Tuesday, February 26, 2008

More impressions about Obama

I thought I would give a few more vague impressions I have concerning Obama, relating to his sanity.

An effective manipulative technique to make an issue seem more of moment than it otherwise would be is to encourage the audience to view it as THE issue. People have the innate tendency to want to view one issue as THE issue. I.e., to view precisely one issue as so important that if you have the wrong opinion about it, well, you're screwed. This is because there is one issue that is always THE issue. Don't get addicted to oral or rectal sodomy, and congratulations, you're already half-way to virtue; at any rate, you quite literally are not screwed.

What strikes me about Obama is that he comes across as believing that his becoming president is THE issue. He has a way of projecting that if we only believe in him and put him in the White House, voilá, he will make our country pure again in the important sense. There are lots of people who try to manipulate thus. For instance, preachers will tell you that if you only believe in the Bible, you will be saved. Or financial gurus will try to get you to believe that if you only follow ther advice with sufficient enthusiasm and belief, money will sprout up all about you and you will get rich. Obama is a little different, though, from the Suze Ormans or the typical evangelical preachers. He doesn't so much play on fear for he seems to think our country (with at least one important exception, namely him) already is screwed-up; the only thing to fear would be more of the same, and most people just aren't very scared of that. But once he comes in, unifies the country and maketh THE GREAT CHANGE, we will be saved, he seems to think.

I could cynically say that Obama is being manipulative, but I actually don't feel he especially is that. My impression is that Obama actually believes that he can make THE GREAT CHANGE in our political system that will lead our country to pristine springs of prosperity and togetherness. Obama is crazy, I'm inclined to think. What is very strange about Obama is that notwithstanding he is crazy, his opinions are fairly normal. Most crazy people rightly feel that THE issue, i.e., the issue to be obsessed about, is always the craziest, weirdest issue imaginable. In a society with correct opinions about sodomy, THE issue is not important, and in other societies, THE issue will tend to be the issue which seems most insane--the issue which the issues of crazy people most tend to resemble--because largely people become crazy to find it. At least in a comparatively pro-sodomy society such as ours, the typical crazy person will be wise enough to believe THE issue is about the bizarre. But Obama does not seem to have done so. What he seems to be saying is that if we just do the typical things liberal Democrats have been suggesting of late, e.g., pull out of Iraq, make the taxes a little less regressive, make health insurance somewhat easier to get, Wow! we will be saved as he parts the Red Sea of disunity before us ennabling our trip into the great promised land of THE GREAT CHANGE.

It is very hard to convince people that THE issue is THE issue, because THE issue (sodomy) is something people laugh at, and because many have addictions that make them feel THE issue is not the issue. What Obama asks of us is easy. He just wants people to believe the standard things that democrats have been saying for years. It is much easier to get people to believe normal opinions. After all, people with self-doubt want to believe in normal, and since Obama comes across as wanting us to believe we are all screwed up, his remedy of normal has a certain appeal. It's a help he has a booming, powerful voice. Zombie people like to be rescued by the strong. The big help to Obama, though, is that he actually believes. Sincerity is hard to fake, and I'm not inclined he has to.

I can imagine how Obama might have become crazy. I have read that in much of his childhood he was separated from his mother. Very possibly he viewed the separation as caused by something screwed-up. In a situation like that it can very easily seem emotionally that not succeeding here, not succeeding in defeating whatever caused his mother to be away, is a defeat by screwing-up forces equivalent to his own self getting screwed up. This can lead to an obsession. What is most peculiar about Obama is that whereas almost any normal crazy person would view his loss as having been caused by extraterrestrials from a planet orbitting Arcturus, or his mother secretly having pledged herself to the rules of the gypsy council, or some other bizarre such theory and that the answer lay only in deciphering the secret codes she has given him that lay all about him, instead he just seems to have decided that the answer to preventing such problems is the most conventional one.

Don't get me wrong. I am not against Obama because I think him a little crazy the way he comes across as believing himself on a mission. On the contrary, craziness rather suggests anti-sodomy characteristics I want in a leader. The craziness itself can be annoying and even disabling if excessive, but it says so much good about character, I can live with it. What bothers me is not that Obama is crazy, but that he is not looney enough for a crazy person. Given his craziness, such absence of looneyness doesn't suggest effective anti-sodomy characteristics, and rather undoes what his craziness suggests about his character. Accordingly, his personality doesn't suggests to me one way or the other whether he is virtuous. And the craziness itself will be a disadvantage, especially since he doesn't appear looney enough to profit from it. I don't know why he is so crazy without being looney. I suspect these traits are in his makeup. It's a very strange combination, I am inclined to think, and can't offer any explanations other than that combinations with small chances can happen, especially in a huge world like ours.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Why Obama makes me uneasy.

I end up watching a great deal of CNN and MSNBC because my mom is very much into the election and likes to keep up with the election drama not very differently I think than from how I used to keep up with sports when I was a kid (only she is even more into it), and so the television often tends to be on and tuned to those stations. We both agree the coverage is awful--the shameless emotional manipulations to make it seem like every bit of news is the most important thing to know about since the invention of the wheel. It is just not a restful thing to listen to for me, and so I'd rather get my news from the internet. Anyway, what we notice is that these networks are very much pro-Obama and anti-Hillary. Right from the get go I could tell they had decided they want Obama to win. That, if nothing else, makes me not want to vote for Obama, since it makes me wonder whether there be some corruption causing the media's slant. In the debates Obama really doesn't say at all precisely what he is going to do, and though he speaks about change as though he has some original different ideas, I suspect that if he had these original ideas to a significant extent, he would tell us what they are.

Conspiracy? Has Obama bought off the MSM somehow? I doubt all that. Some of it I think is pure sexism. Obama is OK at giving emotionally dramatic speeches, that's probably his main skill. And it is a skill of presentation not unlike the skill that would make one television personality more fit to squabble and make dramatic political pontifications than another personality. If Obama gets idolized, the male television personalities probably figure they will end up getting idolized too, which might make them get sex easier. But that's all rather obvious, the same sort of thing that makes television full of shows about entertainment personalities nobody with sense who doesn't want to go into the entertainment profession would ever hardly care about. I also think there is something more subtle going on concerning Obama's mixed race.

The main reason I am uneasy about Obama is that I think he has an extremely high opinion of himself that is not justified by what he seems to be, judging from his debates and his declared opinions. I suspect he is extremely conceited. What's more, I don't think people are realizing just how conceited he is because they don't understand the significance of mixed race. Many people are prone to judging one's opinion of oneself by judging how pious one is; thus the expression, "holier than thou." This is mostly very reasonable. If a male thinks he is great, especially in the moral sphere, he will tend emotionally to postpone to future generations the crossing-over of his DNA in his gametes, because postponing this so, by creating in himself a spirit of holiness and piety, will make him in this generation more sexually attractive to females, which on some level is what he feels he needs to do, because he be unusually great in his own estimation. Obama comes across as being rather pious in aspect, which in ordinary circumstances would seem a little excessive considering how he comes across on television. But it would not appear so very excessive I should think it terribly excessive except for the consideration of his mixed race. The whole point of genetic crossover is genetic mixing. In no person is genetic crossover more relevant and appropriate than in a person with parents of differing race. Obama has done pretty well for himself. If he is what he presents himself as, there would appear to be a fairly harmonious new combination of DNA there in his person, a harmonious combination that just won't exist much anymore in his descendants unless he is more lustful than he is, because it is a new harmony. Males of mixed race (and more especially and precisely males whose parents are of different race) should be a great deal more lustful than males not of mixed race, and I really think that is their (appropriate) tendency mostly. That Obama comes across as pious makes me think he is either a remarkable faker or that he is extremely conceited (probably the latter). There are other possibilities, I guess. E.g., he could be very much into girls, who especially appreciate piety (this would actually make me want to vote for him, but I don't think that is the most likely explanation). Or he could idolize his wife an extreme degree or be extremely hen-pecked by her (I wouldn't be surprised if both of these possibilities might apply somewhat, but I think them less significant possibilities than his conceitedness). And a president who thinks too highly of himself could be quite a dangerous thing that I don't want. Especially since apparently he used cocaine previously.

I am really quite certain sons of parents of different races should be more lustful and less pious and holy than sons of parents of the same race. Indeed, a few years ago when I was on a train, I was pleased to sort of eye flirt during most of the trip with an extremely pretty girl whose parents were of different races (her mother was white, and her father was Asian--Filipino or (less likely) Thai I guessed). I would look at her all holy and pure and innocent, and she just really tried so hard to get me to look lightsomely at her like that was how I would feel about her if I liked her--not so much in a seductive way like she was temporarily adopting seductive emotions to destroy misplaced guilt in me, but like she figured with emotional lightness all around is how our physical love and attraction if it ever came to that (I don't wish to indicate whether I think it already came to that in her) would be. It's as though it never occurred to her that I could physically love her in a holy way or that holiness could ever have anything to do with anything but priggishness. And I deduced from having looked at her and (a great deal less) at her other family members what the deal was. Her brother also was a very special person (though I didn't look at him much, duh, since his sister being so pretty and of the opposite sex was of course much more interesting to me), at least he looked that way, and his sister probably loved him and their family so much that she definitely didn't want him to have the holiness that would be inappropriate from the point of view of producing lasting genetic connections between her mother and father. She sensed that her brother, a lovely son in a beautiful interracial family, will need when dealing with females to be emotionally lightsome and not very all-serious like, and that's how she just sort of assumed all males should be. That is something else that is weird about Obama. He says that he believes in making one America (a very good and effective political goal, which if I recall by the way was Edwards' stated goal four years ago before he apparently decided to change this time around and run mostly using the standard rich-are-evil-wicked-people platform), but if he believed that emotionally, Why wouldn't he emotionally be lightsome like cream (the girl somehow reminded me of cream or creamy smoothness, or maybe some sort of ideal healthy vegan creme since I mostly avoid milk products), since in some sense that would bring his parents together? (Of all my biological theories, my one concerning males being able to regulate genetic crossover in gametes should be the most obvious. It just doesn't make sense to anyone who thinks for himself that such a tendency wouldn't evolve given the ease with which such control could occur and the usefulness of it to evolutionary survival.)

I prefer Hillary to Obama. I am also OK with McCain. The Republicans seem to be getting better, and the Democrats seem to be getting worse. The Democrats have the cowardly wrong position about the war and they are too pro-sodomy. The Republicans are too much for the wealthy and tend to be too much in line with the evangelical fanatics. McCain comes across as less for the wealthy and the evangelicals than the other Republicans, and he has the best war position of all the candidates. Believe it or not, what bothers me especially about McCain is that he has been (and I guess still is) very much against Amtrak. I have always loved trains, and with today's energy crisis, they make more sense than ever. How could anyone be against trains? I'll probably vote for Hillary over McCain and McCain over Obama.

Friday, February 08, 2008

Is dancing adult?

Is dancing adult?

For the past few months or so I have had in the back of my mind the question of why some girls like to dance. It seems innocent enough, dancing, and yet some girls seem to be quite determined in viewing it of an importance to themselves beyond whatever I could imagine it being to me. And I don’t think dancing has anything to do with young female sexuality. So I have been trying (duly purposivelessly) to understand it. I shall first give a poem about dance I wrote a few days ago (making a few edits along the way) and then make some clarification and also comments about further impressions I have concerning the matter.

Silly Doodle Poem

Don’t know what I’ll say.
Am saying it for myself
I love to dance
For someone else
But not myself
It doesn’t do much for me
in the capacity
of just me.

Dancing is sexy
When its purpose
is seductive.
When girls giggle
They go
Arms too
Up and down
A drill
If it looks like
The girls will feel
more comfortable
Doing it.

But just as a dance,
(And Why would a girl dance for me
for any other reason?)
A dance really pretty conservative is.
It’s mostly about play—
Playing at being an adult.
Yeah, that’s about right,
that’s my inference.
Women move when they have sex.
Women behave sexually like responsible adults
Because when girls, they played at it.
Girls like being still,
quiet and music-free
When they have sex.
And if they didn’t,
somehow a Gregorian chant or such-like
sacred hymn would please them best
loved, I imagine.
But girls wonder, I’m sure, what it’s
like to love like an adult.
To most girls,
the girls who wait
to have children,
it’s really pretty much the only relevant concern.
Sex absolutely still is weird.
A girl want to see if stillness and quiet and peace
really is what she wants now.
And how is she to know that?
Without experimenting—play.
For a girl, dancing is the opposite of sex.

But dancing can be seductive to males less wise than I.
Which in a way can make it seductive to me,
I mean given what that implies about her general attitudes.
For no such dance will ever be for me.
To me a dance with me or about me is just silly.

I don’t like music.
At least, it has no relation to my thoughts for her.
They’re best most absolutely still
And yet,
I would go along,
for her,
not seriously,
but just because it’s fun to see her have play—
to help her see dance not really
very relevant is to anything I feel and
yet if she were to wait and get normal
I could do normal OK too, but Why
really would she ever want that?
I’m not that sort of person.
I would never claim that.

I think she’s obsessed with it—
Being able to dance,
yeah, in her music,
if my understanding of custom be accurate, and she does as custom dictates,
She throws her head about violently
thrashing like dance is what it is all about
and frustrated wall-banging would be a natural consequence of
ever getting rejected when wanting it.
Sometimes people obsess
At singular frustrations.

Seduction not what she is after.
And it’s not what I want from her,
Yet I keep coming back to that, Why?

To some guys,
Guys who don’t feel as good about themselves as I,
a dance can be so seductively light
With laughter
And clean movement
there Can be conveyed the notion
A mere instant of pleasure
Can amount to more than a month
of sexual love.
That’s OK, it’s normal, it’s what women give normally
When they want to give.
Losing oneself in a song
like some other losing oneself?
No way, I’ll stay myself
and so won’t really take dancing too
seriously. I won’t be into the music, but you.
I could do that,
I’m pretty sure.

Love dawdles, it seems,
More than I had expected,
I don’t actually seem to be very fast or forwards
When it comes to actually communicating with females.

She is too scared:
The simplest inference I can make
from my tendency not to do anything.
On some inner level I can’t reflect well upon
I have evolved to have considered her scared given the data.
But that’s just a guess
I’m more sure that what I’ve evolved to feel
as the right speed probably is.
Glacial it is,
Until I feel otherwise.

I could make her less afraid
By dancing with her
Or just enjoying the spectacle
Of her movement.
I don’t have to make it more than
it is
Because it won’t be about me on any fundamental level.
It is not important to me,
Just to her
Maybe about me as much as someone else,
but as to the last point, it makes no difference,
Whatever..., I like dreams even if just dreams.

Back to seduction
Girls can make a male want to sexually enjoy her
In no still tantric way.
Innocently they do this to the
men they want
to value pleasure
more than guilt.
Girls aren’t fools
Lots of desirable guys don’t get it.
I didn’t get it.
Neither did anyone else,
male, female, or neutral.
A girl setting out to please
Can make
A moment of bliss
That leaves one awestruck.
Really what’s the point?
The more religious the girl
The more one wants to tell her to remove the crucifix from about her neck,
Because she needs to be herself
And devoid of vampire fears
To enjoy
Great sex and make it enjoyable.
How could I have determined
Without lengthy derivation
When throwing away the crucifix is
What I wanted her to do
That I should be as holy and sacred
As I ever possibly could be.
It’s easy for me now to see this
but I really didn’t see anything
except from a standard direction
then, back yonder,
The words,
they weren’t my own
I thought I was my own man
I wasn’t yet man.
I knew I loved my holiness more
even though I loved them both.

Try to seduce
And many people will (unjustly) try to spit on you
Try to dance
And some people will (unjustly) think you are trying to seduce
They will hate you for it,
Others will find it dull
or that it is not quite preferable to what they wrongly see as its only alternative.
Or, as I would probably be if I were as vulnerable to music as I was at your age,
that they aren’t up to the risk of letting their feelings for you
be controlled by a song.
I think I can dance.

The depraved pedantic
Don’t want women to remember
How they had thought they would love when older.
The play of their childhood is what the fallen women remember of themselves,
and it could make them pure.
But it would require too much understanding
for the wicked
to behave with such cunning.
Bitter men,
when the bitterness tastes bad,
they believe girls dance because they be natural sluts.

OK, now for a clarification. When I was speaking of “back yonder” I was referring to my high school days. A long time ago indeed.

Now I feel I should more-or-less list my other impressions about dance and music, some of which I haven’t developed as highly.

I really do feel dance is more of an adult thing. For instance, one would think, given my attraction to young females, that high-school cheerleaders would be more attractive to me than (say) professional cheerleaders that one sees at sporting events, and yet not so. High school cheerleaders when they leap around all over it’s unappealing to me. But maybe partly it is just that the aesthetic when it comes to makeup, facial expression, etc., that one sees on high school cheerleaders nowadays who make it to television has been twisted by ESPN, the event organizers, coaches, or I don’t really know because I hardly care, blah, blah, blah. If they would stay still, they could be prettier, probably, but then that wouldn’t be cheerleading, I guess. There are doubtless many pretty high school cheerleaders (there were a fair number when I went to high school) and gymnastics is quite interesting to watch. Not that I am particularly attracted to professional cheerleaders—I really am not into movement—but mostly they are prettier and sexier to me than high school cheerleaders on television, at least when they are cheerleading.

Dance if it is slow and ballet-like can have a kind of gracefulness about it that is appealing and beautiful. It has a way of showing off balance. And balance is related to bipedalism, an important anti-sodomy defense.

Dance can be an interesting way for females to express strength and distaste. For instance, Paula Abdul was cool when she danced about cataloguing her frustrations about males she might otherwise want to be still with. Like I said, dance is the opposite of sex. But presumably females in a spirit of having been inspired by a male would have more interesting things to express than those in a spirit of contrariness, the attractiveness of female strength and/or coyness notwithstanding.

Some songs probably have a slightly addictive appeal. These would be the catchy songs. Songs if at all catchy (and perhaps the majority of popular songs are catchy to some degree if not just plain boring) interfere with my sense of poetry and can make concentration (e.g., when doing math) difficult. And there are catchy songs which are not at all pretty. The most prominent example I can think of would be “Wreck of the Old 97”. It is a very catchy song that is dreadfully ugly; you can take my word for it, or if you are fairly invulnerable to catchiness, you can listen to it yourself and see my point. So the ugliness makes it quite clear to me that catchiness isn’t just something in my mind saying that there is something profound in the song I need to listen to. The young are probably most vulnerable to this catchiness. And I should point out that whereas catchiness might be something one normally can accept somewhat (it is a very mild addiction probably to most people), a male is very hesitant when he is being taken as expressing his feelings for a girl to risk having his feelings corrupted by a catchy song that he fell into. I would be very reluctant to dance in a spirit of seriousness with a girl. Danger, danger: Nothing I could seem to be feeling she should take seriously as the authentic me. If I wrote the song myself, perhaps I might feel somewhat different, but that is not my talent. But what about the expressiveness of music? How does it compare with poetry, for example, in importance.

Music can be useful as a way of clarifying the sense in which something is meant to be taken. For instance, in movies, when a movie is trying to make some subtle point, music can be an effective means by which to clarify the intended meaning or sense of a scene. Music can make the expression of the movie more compact and efficient. Oftentimes, however, music in movies only serves by way of trying to force the viewer to feel an emotion with a strength it is not natural for the viewer to feel; frequently it is manipulative. Can’t create a sympathetic treatment of a character? Create a sympathetic song to make the audience feel more like crying than the underlying meaning of the movie itself would. There is a subtle difference between using music to help the viewer find the meaning of the movie and using music to manipulate the viewer into believing the meaning of the movie by means of warping the audiences’ emotions so as to find the truth of the meaning more plausible; but there is a difference.

I do think girls somewhat attracted to the expressiveness of music. Girls, being young, don’t have as many impressions to deduct from as older people do. In a way, I feel this might make logic less useful to them compared with emotion. But then a rational outlook is very useful to girls when it comes to avoiding sodomy. And in some ways girls seem to be fond of deduction. Just look at the popularity of the Nancy Drew books (which I enjoy reading myself). And words come from society whereas notes might appear more naturally authentic and God-given. But I look at it this way. Music is mainly about expression if it is not addictive. And if there are no words, well, what is there useful to be expressed? Music is important mainly in the sense that it should be important in movies—as secondary to the meaning rather than primary to it. (I tend to prefer songs with words in them.) If it tries to be more than that, I think it mostly ends up being less than nothing.

Hmmm, vaguely it seems like I had a few other mostly less interesting things I was going to say about music/dancing that I might have forgotten. But I can't remember whether I forgot something. If I do remember that I forgot something and remember what it was, I’ll jot it off in a suplementary post before I forget. No need to wait about posting what I have written so far.