J. Michael Straczynski, the creator and principle author of Babylon 5, has this theme he revisits: characters who are cryptic. The most famous of these are the alien species, the Vorlons, known mostly to audiences through their ambassador to the Babylon station, Kosh. He was one of those characters spouting seemingly nonsensical lines which were more often than not laden with hidden meanings (there's a whole page dedicated to these sayings). He, at times, would come across as dismissive to those speaking to him...but he had his reasons for doing this.
Kosh, being a member of an ancient race of aliens, knew their (even more) ancient enemy, the Shadows, were coming out of hiding and that it was important to begin preparations for the inevitable war which would begin once the Shadows had reassembled their fleets. The thing is, the Vorlons just couldn't come right out and say this fact nor could the Vorlons openly reveal who and what they were lest the Shadows get wind of it and begin the war before anyone opposing them could be ready. The modus operandi of the Vorlons is that of secrecy. Next to nothing is known of their species, their way of life, their government...even what they really look like since they insist on appearing in public wearing an "encounter suit". The only thing known definitively about them is that the ships they pilot are alive.
I like how their actions gave a sense of importance to what they were doing. Yes, it was arrogant of them...but it was also necessary. I would love to find out that I was actually important and mattered in the grand scheme of things.
Another character, introduced in "A Call to Arms" and then as a regular character in the legacy series "Crusade" was the technomage Galen. Technomages were a group of people who used their advanced technologies, in addition to furthering their own purposes, to simulate the effects of magic. After all, it was Arthur C. Clarke who said that, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" and the technomages used that Law to great effect.
But like the Vorlons, the technomages too, were secretive. They left known space before the Shadow War had begun for reasons which were their own and hesitated to return. It was Galen who first returned and without permission from his Order when he discovered that the Drakh, the primary servitors of the Shadows, in the name of revenge, had found a Planet Killer the Shadows had left behind and were intending to use it, in a grand display, to wipe out all life on Earth. But Galen could not simply tell the people he needed to tell about this impending doom otherwise the Drakh would launch their attack now instead of when planned, when Earth would be wholly defenseless against such an onslaught. He had to be cryptic and careful in an effort not to alert the Drakh's spies.
The point I'm getting to with all this is that I've found their secretiveness to parallel what I go through on at least a weekly basis. Yes, it is very arguable that both Kosh and Galen are simply being dicks because why not just be frank about it? And there really are occasions when you, as an audience member, feel they know full well they are toying with those whom they are speaking and enjoying every moment of it. (best example)
What I'm saying is, there are a lot of things that go on in my that I obviously need to talk about...but I can't tell you what they are. There's something about me needing to know you're capable of figuring it out. I can't just lead you by the hand to the problem because then I have no faith in your ability to solve it or help me work through it. But if you can figure it out...if you understand...then I am more prone to relaxing my defenses and letting you in and more importantly, accepting what it is you will tell me.
A simple example is most often the simplest, almost daily, problem I face: I need human contact...literally. Touch. Ideally from women, but really...all kinds. I've been left alone; isolated, for too long. But I can't ask. To beg for it or even to simply feel as though I am begging for it...no mater how much it is actually needed, simply ruins anything brought about from such begging. It needs to be either sincere or I need to believe that it was sincere. The trouble is, most people do not understand this need, probably because they have never had to go without for any extended period of time, but I can attest to you...touching is needed to feel human; to feel like one belongs...it is so very necessary. Going years without it or having it only anomalously is corrosive to the soul. It wears you down as it is not a singular longing but a pervasive one so it's not a hurt like you would feel from falling or getting pricked or even suffering a public humiliation. No, it's more like erosion.
Touching and inclusiveness are the roots and moisture holding the soil of the soul in place. Without them, it all just blows away...some parts faster than others, but it is a steady loss that a healthy individual can withstand either because they are still strong and can replace that soil themselves or are capable of finding support when they need it to halt any further erosion. But I've gone a long time. I'm like the soils of Iceland. When the Vikings first arrived, they saw a fertile-looking land much like the Scandanavia they had left behind and treated the land as such not realizing that the fertility of the soils they had found was the product not of years, but of centuries and as such, those soils and lands were easily depleted...the fallout of which Iceland is still dealing with centuries later1.
Occasionally, like Kosh and Galen, I've attempted to recruit people unwittingly to serve my goals...hoping they'd figure it out. I haven't succeeded in such endeavors. RedMom tried, I'll admit, with Digby...a lot of people I worked with did, but then I was open about recruiting allies as an experiment against previous crushes which I had attempted to succeed largely, if not entirely, on my own. But like letting the cat out of the bag to the Shadows, it had only caused me to fail faster than ever before...
Triangulating is another method I'm fond of. This is where I tell one person something directly knowing full-well they now cannot not help me themselves. I'm sacrificing them (so to speak) using the idea that now they know something they can use against my Mind (though not themselves). I hope they will find the right person to give this information to behind my back while not simultaneously giving away that they had done so (at least not until after it's too late for such damning information to have any effect)...but it never happens. The Drakh succeed, and Earth is destroyed.
Even when I had been to therapists, they annoyed the shit out of me by dismissing my desire to talk about my made-up worlds, language, and alphabet. Looking back on it all, I see a goldmine of useful information which could have come from discussions of how my language's grammar worked and what kind of governments and religions did I envision for these worlds? So much could have been learned and insights into the way I think gleaned...albeit roundaboutly...I'm sure of it...but it would never be and my disdain for therapists is only furthered when listening to my other friends who have had therapists themselves, describe their experiences. Without even getting into it, does anyone else see the irony of a person who feels he has no one to talk to creating a language from scratch? Talk about a cry for help, but no...it wasn't important.
So, I don't know, I guess if you see me...make sure you give me a hug and associated normal kinds of touching and make sure I do the same for you...just don't mention you had read this article. Keep it between "us" ;-)
1 Information on Iceland was paraphrased from things I had learned from reading the book Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared Diamond
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Thursday, May 10, 2012
DATING SITE MATH
I only have two "equations" so far, but then that's what the addendum tag is for.
The first one is straight up math: Pi ∝ Rd
DEFINITION: the interest a profile generates is directly proportional to the reader's distance from said profile.
That happens way more often than can be explained by mere chance.
The second one is more difficult but here goes: ∵ Di = ∅, P(R|M) = 1
DEFINITION: because intent to date is an empty set, the probability of getting a reply to one's message equals 100%
In other words, if the purpose of your message to a woman is merely to compliment her on an aspect of her profile and not actually an attempt to seek a date, you can be assured of a 100% reply rate (e.g. I thought a recently viewed headline on PoF "My heart's not a d!ck so don't play with it" was funny, but the kind of guy she was looking for was clearly not me. Nevertheless I wanted her to know that her headline made me laugh).
That type of reply dominates those I have received over the past nine months of my attempting to date online. How very disheartening...
The first one is straight up math: Pi ∝ Rd
DEFINITION: the interest a profile generates is directly proportional to the reader's distance from said profile.
That happens way more often than can be explained by mere chance.
The second one is more difficult but here goes: ∵ Di = ∅, P(R|M) = 1
DEFINITION: because intent to date is an empty set, the probability of getting a reply to one's message equals 100%
In other words, if the purpose of your message to a woman is merely to compliment her on an aspect of her profile and not actually an attempt to seek a date, you can be assured of a 100% reply rate (e.g. I thought a recently viewed headline on PoF "My heart's not a d!ck so don't play with it" was funny, but the kind of guy she was looking for was clearly not me. Nevertheless I wanted her to know that her headline made me laugh).
That type of reply dominates those I have received over the past nine months of my attempting to date online. How very disheartening...
THOUGHTS I NORMALLY KEEP IN MY HEAD, part XIII
One thing about this gay marriage debate that catches my attention is this notion that "Hey! If you oppose gay marriage, you might miss out on a hot lesbian couple moving in next door!" and I'm left wondering, just what is the supposed appeal of lesbians to straight men? Because it is most certainly straight men that this idea is being marketed to.
The Top 4 sexual-orientation possibilities are heterosexual male, heterosexual female, homosexual male, and homosexual female. Of those four, how do you order them in, uh...let's call it "evolutionary terms"?
For me, it's heterosexual women, homosexual men, heterosexual men, and homosexual women. The reasoning is simple.
I am attracted to women. I want to have sex with them, marry one, start a family with one, etc. They're the top of the pecking order for those reasons.
Homosexual men take second place for the simple fact that they are not my competition. They can be perfectly ignored or used as allies in securing a woman for me since, stereotypically, gay men have a kind of understood alliance with straight women. I don't understand why that is but that ignorance will not stop me from exploiting it when possible. Homosexual men are neutral players in this Game of Life.
Heterosexual men take third place because, while I can get along with them, they ultimately represent competition. We share a goal and even if that goal is not with the same girl, that underlying tension is always present, especially for me...a weak player in the Game of Life.
Homosexual women are the bottom of the pile for me. They float higher to the top if other attributes are allowed (e.g. English-speaking: non English-speaking women are viewed by my Mind as a "waste of material"). Because I am attracted to women, lesbians represent a kind of affront to my Mind. The absolute certainty that a lesbian will not be attracted to me makes her, at best, a guaranteed waste of my time (whereas the 99.999% chance that a straight woman I'm attracted to will not be attracted to me makes her, at best, merely an assuredly certain waste of my time). And when they are attractive, it's like the equivalent of becoming attracted to a married woman or one who doesn't speak English...a frustrating waste of attraction.
So tell me again, what exactly is the joy of watching lesbians "in action"? It's the worst kind of cocktease. Actually, that's not fair. Lesbians can't be cockteases because they never wanted the cock in the first place.
The Top 4 sexual-orientation possibilities are heterosexual male, heterosexual female, homosexual male, and homosexual female. Of those four, how do you order them in, uh...let's call it "evolutionary terms"?
For me, it's heterosexual women, homosexual men, heterosexual men, and homosexual women. The reasoning is simple.
I am attracted to women. I want to have sex with them, marry one, start a family with one, etc. They're the top of the pecking order for those reasons.
Homosexual men take second place for the simple fact that they are not my competition. They can be perfectly ignored or used as allies in securing a woman for me since, stereotypically, gay men have a kind of understood alliance with straight women. I don't understand why that is but that ignorance will not stop me from exploiting it when possible. Homosexual men are neutral players in this Game of Life.
Heterosexual men take third place because, while I can get along with them, they ultimately represent competition. We share a goal and even if that goal is not with the same girl, that underlying tension is always present, especially for me...a weak player in the Game of Life.
Homosexual women are the bottom of the pile for me. They float higher to the top if other attributes are allowed (e.g. English-speaking: non English-speaking women are viewed by my Mind as a "waste of material"). Because I am attracted to women, lesbians represent a kind of affront to my Mind. The absolute certainty that a lesbian will not be attracted to me makes her, at best, a guaranteed waste of my time (whereas the 99.999% chance that a straight woman I'm attracted to will not be attracted to me makes her, at best, merely an assuredly certain waste of my time). And when they are attractive, it's like the equivalent of becoming attracted to a married woman or one who doesn't speak English...a frustrating waste of attraction.
So tell me again, what exactly is the joy of watching lesbians "in action"? It's the worst kind of cocktease. Actually, that's not fair. Lesbians can't be cockteases because they never wanted the cock in the first place.
:-P
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
STEAL THIS IDEA!
I think I've built up enough of these to start a new entry series. Y'see, in addition to not being an author, I am also not a writer...or at least not a good one (as this blog no doubt attests). However, this doesn't stop these strange, and what I would hope to be good, ideas from popping into to my head on occasion. I would love to see these ideas developed, but lacking talent of my own to do so, I must rely on the good peoples of the internet to do it for me.
Here's how it works. I present to you, my dear reader(s), an idea I think worthy of a story or at least worth including in a story be that story traditional literature, a movie, or television series (hell, even a play, who am I to give a fuck?). What you do is, upon approving of its meritoriousness, you fucking steal it...run with it...make it your own. Take the credit too, I don't give a shit (although let's face it, getting a mention in your finished project would be just peachy). I just want to know this idea exists outside my limited mind.
Seeing as how I recently railed against horror films, I thought my first entry should relate to them.
Start the film in the middle of the action. Bypass all that shit in the beginning where we spend twenty minutes with jerks and deal with the happy times before the killer/monster/force of evil strikes.
Jump right into the thick of it, like after the first couple of kills. Have a cast which is already aware that something bad is happening and have the audience figure out, through clues in the narrative structure and/or scenery, just what is going on. Do not provide the solutions for what is going on through clumsy dialogue exchanges between surviving characters. They're running for their lives, not trying to solve a mystery. The mystery element is there for those audience members who didn't necessarily come just to see teenagers getting murdered in impractically fantastic ways. I'm looking for a "have your cake and eat it too" type film that will lend itself to rewatch because you, the curious viewer, are determined to figure out the killer's raison d'être, what these kids actually did to provoke his/her/its ire, and how it was the Final Girl was able to stop him/her/it despite the utter failures of her other, now dead, friends.
Doing this will require a lot of planning and storyboarding before you actually begin shooting the film, but I think it is something worth doing because at some level, I am a fan of giving the audience homework. Wait on the actual answer for at least a year...let the message boards hash it out first...see if anyone can put it all together first. Done right, even the actors and actresses in the film need not know the mystery behind it.
It's an idea that's been attempted before in the Babylon 5 legacy series, Crusade. While ultimately TNT forced J. Michael Straczynski to make an alternate pilot, the episode intended to be the first one survives. It was meant to thrust the audience into the thick of things and have them figure it out and it not only works, but is a solid concept. I've been entranced by the idea ever since and would like see it done.
DISCLAIMER: To anyone reading this, you are welcome to not only use, but claim this idea as your own without giving credit to me. I sometimes have ideas, but I do not have the skills needed to express them. It is more important to me to see these ideas done than to receive recognition for them. That being said, giving me a mention anyway would make me giddy. If this idea has in fact already been done, then I strongly suggest you not actually steal it (at least not without major revisions) :-)
Here's how it works. I present to you, my dear reader(s), an idea I think worthy of a story or at least worth including in a story be that story traditional literature, a movie, or television series (hell, even a play, who am I to give a fuck?). What you do is, upon approving of its meritoriousness, you fucking steal it...run with it...make it your own. Take the credit too, I don't give a shit (although let's face it, getting a mention in your finished project would be just peachy). I just want to know this idea exists outside my limited mind.
Seeing as how I recently railed against horror films, I thought my first entry should relate to them.
Start the film in the middle of the action. Bypass all that shit in the beginning where we spend twenty minutes with jerks and deal with the happy times before the killer/monster/force of evil strikes.
Jump right into the thick of it, like after the first couple of kills. Have a cast which is already aware that something bad is happening and have the audience figure out, through clues in the narrative structure and/or scenery, just what is going on. Do not provide the solutions for what is going on through clumsy dialogue exchanges between surviving characters. They're running for their lives, not trying to solve a mystery. The mystery element is there for those audience members who didn't necessarily come just to see teenagers getting murdered in impractically fantastic ways. I'm looking for a "have your cake and eat it too" type film that will lend itself to rewatch because you, the curious viewer, are determined to figure out the killer's raison d'être, what these kids actually did to provoke his/her/its ire, and how it was the Final Girl was able to stop him/her/it despite the utter failures of her other, now dead, friends.
Doing this will require a lot of planning and storyboarding before you actually begin shooting the film, but I think it is something worth doing because at some level, I am a fan of giving the audience homework. Wait on the actual answer for at least a year...let the message boards hash it out first...see if anyone can put it all together first. Done right, even the actors and actresses in the film need not know the mystery behind it.
It's an idea that's been attempted before in the Babylon 5 legacy series, Crusade. While ultimately TNT forced J. Michael Straczynski to make an alternate pilot, the episode intended to be the first one survives. It was meant to thrust the audience into the thick of things and have them figure it out and it not only works, but is a solid concept. I've been entranced by the idea ever since and would like see it done.
DISCLAIMER: To anyone reading this, you are welcome to not only use, but claim this idea as your own without giving credit to me. I sometimes have ideas, but I do not have the skills needed to express them. It is more important to me to see these ideas done than to receive recognition for them. That being said, giving me a mention anyway would make me giddy. If this idea has in fact already been done, then I strongly suggest you not actually steal it (at least not without major revisions) :-)
LIBERAL TRIAGE
I just want to state for the record that I actually don't care about what these girls have done nor do I have any personal opposition to it because I'm really not one to stand in the way of other people's fun provided it synchronizes with the general dictum: "Your freedom to swing your arm ends where the other fellow's nose begins." That having been said, I like the moral conundrum it puts upon liberals...
Not too long ago, the New York Times ran an article about Muslim girls in Hamtramck, Michigan and their desire to have a prom of their own "...which conforms to religious beliefs forbidding dating, dancing with boys or appearing without a head scarf in front of males." Now while I personally feel it is customs such as these that have been hampering strict Muslims around the world from properly assimilating into their adopted lands (and pretty much any overbearing religion...I don't need to pick on Muslims here seeing as how ultra-Orthodox Jews, the Amish, and probably Mormons and Scientologists too, would also qualify), that's not what I found so amusing about this all-girls prom.
For me, the prom posed a lose-lose scenario for liberals who praise diversity and denounce bigotry and sexism and such among their many other stances. I mean, as a liberal, can one really support this all-girl prom being held? It wasn't being paid for by the school, but through fund-raising on the girls' parts, so I don't want to hear that it was a private affair arguments otherwise why don't liberals in general denounce others for protesting the practices of the Boy Scouts who find homosexuality to be contrary to the principles they espouse? Why would they clamor for women's rights in countries under Islamic or Shariah Law when those laws clearly permit such heinous practices?
On the surface, the prom is openly sexist: no boys allowed. Don't tell me because it's girls-only that it's okay especially with the annual brouhaha over Augusta National's policy on not permitting women to join their organization (among other things). If it's wrong for a golf club to forbid women members for no other reason than they are women, then how is it right to permit a prom which forbids participation from men for no other reason than they are men?
But if you oppose these girls having their prom due to its sexist nature, you are then effectively preventing them from expressing themselves in the name of their religion which goes against the liberal creed of espousing diversity. It amuses me because there really is no answer which does not produce hypocrisy. I love it.
It's liberal triage. What do you do? I guess if it were me, I would have to oppose the prom on the grounds that women's rights would supercede religious rights seeing as how being a woman is not a choice whereas being a Muslim (or Christian or Jew or Hindu or Shintoist or Atheist or etc.) is.
Not too long ago, the New York Times ran an article about Muslim girls in Hamtramck, Michigan and their desire to have a prom of their own "...which conforms to religious beliefs forbidding dating, dancing with boys or appearing without a head scarf in front of males." Now while I personally feel it is customs such as these that have been hampering strict Muslims around the world from properly assimilating into their adopted lands (and pretty much any overbearing religion...I don't need to pick on Muslims here seeing as how ultra-Orthodox Jews, the Amish, and probably Mormons and Scientologists too, would also qualify), that's not what I found so amusing about this all-girls prom.
For me, the prom posed a lose-lose scenario for liberals who praise diversity and denounce bigotry and sexism and such among their many other stances. I mean, as a liberal, can one really support this all-girl prom being held? It wasn't being paid for by the school, but through fund-raising on the girls' parts, so I don't want to hear that it was a private affair arguments otherwise why don't liberals in general denounce others for protesting the practices of the Boy Scouts who find homosexuality to be contrary to the principles they espouse? Why would they clamor for women's rights in countries under Islamic or Shariah Law when those laws clearly permit such heinous practices?
On the surface, the prom is openly sexist: no boys allowed. Don't tell me because it's girls-only that it's okay especially with the annual brouhaha over Augusta National's policy on not permitting women to join their organization (among other things). If it's wrong for a golf club to forbid women members for no other reason than they are women, then how is it right to permit a prom which forbids participation from men for no other reason than they are men?
But if you oppose these girls having their prom due to its sexist nature, you are then effectively preventing them from expressing themselves in the name of their religion which goes against the liberal creed of espousing diversity. It amuses me because there really is no answer which does not produce hypocrisy. I love it.
It's liberal triage. What do you do? I guess if it were me, I would have to oppose the prom on the grounds that women's rights would supercede religious rights seeing as how being a woman is not a choice whereas being a Muslim (or Christian or Jew or Hindu or Shintoist or Atheist or etc.) is.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
VIDEO GAMES AND LIFE
Of all the things that video games get blamed for when it comes to supposedly ruining young minds, there is one feature of these games that goes overlooked and yet it is this feature which gets filtered deeply into our subconsciousness, lingering there...festering...and poised to create a feeling of utter damnation once its trap has been sprung.
Now I'm talking classic games like Super Mario Bros., Megaman, and Castlevania. They all had something in common besides scorekeeping. You got three chances. If you died, you got to start the stage over and try again. You alone retain the experience of the failure; the environment you're respawned in completely forgives you. The enemies, tricks, and/or traps which had, just moments ago, caused your downfall are all reset with no memory of your previous attempt. You're allowed another attempt at success and may do so while not in fear of judgement.
It should come as no surprise that life is in no way like this. You fail and you have to live with it. Not only are you denied that which you had attempted to acquire/master/etc. but you have to make do with it and everyone who witnessed your failure will continue to remember it. You do not get to try again. You stay the way you are and how much older you've become over the course of the failed attempt. There's no second chance to get it right. No chance to figure out what you were supposed to do, what you did wrong, what you should have said or done... In fact, it doesn't matter if you figure it all out because it's too late...it's over...you lose.
I hate seeing how all the mistakes I've made have compounded and there's nothing I can ever do about it because there's no redo. I have to live with them. I have to live with my wasted youth and adolescence. It's all gone...
Now I'm talking classic games like Super Mario Bros., Megaman, and Castlevania. They all had something in common besides scorekeeping. You got three chances. If you died, you got to start the stage over and try again. You alone retain the experience of the failure; the environment you're respawned in completely forgives you. The enemies, tricks, and/or traps which had, just moments ago, caused your downfall are all reset with no memory of your previous attempt. You're allowed another attempt at success and may do so while not in fear of judgement.
It should come as no surprise that life is in no way like this. You fail and you have to live with it. Not only are you denied that which you had attempted to acquire/master/etc. but you have to make do with it and everyone who witnessed your failure will continue to remember it. You do not get to try again. You stay the way you are and how much older you've become over the course of the failed attempt. There's no second chance to get it right. No chance to figure out what you were supposed to do, what you did wrong, what you should have said or done... In fact, it doesn't matter if you figure it all out because it's too late...it's over...you lose.
I hate seeing how all the mistakes I've made have compounded and there's nothing I can ever do about it because there's no redo. I have to live with them. I have to live with my wasted youth and adolescence. It's all gone...
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
I HATE HORROR FILMS
I just don't like horror films. All too often they are poorly written, badly acted, too dark (absence of light too dark, not the other kind), too predictable, obviously low-budget, and (among other things) lacking in compelling characters. And they're not scary. A quick cut-away or sudden loud noise does not scary make. "It's not actually talented filmmaking if you can get the same effect from popping a bag of potato chips behind somebody's head."
And for those assholes out there who would counter me with, (mocking tone) "Well, then why you don't you make a horror film then?" You're a fucking idiot. You don't have to be a filmmaker, an actor, a writer, a grip, a director, a producer, etc. to criticize a work. I couldn't play "You May Be Right" if my life depended on it, but I would know immediately if you missed a note, lyric, or sang off-key and I can't do either of those things either so such challenges to criticism are meaningless.
And for those assholes out there who would counter me with, (mocking tone) "Well, then why you don't you make a horror film then?" You're a fucking idiot. You don't have to be a filmmaker, an actor, a writer, a grip, a director, a producer, etc. to criticize a work. I couldn't play "You May Be Right" if my life depended on it, but I would know immediately if you missed a note, lyric, or sang off-key and I can't do either of those things either so such challenges to criticism are meaningless.