend so much time with the children?  are you some kind of freak?”   Women use humiliation rituals.  “How come you spend so much time with your boyfriends, are you gay?”  She tries to define a real man by what he does for her and what he puts up with from her.  How is it that women are the arbiters of what it means to be “real men” are men the judge of real women?  ‘Cause I have some ideas, just sayin’…

Advertisements

How Feminine Thinking Prevents the Wisest Solutions.

Image

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
Maimonides

For the sake of being as analytical as possible I want to break this down into a math problem.

A = man that knows how to fish,

B = Man that doesn’t know how to fish

F = the knowledge of how to procure fish.

Now the solution that creates the most value, based on my system of efficiency towards value, is B makes himself like A.  B turns into A.  Other possible permutations include.  A keeps on giving B fish.  This could be done happily or begrudgingly, A could be being forced by some external moral authority to continue giving fish to B.  Or A could be using fish as some sort of currency to get something in return, perhaps a sense of dependency, or superiority, or moral high ground.  The worst solution that creates the least value is if A makes himself like B.

B + F = A

A – F = B

Now there is a transition period as B makes himself or is made in the image of A.  If A participates happily there is no problem, but if B participates begrudgingly and his survival depends on his learning how to fish, there are two options, A can leave him to die, or if that is not an option, force B to learn how to fish.

Seems pretty obvious and logical doesn’t it?  But then when we turn around and replace A, B, and F with specific people and skills we see that all of the intellectual confusion set in, because we invite the judgments of the stupid majority.

Image

Now I am not a heartless bastard as some would have you think or as you yourself might think.  What I am is a rational person who will not be forced to do anything that will fail or that is irrational.  I want you to try to keep your emotions from clouding your judgments if you can.  I call the above picture a type of “emotional pornography”.  Yes, there is a problem and bad stuff is happening in the world.  My question is, “what is the best solution that creates the most value for the most people?”

You might ask yourself with people like Michael Jackson and Oprah Winfry wrapping their minds and millions around the problem why does it still persist?  And this is the thing understanding the problem.  If you are not willing to understand the problem and use your own resources to solve it you have no business using the chicken head fallacy or the chicken hawk fallacy and arguing for what other people should do with their resources to be a part of the problem.

First of all, what kind of people conceive children in circumstances like that?  Exposing their children to that living situation?  I don’t want to hear your intellectual faggotry on the subject, calm your tits and keep your emotional appeals to yourself.  Part of the reason that throwing money and food at the problem doesn’t work is the same reason that throwing sugar into a bottle conditioned beer is ill advised, sugar awakens the yeasts which explode to life, and then you have a bigger problem, more of what you didn’t want in the first place.  You are rewarding failure.  What happened to the air dropped food that was sent to Africa?  Men with guns picked it up and recruited young soldiers.  They said, If you want to eat you are going to be a part of our gang and you are going to kill our enemies.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion

Image

In my system, superficial aesthetic snap decisions are products of the female mind.  Every individual has both a male mind and a female mind and one of them is dominant.  Sentimentality, and emotional thinking prevents the wisest solutions that create the most value for the most people from being institutionalized.  The Wise person says, “This is the wisest course of action.”  and then the sentimental, uneducated, female mind which can be recognized by its emotional appeals and its attempt to expand and increase its own authority through mercy and charity speaks up and says, ” Do we really know that is the wisest solution?  Somebody should do something right now!  Look at them!  They are suffering!”  The female mind uses doubt, guilt, shame, and causes the hesitation to act on the wisest solution.

Image

What is further fascinating is that the female mind in blocking the wise solution never finds out that it’s own solution is the inferior solution.  A child bumps it’s head and the mother in relationship with her own authority, proving that she is the better parent, swoops down on the child, coddling it and communicating to it through her face and voice that something terrible has happened.  The baby reacts not to the sensation analytically but responds to the mothers emotional data, and starts crying believing that something terrible has happened to itself.  The same thing happens with the father there and the father says nothing and doesn’t react.  The child looks around, thinks to itself, “that didn’t feel that good, I should probably not do that in the future.”  and toddles off a little wiser for the experience.  Until the mother can control her instinct she will continue to react preemptively and she will never realize that their is a better wiser solution.

All of these charities disgust me, parading their images of starving children and kicked puppies in front of everyone.  It is emotional pornography.  They want your money and they want to extend their influence and authority.  There is no such thing as a 100% altruist.  Everybody is doing what they are doing for their own benefit in one way or another.  If they aren’t doing it because they love to do it then they are doing it for some other reason. They want to communicate to you that they are good people, trust them, they are harmless.  I never trust people that attempt to appear harmless and good.  I would be a fool to trust anybody that would tell me that they are harmless and good.  Why would they tell me that in the first place?  To manipulate me?  To take advantage of me?  I never tell people that I am harmless or good.  If they ask me that then they are an idiot in the first place.

Matthew 6:5

New International Version
“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.

troll

Evaluating Greater Minds

spherical1

AN INFERIOR MIND CANNOT EVALUATE A SUPERIOR MIND.

Imagine that you are a big game hunter and you have hunted all of the deadliest animals all over the earth and you want an animal that will challenge you and give you a thrill.  You have hunted grizzly, great white shark, and rhinoceros.  You decide to hunt the man eater, the Bengal tiger.  For a year you stalk this wraith never catching sight of one, it imagines to allude you.  Determined to succeed or at least to have an interaction with the creature you redouble your effort.  Convinced that you have the drop on the creature you slide into position and raise your rifle, suddenly you hear a low guttural vibration, not even a growl, just a little noise to let you know it is right behind your ear.  Not until that moment do you realize that you were hunting a creature that was smarter than yourself.

For the sake of the story the tiger is made   smarter, but in actuality it is probably just the better hunter.  I was trying to illustrate a point however.

cir

There is a similar concept in comparing different types of minds.  A plane can only know a sphere as circles.  At the first introduction and the last contact the plane would know the sphere as a point that expands and then retracts and then disappears, but the plane could never know anything about the SPHERENESS of the sphere.  It could only evaluate the circleness of the sphere.  You can’t comprehend a mind greater than your own unless you become equal to that mind or superior to it.

760px-Plane-Sphere_Intersection_svg

To put it another way, what can the plane know about the coneness of the cone?  The cone can grasp the planeness of the plane, but the reverse cannot happen.

2ddcm-conic_sections_tcm1023-134628

The reason I began to ponder this is because I am constantly the subject of scrutiny and judgments and attacks by people who can’t understand me and are not inclined to do so.  I understand them, and they understand their own perspective, but they do not know that I understand their perspective and they are not capable of understanding my own, not because I am concealing it, but because they are not capable of grasping it.  They presuppose the superiority of their opinion without testing it, and they start to attack, they don’t use Socratic dialogue or scientific method, we don’t have experiments, they just begin attacking, and not until the end do they realize that they never had a chance, they never saw me coming, I wasn’t even on their radar…

Everybody bets against me.