Okay, delayed retort to my mom's rant on politics...

Yeah, the ten most powerful people in the world are political personality types, but Jesus is freakin' the most celebrated person of human existence and all he did was walk around loving and healing people. AND. He came back to life. Let's see Dubya do that! So who cares if I don't want to participate in all these stupid, insecure, little-children-in-grown-overweight-bodies games of building the biggest corporation, country, house of meangless cards, WHATEVER to reach heaven. I want to be kind to people and if I want to sit on my fucking ass and be kind to people and play with children and give them love and comfort, then that's what I'll do and FUCK IT if I don't know the intricacies of stupid politics that go on in meeting rooms that add up to NOTHING when we die and can't take the high profits/ low overhead with us.

Going back to painting my nails.

Last thought for today and I'm off to bed:

My favorite stories as a kid were about King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. I mean, I obsessively loved them.

Now that I'm older and know that all creative output is a metaphor for something within the artist or the social group that embraces the tale (a cry for help, if you will), then if I love it, it means that I feel that it also reflects something within me, or it voices something I need voiced.

So I was thinking about the whole thing about King Arthur proving himself by being the only one who could pull the sword out of the stone. It doesn't matter that this story is obviously warped from what really happened (be pissed at me, but to be honest, so is the Bible, though I'm not saying it doesn't have quite a bit of value as a guide for people). It's the symbolisms that have been embraced by people, and if it can make it through so many generations, it means that some universal themes can be found by taking it apart. TANGENT! What I'm saying is that there can be many interpretations of this aspect of the legend, but for me, one thing I thought about was the theme of needing a leader and then having the one destined to rule be able to unlock the magic.

So I just thought of it. The thing I want most in life, more than ANYTHING.

I want someone who can listen to me talk, read what I write, and see through all the webs I spin that are hiding who I am and can see me evading all attempts for anyone to see my core. I mean, what if there's one person out there, who can read this blog and understand EXACTLY what I’m saying, understand exactly what I'm feeling, can cut through all the smoke and mirrors, bravado and neuroticisms, and be able to decipher, through the maps hidden within my writing, the path into my soul? Maybe this person is old, young, a man, a woman, someone from a different background, whatever. Could be a relative, friend, lover, mentor, protege, stranger. It's not about sex, or even emotional love or any other dictate of a social construct. It's about the naked connection. Of being known. Truly, completely known. If that person exists, I would do anything to meet that person some day.

And I think it would be amazing to look into someone and just SEE. Everything. The entire universe inside of him.

They say a gemini spends a lifetime looking for his/her soulmate. I think geminis would be a lot more at ease if they realize that the soulmate doesn't have to come in the form of a lover. So you don't have to leave that slot open and put so much pressure on the people who want to sit in that seat. Your soulmate can be an old homeless man who will teach you the biggest lessons you'll ever learn. It can be your future son or daughter. Or maybe it will be your lover. But know that if you keep your eyes open and allow for that connection, you'll find this person (actually, these people because everyone has numerous potential soulmates. But you only need one true connection with one to break open that door to your soul). In the meantime, don't limit yourself by believing your soulmate will only come in the form of a lover. You'll also deny people who would be quite supportive of and beneficial to you in your journey.

Dude, this is a good blog...

http://myrthalita.blogspot.com/

It's crazy, the drama these kids have!

Okay, here's my psychology thought for the day. I was at work at my confidential job so I don't know if I'm going to get in trouble just for saying as much as I'm about to. But I watched a therapist give some good advice to a really mellow guy whose wife said he had a lot of anger inside but would put it away and not even know when he was upset; he really believe that it wasn't a big deal. He grew up in a family where authority was oppressive and he was often told to keep quiet about negative things (ie "don't tell so and so that or he'll have a heart attack.") His upbringing implied that everything had to seem okay and possible conflict needed to be avoided at all costs. So to be open about negative emotions meant disaster, and to repress these emotions meant strength and altruism. She was worried about this repressed rage. I wanted to pass it on because it really made me think about my own anger that comes from the past.

******************

Anger can feel like not just something we need to control, but something that makes us feel weak or scared or even numb.
You might not be aware when you're angry. You might know it, but also not know it. When something gets you angry, you might first get numb, and that might be when your defense kicks in and you decide that you have to stay in control. Rather than get into conflict, which is what you're afraid of, you withdraw. Because you're afraid it will upset your partner and it will hurt her. So you would rather withdraw than hear about your partner being unhappy. You're afraid to hear what you may have done that made your partner unhappy. Even when she could be unhappy for other reasons, you are afraid to know why she is unhappy, for fear it may be because of you. So you assume the worst case scenario, then withdraw to avoid it. The same goes, vice versa. Whether there are emotions that come from your partner or you, what reassured you was that you were in control of them, which could have then brought on the numbness, which assured you that you were in control. But to your partner, it can feel like you're rejecting her and refusing to deal with the issue.

When it comes to dealing with conflict, you have to learn how to trust yourself. That you're not going to blow up. It's just like, when someone clenches their fist, they're saying, "I don't trust myself. I may do damage." It's self-fear.

The wife interrupted and told the therapist, "he used to punch walls and do other things to hurt himself when he was mad, like bang his head against the wall."

The therapist says...When you do something against yourself, it's another attempt to keep control. You don't want to hurt someone else so you hurt yourself. It's also a loss of words. You don't know how to say how you feel, so you have to act it out.

*****************************************

My thought for the day:

When people argue, they are coming from a place of simultaneously not wanting to get hurt and desperately wanting to be heard.

You must use conscious thought and effort rather than sub-conscious reaction in order to change things and try something different (more positive) within conflict.

Happy birthday to Roxie! I showed up late to her party because I wanted to miss the stripper. There's just something disgusting about a dumb, greasy man playing to the lowest common denominator with the conviction that this is a sexy representation of himself. It doesn't do anything for me and it makes me sad sometimes. It's cheap and a non-turn on. Because it's easy. It's really easy to say, I'm just a piece of meat and by doing that, people will be drawn to me. I think most girls can get a guy who's just about sex. There are a lot of guys who are just about sex. Sex is sex and all you have to do is be forward about your intentions and very few of these guys will pass that up. But when you meet those kinds of guys, you assume they have nothing else going on for themselves because that's the best gimmick they can use to represent themselves to draw people to them. Anyone can get a dog to follow her home. And what's that worth? NOTHING. I think the challenge is getting the guy who has a lot more going on for him, and who has the confidence and knowledge that he does. Because he's got high enough standards for himself and the people he spends time with not to go for the lowest common denominator. And that's hot. Maybe that's what class or sophistication is...someone who embodies so much more than the primitive, which again, is just so freakin' easy to play out! Because he knows that if someone gets to spend time with him, it's more than just about a dick and a good time. It's about all the different facets of himself that the people he spends time with get to experience that are pretty unique and amazing. And it's the same thing for a girl who knows she has a lot more going on for her and doesn't feel the need to reduce herself to raw sexuality, even though she's got it and can. And anyone who shows that is so much sexier than than these people who walk around and present themselves as purely sexual. People who go out of their way to present themselves as raw, promiscuous sex are messed up inside and devaluing themselves, but I don't feel like going into another psychological rant. But people like that are really, really sad if you really think about why they're doing it. If you have it and are confident in it, you don't need to go out of your way to talk about it and throw it in people's faces. That goes for just about everything.

As promised, I have to give props to Colin who has the magic touch. I don't remember much from last night, but I do remember getting the best massage of my life. I think men and women would be throwing themselves at this guy if they knew about his talent. Plus, he has nice hair, and uses good product. God bless, Colin. Martin is one lucky man.

I peed this morning and it smelled like rasberry stoli.

"I hate it when people throw strippers at me."

-Brian M.

Date: 1/24/04
Time: 6:14 PM PST
Situation: Phone Call from My Mom

She wants to talk about my work situation and my needing to understand office politics.

I tell her that I understand some politics...during a meeting, I made sure to give props to and compliment an executive who helped me design a marketing ad. She went SILENT and then said really gravely, oh, no...
pause....You have not even realized how deep, are people's minds and hearts.

Obviously, I have no idea what she's talking about. She says, I'm not sure if I'll be able to teach this...okay, I will try to give you a lesson, and if you can understand it, good, but if you can't, then put it out of your mind forever to save yourself from mental misery.

I am going to tell you a story. Your aunt had two professors that she really liked. One day, she went up to one professor and in discussion, mentioned how much she liked the other professor. The professor didn't say anything. The next day, he approached her and reprimanded her. "Ni Shao Jen, when you complimented your other professor in front of me yesterday, were you telling me I am a lousy professor?" My aunt was stunned.

My mom goes on to explain that when you compliment one person, another person will have his feathers ruffled.


Other snippits of the conversation (I was on this site when she called so I just typed as she talked)...

Politics is about NEVER BEING DEFEATED. You can never let them see any kind of weakness. You have to support yourself. Everything you say, whether it was wrong or right, you have to be behind it. And with every issue, some people will be on your side, some will be on another side. You have to gather up those who would be on your side. You can not go into battle by yourself. Gather those who will stand behind you. You are losing in this conversation because you keep asking me what the boss thinks of you. You need to be talking about what you think of him. And who cares if he thinks you're stupid. You think HE'S stupid! It's about winning, Julia. (sorry to step in here, but may I just mention that I never said anything about my boss calling me stupid??...)

People perceiveyou as a non-political person. Do you think that's a good thing or a bad thing. I said a good thing. She said, a good thing...hmmm. Do you understand that the top people in the world are political??? Do you finally understand what I've been trying to teach you for 25 years? You need to start learning how to watch people's body language so you can know their motives and conquer them! Political people have more challenges. That's how they made their way to the top. Now do you see that being political is a good thing? [to some lady] Excuse me, where's the Marriott? [Lady: brrrrmrmrmrmrm] Okay, gotta go. Luv ya! Bye!

*?*?*?*?*? Comments? Comments anyone?

Today's Music Recommendation: Howie Day - Australia ... freakin' AWESOME CD.

Currently in my CD Rotation:
1. Howie Day - Australia
2. Blur - Think Tank
3. Morcheeba - Charango
4. Radiohead - OK Computer
5. Dave Seaman - Back to Mine

Call me weird, but I just did a comparative lyrical analysis on the recorded version of this song and on a version recorded at a performance before the recorded version was made.

Ghost
by Howie Day

Lately I've been thinking
Lately I've been dreaming with you
I'm so resistant to this type of thinking
Oh, now it's shining through
I was alone for the last time
Before my night's vacation with you
Alive from the first
Now I'm denied by the ghost of you

You take yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please

I know there's little use in crying
It's more wide awake and dying then I'm used to
I thought we'd walk these streets together
Now I'm hoping that I'll never have to meet you
Step aside from all this anger
And somewhere in between I can feel you
Ask me should we try again
I'm thinking no
Y'know, it's not what I believe in
It's not what I believe in

You take yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please
You make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please

No I, wanna taste you, love
No I...no I
No I, just wanna taste you, love

Standing in your shoes
I turn and now
You're standing bare in my doorway
I only wish that I had been prepared
I'm gonna have to go along with your way
Just take the plastic camera out
It's the pants you borrowed in the driveway
Alive from the first
Now I'm denied by the ghost of you

Make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please
You make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please

No I, wanna taste of love
No I...

I was alive from the first
Now I'm denied by the ghost of you



Ghost (Live Version)
->if you've never heard it, download it. In some ways, it sucks, but in other ways, it's fucking awesome.

Lately I've been thinking
Lately I've been dreaming of you
I'm so resistant to this type of thinking
Somehow it's shining through
I was alone for the last time
Before my night's vacation with you
Alive from the first
Now I'm denied by the ghost of you

You make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please

I know there's little use in crying
I no wide awake and dying than I'm used to
I thought we'd walk these streets together
Now I'm hoping that I'll never have to meet you
Step aside from all this anger
And somewhere in between I can feel you
Askin' should we try again
I'm thinking no
Y'know, it's not what I believe in
It's not what I believe in

Make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please
Make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
I'm standing in your doorway

Oh how you tasted love
No, how you've tasted love

Standing in your shoes
I turn and now
You're standing bare in my doorway
I only wish that I had been prepared
I'm gonna have to go along with your way
Take the plastic camera out
It's the pants you borrowed in the driveway
Sit around around and think about just why
nothing's left to say
nothing's left to say

Make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
Please
make yourself a photograph and laugh at me
I'm standing in your doorway
I'm standing in your doorway

No, you tasted love
No, you tasted love

My Analysis:

I freakin' LOVE the artist's process. I like to see drafts of people's work and be able to see the changes they've made and the direction they go and how this art goes from raw into, hopefully, a precise snapshot of an emotion (created by the artist's personal circumstances), or sometimes, an exiled interpretation of an experience the artist is trying to detach from himself by giving it less emotional power.

I think recorded versions of songs often lose that "something" because the artist's focus is challenged in the recording situation. Music is about capturing the exact emotion that is attached to the artist's private circumstances and expressing it. It's channeling. It's the same process that goes on in interpersonal therapy, in intimate moments between people, in religious, spiritual ceremonies, etc. And that's an inner journey that's very hard to take repeatedly in such a monotonous and intrusive process, so that while some takes that are ultimately accepted as the recorded version may be technically excellent, the "capture" of the emotional essence (soul) of the song may be missing. That's why some producers are very good and others are not--it's about recognizing if the soul of the song has been captured.

That said, there's a power missing from the recorded version of this song. It's not that it doesn't have a soul; it feels like a soul that has been muted by a numbing outer shell.

The artist tries too hard to be technically sound that you can hear in the way he sings that he's not really feeling what he's singing...what this song is really about...it's essence. This song is about a break-up. Probably one in which the connection was extremely powerful but for some reason, someone couldn't stay in the relationship but wouldn't exactly let the artist go, keeping him in emotional limbo. But what this song is really about, is that inner struggle within the artist...he wants to be able to tell a part of himself that clings to her that she doesn't care about him (in fact, hurts the part of himself that wants to believe in her by imagining her mocking him) and therefore, she's not worth it. Do you hear the bravado he sings "it's not what I believe in" about trying again? It's bullshit. It's the artist trying to front. You get to that verse about him standing in her shoes...he's fucking PISSED. He's totally fronting, and the rest of the song is equivalent to, "FUCK YOU! I'm better off than you. And one day when you want me back and I'm in your shoes, you'll know you fucked up." So that version of the song, the artist's state is...he's miserable, is stuck in a limbo where he doesn't want to go but she's let him go but not really let him go (stringing him along. Bitch). But he's trying to put his foot down and say he's really fuckin' walked this time. So he starts off hurt but suddenly the anger comes in and he's mad. But would he take her back? Is he really walking? Well, he's just about tantruming for there to be another round where he can have that choice. He probably obsessively fantasizes about that moment. Otherwise, he wouldn't have written this song. My guess would be that he wants it set up so there's a situation where she initiates an encounter with him and a truthful moment is created. She wants him back and he can either toss all the anger and hurt that's been built up at her (the fiery destructive scenario), or if she can make a strong enough case for herself, he'll take her back. But I think he doubts that she will have grown up enough to make a strong case for herself. He's so afraid that she's going to disappoint him. Because it would mean that his idealism and this idea of such an intimate but all-consuming connection are farce. So this whole thing should be more about him dealing with himself and wondering why it's so important that this girl accepts him or rejects him, and why he has placed so much symbolic burden on her, knowing that there's a very good chance that she'll fail. Did I just psychoanalyze Howie Day? Damn, girl. You are weird.

You can map out an artist's process through his creative output. With written words, you can only capture so much. With music, there's somewhat more dimension to the conveyance of the emotion. But face to face, it's the the most amazing thing, to be in the presence of someone in that raw process. If you listen very carefully to people when they talk, you can actually know exactly their current state and mental processes by the way they formulate their thoughts and by listening to their selection of linguistic emphases. It's like they're playing a musical instrument or a code that spells out their soul, and if you have a good ear for music, you can listen to it and be able to know in your mind, the exact procession of notes just played. So some people have an ear for music, and I have an ear for the music that people create when they express themselves. My forte is in regards to the minor notes...I am most in tune to the pain in others. The stronger the emotion or inner conflict (or the closer to the surface it is), the more prevalent it is when the person expresses himself (imagine intensity like volume...the stronger the person feels something, the louder the volume to your perception). It's really cool if you can catch it...it's like riding a wave...you'll know when you've got it and are on the same frequency. Everything just feels CONNECTED. It's kind of like those 3D digital pictures, where it's all squiggly lines and stuff, but it's actually a 3-dimensionsal dinosaur or something. You have to do to your mind, what you do to your eyes when you look at those. And then you'll suddenly find yourself able to catch a lot of a person's insides, what's important to them, what is scary to them, where they come from, where they are now and what they want and fear from the future, just from hearing them talk. Even though some people are very crafty at hiding these things by constantly saying things that erratically contradict then parallel their true meanings or feared repressed meanings (kind of the way a running back gets around defenders. Or how anti-tracking equipment bounces a signal around...a lot of backtracking, rushing and lateral moves). The smarter the person, the more complex the defense system that's hiding internal cues. It can be very frustrating. If you instinctually don't trust someone, it's because you've subconsciously picked up on someone doing this and you'll feel that he is hiding something. So for a reason you can't put your finger on, you won't trust him.

So there. I've just explained psychic ability. And a lot of useless crap.

I just realized...for someone so intuitive, my blinsights are really pretty huge and problematic. I really can't see accurately into people when they're too close to me.

It hit me a few minutes ago... I. Hate. Cheaters. I mean, it seems like a stupid, obvious statement, but I've been thinking...the worst thing about cheaters is the way they can look you in the eye and act like by feeling sooooo badly over what they've done, that you shouldn't blame them. But seriously, that martyr act is disgusting. Sometimes they even expect you to feel sorry for them, that what they went through, the torment and guilt over what they have done, was horrendous and really deserving of sympathy and open arms and forgiveness. And even comforting. Never mind that YOU are the person who was wronged. This is the difference between someone who is a habitual cheater and one who is not. Someone who is not will deal with the act and its ramifications on the relationship and his partner. They deal with what is at hand, because what is playing out is a breach of trust and all of its consequences. On the other hand, the habitual cheater has a problem...he has inner conflict about relationships and unfortunately, he plays them out in the most destructive manner possible. These people are dangerous both to themselves and the people close to them. The habitual cheater is playing out an emotional cycle that is actually a very painful game. It is not so much about the sex or the thrill, but about the sado-masochism of hurting something that means a lot to that person. It has nothing to do with the partner; it all has to do with himself. Again, unfortunately, their partners have to play a role in this destructive game and need to be hurt in order for this cycle to play out. Therefore, unless you are also looking to play out the complementary destructive cycle (wanting to get rejected), you should avoid these guys. (Hint to spotting them: These are the guys who, when they know they've done something small wrong that they know you're going to be mildly unhappy with but that they secretly think is ridiculous, will pull a martyr act and come off like they are obviously being so much harder on themselves than you could possibly be, and by you being angry, upset or anything but gentle, you would be hurting them even more than they really deserve. What they are really doing is testing your boundaries. Stand your ground; and when that sad little boy act is replaced by a irrational tantruming baby who thinks you're the biggest bitch for not letting him have his way, you'll know that you're dealing with someone who is not looking to be in a relationship, but basically looking for someone's permission and agreement to take part in enacting a very destructive cycle. And if you agree to stay in it, it's also your fault too, because you would have walked if a part of you hadn't subconsciously agreed to stay and take part in it)


I have to say, one of the most disgusting things about these men is... they will do it over and over and probably leave a lot of hurt women in their wake, but anyone who is courageous enough to stand up to him will get beat down by his childish, tantruming rage (even if the vindictiveness is carried out in a cold, calculating manner, do not be fooled. The rage is the mastermind and fuel). And if the guy is smart, he'll often go to very calculating methods of cutting this person up so that she doesn't have anymore power in his eyes. He'll destroy the reputation of this woman behind her back by presenting her in a certain negative light to other people. He'll call her derogatory names. He'll exhibit all kinds of misogynistic attitudes when talking about this woman. He may even embellish stories about her to illustrate points in his favor. He will do whatever it takes to take away this woman's power in his eyes. But in truth, these men are doing themselves a grand disservice. Because basically, they are fighting for their lives to be able to continue this destructive cycle, and they are so angry when others won't give them permission to do it.

I just realized...for someone so intuitive, my blinsights are really pretty huge and problematic. I really can't see accurately into people when they're too close to me.

It hit me a few minutes ago... I. Hate. Cheaters. I mean, it seems like a stupid, obvious statement, but I've been thinking...the worst thing about cheaters is the way they can look you in the eye and act like by feeling sooooo badly over what they've done, that you shouldn't blame them. But seriously, that martyr act is disgusting. Sometimes they even expect you to feel sorry for them, that what they went through, the torment and guilt over what they have done, was horrendous and really deserving of sympathy and open arms and forgiveness. And even comforting. Never mind that YOU are the person who was wronged. This is the difference between someone who is a habitual cheater and one who is not. Someone who is not will deal with the act and its ramifications on the relationship and his partner. They deal with what is at hand, because what is playing out is a breach of trust and all of its consequences. On the other hand, the habitual cheater has a problem...he has inner conflict about relationships and unfortunately, he plays them out in the most destructive manner possible. These people are dangerous both to themselves and the people close to them. The habitual cheater is playing out an emotional cycle that is actually a very painful game. It is not so much about the sex or the thrill, but about the sado-masochism of hurting something that means a lot to that person. It has nothing to do with the partner; it all has to do with himself. Again, unfortunately, their partners have to play a role in this destructive game and need to be hurt in order for this cycle to play out. Therefore, unless you are also looking to play out the complementary destructive cycle (wanting to get rejected), you should avoid these guys. (Hint to spotting them: These are the guys who, when they know they've done something small wrong that they know you're going to be mildly unhappy with but that they secretly think is ridiculous, will pull a martyr act and come off like they are obviously being so much harder on themselves than you could possibly be, and by you being angry, upset or anything but gentle, you would be hurting them even more than they really deserve. What they are really doing is testing your boundaries. Stand your ground; and when that sad little boy act is replaced by a irrational tantruming baby who thinks you're the biggest bitch for not letting him have his way, you'll know that you're dealing with someone who is not looking to be in a relationship, but basically looking for someone's permission and agreement to take part in enacting a very destructive cycle. And if you agree to stay in it, it's also your fault too, because you would have walked if a part of you hadn't subconsciously agreed to stay and take part in it)


I have to say, one of the most disgusting things about these men is... they will do it over and over and probably leave a lot of hurt women in their wake, but anyone who is courageous enough to stand up to him will get beat down by his childish, tantruming rage (even if the vindictiveness is carried out in a cold, calculating manner, do not be fooled. The rage is the mastermind and fuel). And if the guy is smart, he'll often go to very calculating methods of cutting this person up so that she doesn't have anymore power in his eyes. He'll destroy the reputation of this woman behind her back by presenting her in a certain negative light to other people. He'll call her derogatory names. He'll exhibit all kinds of misogynistic attitudes when talking about this woman. He may even embellish stories about her to illustrate points in his favor. He will do whatever it takes to take away this woman's power in his eyes. But in truth, these men are doing themselves a grand disservice. Because basically, they are fighting for their lives to be able to continue this destructive cycle, and they are so angry when others won't give them permission to do it.

Alter-ego here. Sittin' at the computer as those fucking car alarms go off outside and knowing that somewhere out there, someone is killing someone else and really enjoying it. Sick, sick world we live in and if we went around giving a damn and dealing with the reality of that, we'd self-destruct from an overdose of empathy. In truth, no one CAN care that much about you. Because they've gotta look out for themselves to survive. Even the nicest, most giving people in the world need to make sure they're still gonna be alive the next day. And you know what? There really aren't that many of those kind of people in the world. So what does this mean? We live in a world of selfish pricks who do hurtful things to each other that may or may not lead to the other person's death but sure make living their own lives more miserable. There is such a huge cycle of pain out there. People stabbing each other emotionally, psychically, and walking away so they don't have to admit that other people bleed and are vulnerable, therefore, perhaps, you may be, too. And that's too scary of a realization to deal with. Even I do it sometimes and don't realize it. The guy in the car I cut off may have gotten into a near accident himself. Someone that I was cold to because I didn't feel like being a cheerful person that day could be angry or hurt because they took my actions personally. And it could be someone I have a very small interaction with, like the clerk at a store, or someone I pass in the street and give a look to, but nevertheless, I darkened their day. And these are the most miniscule examples. On the bigger scale are the people who I know I've consciously hurt, but am too proud to admit that I know. What is so scary about admitting you did something wrong? What is so scary about admitting to someone that you've hurt them? It hurts so goddam much, to know that your hands have the power to, and did, hurt someone. I know for me, it is easier to be hurt by someone else than to admit that I've hurt someone. Because I can't even describe how terrible of a feeling it is to hurt someone you really love, and the shame that comes with it. I know we have all experienced it. And it is not the fear of getting hurt, but of hurting someone you love, someone whom you may actually love more than yourself, that creates the greatest terror within human experience. I think few people can look deep enough within the roots of their actions and attitudes to realize that. I wonder, if we all could and did, if we would put down a lot of our walls and really be able to interact on the most basic and rewarding level.

I've always said, it's all about relationships. How one object can't exist or be identified/created without the presence of another object and what that relationship is with this other object. Therefore, neither the chicken nor the egg came first. In order for either to exist, there must be two things which have a relationship, such as a rooster and a chicken, or a chicken to be present to provide the circumstances which allow the egg to hatch. First of all, the cycle is not defined. If the egg came first, a chicken would hatch. In this scenario, the egg came first. If a chicken came first, it would not even HAVE an egg without the presence of a rooster. So a chicken cannot come first because then there would be no egg. Unless, the chicken that first existed was pregnant with the egg, but again, that would mean that the two co-existed and it was their relationship that allowed for a cycle. If we're assuming that this is an infinite cycle in which chicken begat egg begat chicken begat egg or vice versa with these two items being creationist metaphors, again, the chicken cannot have an egg without a rooster, but an egg cannot be hatched without a chicken. Both items are integral in each other's survival. A becomes B. B creates A. A Becomes B. B creates A. But B can not create A without an outside force, meaning the rooster (C). Therefore, it can't be B creates A. A becomes B. B cannot create A because it needs C to create A. B+C=A. With this formula, a cycle can only go one step, or can't even go one step at all. (1. A exists first, then becomes B, B can't create A 2. B exists first but can't even create A). Problems...assuming we accept that only B + C = A. But only A+B=C or B. So immediately, both possibilities, need some sort of relationship in order for there to be a cycle created. A needs B to become B (or C), meaning the egg needs a chicken to keep it warm and allow it to hatch into a chicken or a rooster, or a chicken needs the presence of a rooster in order to create an egg (B needs C to create A).That cycle being a metaphor for creation. It's useless to think what force placed either one into existence first. We may as well be useless thinking about the fact that the relationship had to be in place in order for either to exist. As parodoxical as that may seem, the relationship between two objects exists before those two objects can exist. The relationship must exist IN ORDER for those two objects to exist. It is not about one object leading to another. That's a linear process that can not encompass the idea of existence. The relationship must first exist that allows the creation of objects. That idea should be the basis for understanding certain scientific laws. We try to compartmentalize everything into linear cause/effect relationships but don't think outside of the box.

Does anyone know the science behind why they test people with analogies on the SAT? What type of perception they believed that would be measuring? Because even math is relationships (the relationships between numbers. Numbers were really only created to serve as symbols. Isn't it incredible how abstract mathematics is the art of "reading into" these symbols as symbols (negating their nature by affirming their nature) by analyzing and dissecting them in a way to understand the SAME EXACT thing all the philosophers and spiritualists have been seeking to understand? The answer is both so basic and so complex. Like I've always said, at some point, polar opposites equal the same thing. Something possesses both a negative and a positive value. Not just two sides of a coin, but exist as the exact same thing. What is infinitely large (a specific point) will be equal to what is infinitely small (another specific point). At some point, they must CO-EXIST and have qualities of both opposites. Because, at what point can you say, "This is the BIGGEST thing in the world?" At what point can you say, "This is the SMALLEST thing in the world?" Because it's impossible to measure. And we keep finding examples of things that are bigger or things that are smaller (discovering planets, then solar systems, etc., or finding cells, molecules, quarks, etc....forgive me, I don't know my science terms very well). Gradations going in opposite directions between two whole integers (representing states) will also be infinite. So it comes down to, INFINITY=the point in which polar opposites equal the exact same thing. Maybe it doesn't even have to be a point. It can also be a state, or even dimension/plane of existence. (haha, I've been preaching about this since college! About a dimension where everything in existence exists at 1 precise point.). There. I finally defined it for myself after having this idea rattle around in my head for years. I hope that means that tonight I can sleep.

We're all just trying to put it together...the ideas of how things relate to each other.

Something I really like is how I have friends or know people who are so different. People who spend time with me will meet all kinds of different people, with different histories and different perceptions of the world and different projections of reality. Even to define them in archetypes as the artists, the writers, the professionals, the people who are a little bit off, the people whose life stories are entire dramas of tragedy and pain, And in seeing all these differences sometimes gives you renewed faith in humanity. There's something really beautiful about the different slices of the world, the different sides of people, just how unique every single person or group soul is, yet how universal our experience of the world is. Again, this is the same paradox at work. We are each unique (quantified by a decreasing order when measuring extent in which one is apart from the mass) and we are each universal (quantified by an increasing order when measuring extent in which one is a part of the mass). We incorporate both sets of values within us, two polar opposites that go in opposite directions when measuring extent, yet exist because we are a value that is both positive and negative. Each human being is the precise point of where these principles meet. We are the value of infinity, and that is the plane of existence that we live in, the dimension in which we exist exhibiting itself as the exact balance of opposites. It's the perfect tension. Where black equals white, large equals small, positive equals negative. People need to understand that it is contradiction and paradox that creates the fabric of our existence. Stop searching for unity and consistency! It will only come with the realization of this paradox about us, which in itself, illustrates this paradox.

Okay, I have a feeling I'm going to regret everything I just wrote in this half-asleep stupor.

Just got back from "studying" with TaRon. We mostly got into a debate about spirituality vs. religion, but it really felt like we were arguing the same thing. It was interesting. I still say that religion should be the path to spirituality and not the other way around. I knew I was in trouble when he said to me, "I think you need Jesus in your life." I really hate how people who are religious try to push their belief system on you because they truly believe theirs is the only one acceptable. If people are truly spiritual and understand their place in the world as well as their relationship with the greater good, then they wouldn't be so compelled by this drive. I think people who push their religion are insecure, deep down, because they need everyone to accept their faith in order for them to validate their beliefs. And it shouldn't be that way.

It's totally true when they say too much of a good thing is bad for you. As funny as it seems, I've met people with porn addictions and it gets pretty ugly.

http://www.time.com/time/2004/sex/article/the_porn_factor_in_the_01a.html

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

I used to date a guy who told me that people always reacted badly towards him. He said that he noticed that people always reacted openly and warmly towards me but sometimes, people seemed put off by or cold to him. I told him that it was probably just in his mind and maybe just something he was projecting. But now that I think about it, the guy was always dating up. Somehow, even as fucked up as he was, he always got girls that were obviously out of his league. And I think when the friends and family of those girls met him, they would kind of be put off because they expected better for her or they didn't think he was good enough.

So then, when friends and family members of the person you're dating react badly towards you, is that a sign that you're dating up? Personally, I wouldn't know. I think girls have a tendency to date a league or several down. Especially Asian girls. I see way too many beautiful Asian woman with below-average men (both in looks and personality). My Asian (and White and Black and Puerto Rican) Sisters! We Need to go for the HOT men! Screw this misogynistic imbalance! Let the hot girls get the hot asshole guys, the cute girls get the hot nice guys, the ugly girls get the ugly nice guys, and the ugly assholes sit at home and think about what right they have to be assholes. Honestly. What right.

Once when I was 8, I was playing with a neighbor's dog, some kind of bulldog mix, but a total mutt. I remembered that there was another neighbor who had some pure-bred golden retrievers. I just figured that they would like to play together so I lured the dog over to the neighbor's house. When we got there, the golden retrievers were outside. Suddenly, the woman who owned the house came out and started screaming, "Pei! Get that dog out of here! Right now!" She was arms waving, hair flying pissed! I got really scared and grabbed the dog and nearly dragged him back down the hill. I only understood as much that those dogs are really special and I guess she didn't want the mutt getting them pregnant with mixed babies, even though I had no idea how that happens yet. It's strange that my first inkling about sex involved pedigree. But it really hurt my feelings that she would get so angry about it and that she didn't even say my name right. I never looked her in the eye again. I heard she asked my parents a few months later why I never came by her house anymore. It was because I just couldn't face her. I was really ashamed of myself for that whole incident.

The strange thing is, is that sometimes I bring guys home to meet my parents and it feels like that whole incident all over again. Like I'm luring a mutt up the hill again and my parents, like the woman, tell me that I'm with a mutt and I feel ashamed. I don't really think it's about the boys. I think it's about my recreating a traumatic incident.

I think the biggest rush from relationships comes with getting to reinvent yourself. When you meet someone new, you can present a side of yourself or even put together a collage that is completely new, and present that as who you are. This person takes it at face value and in a way, you can be the person that you've always wanted to be. But the trick comes when the relationship deepens. Has the person you have assumed become hard to maintain the deeper the other person gets to know you? Can you become so much of this assumed person that the deepest part the other person will examine will also match what is being shown from the outside? This is where fear of intimacy (exposure) comes from. The fear that the person you've presented as your true self to another person will be discovered as not being true but as hiding something much more flawed. You become not only exposed as someone disappointing to others, but as someone who lies and can not be trusted, which is also disappointing to others. I also believe there is the fear of pity in there, that others will feel pity for you because you felt the need to present something bigger/better than who you really are. The fear of commitment comes after the fear of intimacy is conquered. At some point, the other person stops digging and assumes that what he/she has been presented is exactly what you are. While there is relief at this point, fear of commitment soon sets in. Can I maintain myself as this person forever? What if that means this is the person I have to be, with all these assumed ideas and thoughts and behaviors and desires, for the rest of my life? What if all the flaws that I have presented within this assumed identity are the ones that people who know me at this state/as this person will presume I have? So you know that if you didn't have to see this person (who has become a Constant--an outside conscious force that causes one to maintain a consistent image), you could reinvent yourself. Thus, the need to break off relationships and establish fresh ones. Those who tend to shy away from mass society and are labeled "introverts" tend to illustrate fear of commitment and intimacy across the boards in regard to relationships. For whatever reasons, they feel that they are so flawed inside, that they must reinvent themselves in order to assimilate without being humiliated. The motivation for reinvention is--once a person makes a mistake in human interaction, he retreats into his corner and analyzes why there was a mistake made. He will analyze which characteristics he must incorporate into his presentation of himself and his projected identity. Then, he will seek out new people with whom to relate, and show this reinvented self. This person will be able to interact smashingly with others, and perhaps be very charming, until there is another hitch in human interaction and this person fears that he will be perceived is flawed and a fraud (fear of intimacy/commitment). This person will again retreat, analyze what characteristics need to be eliminated or added, and again, find new people with whom to relate and present with his "new and improved" self. This is the cycle of the neurotic. He is afraid of Constants which would cause him to remain in a world that could hold a negative view of him without having any way to separate that perceived image with who he is inside (or can be). There are many levels of issues that deserve attention when dealing with the neurotic mind. First, this person needs to understanding that those who find flaws within him do not expect those flaws to also become constants. There seems to be a lack of trust between this person and the outside world. This person fears judgment and that, once branded with a negative character type, he will be condemned to it forever without a chance to prove himself to be different or better. This seems to also point to the presence of overly-critical adult figures or environments in the developmental years alternating with minimal or non-existent positive feedback. Possibly, the child only received attention for doing things wrong. Secondly, sure it's fun to continually reinvent yourself to new people, but at some point, you'd better settle on a connection that is most reflective of your inner self, rather than getting stuck in one in which you must maintain a presentation that is unlike yourself. That is the basis of why people become unhappy in marriages. Because they're passive-aggressive and have repressed feelings of trappedness over getting stuck being someone they no longer want to be because this other person expects them to be a certain person and they have to present that person consistently; they will often blame the other person rather than themselves for their predicament.


The neurotic mind is also afraid of Non-Constants--people who do not cause a person to maintain a constant image. These are people that this person does not see on a very regular basis (regular being defined as a time span within which he believes no changes within his projections will be perceived). This person is afraid that if he has changed negatively (physically, psychologically, idealistically) this other person (Non-Constant) would be able to see it immediately because she has had more distance for objectivity, and will register disappointment or another negative perception. So once this person breaks away from someone as a Constant, he is then fearful of this person when she turns into a Non-Constant.

Where there is cheese there are rats,
Where there are rats there are cats,
Where ever there are cats there are dogs.
If you got the dogs you got bitches.
Bitches Always out to put their paws on your riches.
If you got riches,you got glitches.
If you got glitches in your life computer turn it off and then reboota.
Now you back on.
Can't just put the cap on the old bottle once you pop it that will spoil it, gone and drink it and enjoy it.
Mama i'ma Millionaire.


sing it, andre!

Is it weird for two people to date, then break up, and then each date people with the exact same birthday...including the same year? It's a little freaky, isn't it?

Shout out to my girl, Muskrat, for turning 25 today. I remember her back when...nearly hitting me in the head with a 70 mph fastball and breaking up fights at slumber parties. And let's not forget showering as our bulldyke coach watched. Mmmmm...those sweet, sweet, high school days....

Hilarious!! (check out the other toons on the site, too...)

http://www.illwillpress.com/rant.html