hay dad, meet my girlfriend, Rage

 

I don't feel shame for doing what a Uxe1 does when a Uxe1 is left alone.

Partially because shame relates to vicariously wearing someone else's closeted desire, and party because i like being a Uxe1, be that alone or otherwise.

 If im going to be nakedly honest, i have to say i feel like ive lost a little bit of my ability to channel rage into a force in the world. As in the last few years following the loss of my father most of that precision rage has been replaced by an understanding and a feeling that isn't pity, but its pity adjacent. (like without the condescending undertone, its an understanding, mixed with  a sorrow and if i was more invested in his life, it could be cutting, but the distance of our lives severs to now distance me from “owning” any memories of him in a vicarious way… i don't know if that makes sense, for your sake, reader, i hope that all sounds a bit nebulous. 

I don't want to be telling stories outside of class, nor exposing secrets, (nor to actually expose the absolutely unscientific way i experience reality before i filter it down through the callus filter of my 5 senses and logic) but to adequate express what im feeling tonight its going to take a lot of nakedness. Don't worry, its only me who will be exposing myself, but in out puritan infected culture, another's nakedness can trigger your own shame. But take comfort, we both know you're not the one exposed, in fact its likely no one even knows you are reading this, and no one needs to know you did. 

So as im going to take guilty pleasure in knowing this might be our secret moment alone. You get the even dirtier pleasure in knowing that only you know you are here with me. I am alone (like i mentioned earlier) and simply listening to some music with a guitar that can bend a note to an emotion. So we are even. I don't know who you are, and you can't know the sounds that are framing myself in our shared moment . 

Anyways im trying to be better about including others in my understandings, but this isn't about you, its about me… well a part of me.

Throughout my life i've spent may moments alone with music just slightly louder than my ability to think, just being lost in the sound.

( dont get old and deaf because you reach a point where your thoughts will refuse to be out done. And at that point anytime you mange to calm your thoughts you'll be left with tinnitus.)

This isnt ADHD rambling… this is my ADHD rambling as a defence mechanism. I promise you'll be disappointed, because as naked as i feel, this is going t feel like stumbling on Quentin Tarantino's porn collection only to realise it just decades of the socks section of Sears catalogue.

Anyways, RAGE. 

Its been my magic. Rage can overcome any emotion, which makes it handy when your brain neglects to produce seritones or any of the other “ happy chemicals” so the hardware of your body starts to advocate for a simple self shut down. 

Rage wont let you do anything as clean as “opting out of life” rage wont  let you give into another who wants to control you. RAGE Wont Let anyone or anything do anything to you. Rage demands the entire universe stops and responds to you at this moment. 

So i love rage, shes kept me alive, shes driven me past moments where people or physics have wanted me dead. 

And yes over 80% of my existence has been devoted to learning how to appease her. But id of died well over 80% of my life ago had she not been there to override the rest of me.

Im not not have i ever been an angry person. 

Ask any one who knows me an im sure theyll be able to tell you about the one time they saw me mad, and somehow how that was an important moment. But ask a bit more and even those who decide to hate me, will admit that over 99.9% of the time they known of me its not that rage but probably either a “stupid” or “joyus” indifference to reality and only able to focus on finding humour in the moment. This of course requires that they are able to even remember times outside of when rage controlled me.

I don't want to sound like I'm violent, in fact I'm almost pathologically non-violent (another post someday may delve into that) . however I’ve been subjected to “reviews” and “in depth explorations” when rage has simply announced “No” from my mouth. Much more scrutiny that those who had landed kicks and punches on me before i was reduced to allowing Rage control of my mouth. She wanted control of my body too, but shes never yet needed that.

Ok enough back story 

Recently i was alone and sad, and he sad started to set in deep, and so Rage noticed her cue and started to try and refine my experiences through her lens… and nothing. 

Its not like i think i actually hated my dad, but him being gone, and i dont know i have the ability to actively hate anything. 

I dont know if i could sent Rage to even cause someone a headache anymore let alone sending her to “allow” a house fire at their home. 

I dont think shed be absent should someone try and jump me, but i know her just bathing amongst the yeasts isn't enough to prevent all others from even considering jumping me. 

And all this leaves me feeling like i wish i could as my dad if rage ever demanded to be his girlfriend too, and if so, how he decided to live with her 

-this is one of those “ i had no idea it was going there” type of things. Im only posting because i feel like there is something here ill want to revisit some time tin the future 

also i feel like Rage got me talking about her rather than what i was going to say... strange

Some thoughts on ownership

 Well let's start with the easy ones. Ownership is it it's core the right to deny access to others. Our society is currently made up with the idea that the default is that everything is already owned. We never really consider that mabe ownership shouldn't be the natural state of the world. Yes we should have spheres and levels of what can be considered "owned". Like you should 100% own your body. Nobody should be allowed access without your permission. Then we have items that are for supporting and maintaining that body. We should have some basic right to exclude others (like your toothbrush, it seems inherent that I should be allowed to limit who can access and use that). But then we get a bit bigger and the idea of individual ownership seems absurd.

Like my home. Surely I should have the right to exclude strangers from entering into it. But should I be allowed to prevent my infant from coming inside? How about my partner? 

Like aside from situations of assult and safety, it seems absurd that I have ownership of my home above others who also use the space as their home. Our current laws start with ownership of the house and actually do very little to differentiate house from home. 

So it seems that one should have less ownership over their home than their body, and maybe even less than their toothbrush.

What about my garden, here's where a whole lot of other things come into play. My family garden to grow food to enter our bodies seems to have a lot of connection to toothbrush type things, but it's actual land and so has some resemblance to home type things. And that's before we get to the idea of what happens if that garden produces a surplus. Do I own that food that I can't or won't use? So that my right to exclude access includes letting it rot while others starve? 

Like maybe I shouldn't have to allow anyone to come into the garden and do as they please so that it'll prevent my crops from maturing and prevent me from collecting seeds to replant next season. But surely it's just plain wrong for me to let food rot rather than feeding someone starving on the other side of the fence. 

Also what if my gardening skills and system is grossly inadequate. Should I be allowed to deny my neighbor access to the soil when their growing techniques could produce enough for both families to eat and have surplus, and my techniques barley produce enough for my own families consumption. Surely my right to exclude others from that space should also incur some responsibility to all those others that I'm denying. 

If I own a large space if land. That simply means I have a right to exclude all others to that parcel of land. There are 8 billion other people who I'm saying can't use it. My personal wants is to make a golf course. For just me to use. But that land could provide food for some of those others who I am preventing from using it. Surely I have some basic obligations to those that have agreed to allow me exclusive control. 

Shouldn't my right to exclude some obligations as to what's done with it?

What I start to see is that the idea that ownership is part of an agreement starts to crumble. What starts to come through is that ownership is a result and function of force. I don't want to cede to Adam Smith here but, force does simplify the equation. 

Partly because we live in a world that has embraced many of Smith's ideas. But also because it means "agreement" is so much easier to reach when disagreements are settled with killing everyone who dissents until everyone alive agrees that staying alive is more personally important than continued disagreement. 

And that's the real burn for all Leftist ideas. As along as one person or group is willing to resort to force and killing, we will need to develop our own force to maintain any society. This is why "Communism within one nation" is flawed. We will need to use force as our ultimate decider with outsiders. And when that force exists, how do we possibly prevent its use on insiders as well? 

.... I noticed I'm off topic now... Sorry

solipsism taught me that I can chose whats in my world, and that time I exercised my bougie privilege to say if its not in my world its not my problem

 at the beginning of 2022 my fathers death forced me to confront what harboring anger had done to my life. and so the fist part of the year I wasn't allowing myself to carry any anger, without taking the time to evaluate if it was "worthy anger" or not. I simply didn't have the space for it at the moment. time has passed and I'm not running so close to empty. The last part of this year has also marked a decided upturn from the long descent I was in for the last few years. Correlation isn't Causation, But I'm going to keep putting effort into not carrying hate. The comfortable feeling of being right and righteous isn't worth it.

A little over a decade ago, I had made a choice to try and un-distance myself from everyone else. I thought  that if I tried I could stop feeling like an outsider. By simply becoming invested in my interactions I had hoped I could feel like I belonged in them. And its worked. So there is more than a little trepidation that my “cooling” could be the wrong plan. Not having time for the anger, not having space to carry it does seem to be quite closely linked with not having time or space for those that are causing it. I don't want to feel as alone as I did before. And the fact that that distance was probably a side effect of my misunderstood anger in my childhood also adds to the feeling that I'm wading into potentially unsafe water. I’m sure most others have learned the balance in grade school. But here I am. And I’m just now trying to find a way to balance the joy of being involved in the lives I interact with and the benefits of refusing to interact, or internalize with those who would sap my energy and make their deficiencies my focus. 

When I was learning to involve myself, my life had gone through a real upswing, and now as I’m learning to distance myself it appears I'm going through another upswing.
I'm too far distanced to know if when I first developed my distancing behavior if I was going through an up swing or not. But I do know that for the first time I’m making conscious decisions about who and when to allow it, and to put the effort into refusing to accept the burden of anger when it's hoisted on me.
I mean my brain is essentially an electrified bag of meat, and the universe may be predetermined or random, or an unsatisfying mix of the two, so all of this naval gazing is probably emotional masturbation at best. But that's how the end of 2022 feels to me right now. I hope 2023 will continue my feeling of coming back to living my life rather than surviving my existence. And I hope the same for you…. If you're not one of the people I’m relegating  to NPC status as a method to make my interaction with this world work for me.  ;)

the term "idpol" is a slur!

 When you come across the term “idpol” see it for what it really means. 

It's a portmanteau of “Identity” and “Politics”. But its a very particular Identity and Politics the term is condemning. Namely “The Personal Is Political”. A statement by Carol Hanisch (1970), writing about second wave feminism, and often considered the defining trait of 3rd wave. 

Politics as a term means nothing more than “Social Power”.

The users of the term “idpol” are expressly saying that they dont want some peoples identities in power. Even though they won't say it in mixed company, the Identities they want excluded is explicitly clear. By using that term they are saying that allowing power to consider any outsider, its taken away from the “right” purpose of politics. Politics is for Rich White Cis Hetro Men of a Select heritage, bloodline, cast, and family. The longer they are allowed to go the more they would like to exclude from their permitted list.
In politics, we call that thinking “fascism”, although its usually not openly called that until violence and force are used to support the ideas. 

If someone starts using that term in any group you’re in, I advise: Quickly and clearly have them define exactly who, exactly what identities they are saying is muddying up their pure white politics. Don’t let them try and say “it means politics of personal identity”, because, All politics is of personal identity. Which exactly are the Identities they think are not valid enough to be part of the political discussion. Because these people want to try and get you to agree with their bigotry and hate, but they know if they say it outright, most people will not even entertain their ideas, so they want to sneak it in they want to get you to agree with all their hate in broad “Other People” before they can then try and slowly introduce the identities they include in that group.
I won't allow any other topic to continue until the offender will openly retract their hate words. The same way I respond when someone drops any other slur into conversation. We now live in a time where you need to be Anti-racist. Just being “non-racist” isn't enough anymore. When you allow bigotry to go unchallenged, you are supporting those who use that racism to further harm others. The Personal Is Political, and personal attacks are political moves. The term “idpol” is a bigoted and racist slur hidden in conversational tones. But just like calling “liquorice kids” “N***er babies” is racist, and you should call out anyone who tries to act like its ok. Because letting people say it is agreeing that you don't care about how it makes black people feel, you're agreeing  they don't matter.

things that didn't happen; a 2022 barely-fiction horror.

 I wrote a short story I call: Dave Checks Up. 

Just remember this started with things that didn't happen.  Namely this post:

Later that day the police showed up to question her for injecting something into someone without their consent, the victim had told the police that after the initial assault, She and her son  were scared of what else the violent criminal would do. So she ate the almond as told even though she feared the reaction. It would be better that harm happen to her than her son. As soon as she was able to get them both away, she dug out her Epi-pen and injected herself. Then had her son help get her to the emergency room. Once the doctors had her stabilized, she called the police. And now as she sits under observation, waiting for the doctors to say she can be discharged, she weeps… as she tries to figure out a way to find $1300.00 for a replacement Epi-pen, she remembered The $100 she used to bribe the assailant to let her go, was almost her entire budget for this week's groceries. At hte time it made sece to do anything to distract the crazed woman from also injecting and force feeding the deadly nuts to her son. But now, now she had to still keep life going for her and him.

…maybe if she lied about her name she could double up on giving blood. She thought about the cost for a return trip to take a bus the next county over, would she even get enough to make it worthwhile? What if they could tell she'd already given and refused her? how would she pay to get back home?

"A mother must feed her child" she thought, as the guilt she’d been raised by attacked her still recovering mind and body. "What kind of a mother doesn't have an Epi-pen for her child's allergies?"

Frantically, through her tears, her eyes darted around the room looking for something, anything she could steal and sell to fund a replacement shot. But obviously the clinic knew better than to leave anything of value not bolted down. she looked in to the cold mirror bolted to the wall, should she prostitute herself? "Could I even? ... Who would ever pay anything for my ugl..." the door opening cut off her self talk.

"Good News,” a cheery, young, 20 something, nurse whos hairstyle looked to have cost at least a couple hundred dollars, chimed into the room, “the doctor said you can leave now. She smiled as though she had done something great and was awaiting approval, or even applause.

"GOOD FUCKING NEWS? What's good about it? Whats GOOD about Any-fucking-thing?!" she almost screamed, wanting only for this child to see her as an actual person. A real human who had real problems, someone who didn't know how she was going to keep her son fed until next Fridays paycheck. ... But no, that would only cause her to see a "crazy lady", and maybe even lead to a call and social services looking into her parenting. So instead, she squeaked out a small "Oh thank you, sweetie" hoping her voice sounded endearing and not like the old forest witch she felt like. No, even an old forest witch would be better. At least then she wouldn't be desperately in need of $1300.00 for an Epi-pen, and she could feed her child with food foraged from around her house.

It was almost exactly at this time, 13 hours after that evil woman injected her, that Dave, a rookie police officer, only 7 months on the job, finished typing up the file and checking the box that said "not enough evidence or likelihood of conviction to warrant further investigation."

ADHD, Meds Time

 The adhd meds didnt change me, they simply allow me to conceptualize that the next moment will happen and the previous one did. They also gave me a bit of a buffer between any stimuli and response so I can make an executive choice on my response. 

It's funny to me now when I read all these hippy posts about trying to live in the moment. As someone who wasn't diagnosed and treated until my mid 30’s I can tell you that “living in the now” isn't a good idea for anyone who understands that humans need social interactions and society to survive. 

Living in the now is not conducive to healthy relationships. Someone briefly blocking your view of whatever, and you respond “I hope everything you love dies slowly screaming in your arms”, and then in the same breath, “oh could you pass me a drink?”. The other person not living in the now, is still trying to process your words, and figure out what they possibly could have done to elicit such a response, and carrying with them the emotions (that you very much wanted them to to feel a fraction of a second before); Well lets just say they aren't feeling very charitable to do you the favor of passing you a drink. And now you're upset at what an ass they are because you're still thirsty and, being unable to really conceptualize time, its been an eternity that your body has been screaming out in thirst. And all during the eons you've dehydrated and parched as sand fills your mouth and throat, your “friend” is droning on about “rude words” and how “insensitive” you are.  Insensitive? INSENSITIVE? IN-fuckin-SENSITIVE? I’m insensitive? While you're literally denying a dying man, life giving refreshment, because you’re so hung up on some feeling (that I very much wanted you to have decades ago now). I find a last drop in my cup, take a sip, and now that I've never been thirsty before, I can see that in your current mood, you'll not be a source of comfort for me. Your inability to get your emotions under control is not a problem I’m equipped to solve. I wonder if i should tell you this before I just leave and make space for someone who can help, Or just do the leaving part. I cant remember what i chose as im not there any more, i'm simply moving through a room wondering why its so hard to make friends.
It must be that i can't do small talk, I've read books trying to develop that skill, but they dont help. You see, because I don't really grasp the next moment will happen, the slightest bit of boredom small talk causes, is my forever existence while its happening. Galaxies are formed and die, all the while my brain is screaming for anything to break the monotony as a drowning mans body longs for air. 

And you've caused this. For that I hope you develop that flesh eating disease inside your butt-hole, and then one morning while you're wiping away your morning crap, the paper brakes through the last barrier and all your intestines start to unravel out of you into the turd and piss filled water, and you would scream, but some tissue is still attached to your diaphragm and so you are unable to actually breath, and silently you flail about, hitting the flusher and your insides are pulled down harder as they are sucked out into the sewers. Your body isn't found for months as the disease devours whats left of our flesh. After months your landlord that you pay half of the wages you labor for, finally notices your relatively insignificant input in to their life and has someone check on you, there is no obituary, or tombstone as your entire existence, was so meaningless to others that your name is forgotten and so the person in charge of cleaning your ashes out of the furnace, marks the box, Elinor Rigby. Thinking to himself that even fictional forgotten person Rigby is more memorable than you were. … “what? Oh sorry , my name is scott…”...(damn why do i never remember names)... “How are you enjoying the party, Elinor…sorry I suck ant names….” 

All of this happens as the cosmic dance of universes being born and falling to entropy happens again and again…. So No, Alanis Morissette, I did not think about my bills, my ex, my deadlines or when I think I'm going to die… I wish I could have distracted myself from this eternity with any of those pedestrian thoughts. 

Now that I’m medicated I'm able to understand the next moment will probably happen, so as my mind experiences the heat death of several universes, I’m able to make the decision to simply ask you to pass a drink, and not even acknowledge that you blocked my sight for a brief second. Now I save the Flesh-eating-disease-wish, for people who do much more than say “umm” a couple of times while initiating small talk. You know, for people who say shit like “ADHD is just because you lack discipline” or “Jordan Peterson makes some valid points”. I save it for people that truly deserve to feel such things! lol 

Eons still pass when I have nothing to entice my mind, it's just during those eons, I can now imagine a next second, and so I can choose to respond in a manner that will make that next moment suck a little less, rather than simply living in this moment. I still suck at names though, it's been forever since the other person said it. It's been decades for me and the only interaction we've had so far was you saying your name, so maybe it's understandable I don't remember it. We should tell each other our names at the end of the interactions, so we can tie it to something we've actually experienced, when I have some idea of how important or meaningless our interaction was, and can give your name some heft. 

… what was I trying to say with this post again?

I love you Dad

 Ray is dead

I waited a long time for him to reach out to me, even though I was aware that I could reach out to him. I told myself that “he's the parent, it's his responsibility to initiate”. I know it was largely an excuse, so I wouldn't need to make the effort to start an awkward situation. But maybe I was also right, I don't know. I don't know if it matters figuring out who was right. I do know that figuring out if it matters, doesn't matter right now. 

My dad wasn't very good at being a dad to me. He tried to build a relationship when I was teenager and young adult. At that time I was a little too full of hate and it was hard for him. THe hate wasn't for or about him, it was at the whole world at the time. I don’t know if he ever knew that. By the time I was old enough to have a handle on my hate, we were strangers. 

I feel like I need to clear up some of the feelings around the phrase “good at being a dad”. 

Ray had some demons. They lashed at him a lot during life. I feel like a lot of his effort was used up just trying to keep those at bay. He’d miss birthdays and appointments, but you had to just know, that wasn't about you, it was about him. He had a humongous heart. That was undeniable, and if you were ever witness to him in a situation where he could show you, it was undeniable. If you ever saw him with his pets, where he could just be open, he’d relish in times where he could just dump his affections. I remember one day when he was at our house, where our grouchy old cat jumped on his lap. The absolute joy on dad's face while he pet her trying to prove he could last longer giving pets, than she could last taking them. I don't know who won, as teenage me got bored and left the room. 

When his demons were quiet that's who he was. Just someone who wanted to love. 

I remember one time while hanging in the bar, a fight broke out between people he knew. Quickly and with an ease that should have been impossible for anyone as far into the bottle as we were that night. It was like he just appeared right beside them. I don't know what he said, but in what seemed like no time, he was back at our table explaining to me how it was just a squabble, and no need to think anything important about either person involved. I remember feeling some of that teen arrogance, as i thought “duh ,dad, I'm like 19 I don't know why you think I need to hear this”. But it seemed it was important to him to tell me. 

We spent hours upon hours together in Shawnessy. I don't know that we ever talked much, but I remember it almost always felt effortless, as if nothing in the world mattered and the things that did, couldn't find us there.

It didn't take too much of my adult life, and I quickly understood that missed appointments, birthdays, and such were not out of malice to me. In fact I’m now pretty convinced he didn't have any malice in him. The few times I saw anger, it was always out of trying to hide having his feelings hurt. 

When I understood his acts weren’t  out of malice, but usually due to him losing one or more battles with one or more of his demons, I also saw something else. He had an amazing ability to make people love him. 

He wasn't good at a lot of things in life. The things he was good at and the things he was bad at seemed to be uniquely complimentary. He could sus-out a business opportunity and turn having absolutely nothing into a thriving company in a matter of months. He could also crash and burn, and be without anything within a week. But even at his lowest, he had that ability to make you love him, and he had friends that went way above and beyond to go help put him back together. 

I think some of his demons are related to how others perceive him. But when I grew some of his same demons, I knew from watching him, that real friends know your demons and still love you, so I never had to fight them as hard. So when I finally came out to myself, I never had the burden of trying to hide it. My dad had slain that particular demon for me. 

I remember one day as a teenager for some reason dad and I were standing in my dining room. Dad said to me “ I don't know if this will do anything or if this is what you need, but I love you kid” I remember staring at the stupid braided rope pattern on his stupid cowboy shirt, thinking “I don't know why he always has to make things awkward" as he hugged me. 

But he did know, he knew that's something a dad needs to do. Something a son needs to hear. That someday I would need to know that particular moment, happened. Today. 

So that after all these years of putting things off, now that we're out of time, I Do Know, Dad, and I love you too!  

human connection. The Addams Family, Star Trek and dealing with change

 Lets discuss immortality. Someone made a post asking: “The Addams daily lives in a graveyard, but are basically immortal, so what kills an Addams?”, and the answer was “ they leave when they are done”.

First I want to mention Q from Star Trek TNG. There is an episode where Q is trying to explain his existence, standing in an old dusty clearing, he explains that living forever and being able to do anything can be boring. How he even became the scarecrow hanging outside doing nothing for centuries, just to experience it. Leaving aside the rather obvious God metaphor the TNG writer was trying to make, and seriously consider what immortality would be like. 

For the last couple hundred years humanity has changed what being alive is like in very rapid ways. For thousands of years advancements in lifestyle were local, slow and permanent. But that's no longer the human experience. My grandfather told me he was able to remember the first time he even saw a car. As a rancher he had to repair his own equipment often, so by the time I came along he knew motors inside and out. His entire life was surrounded by machines in a close way. During the time I lived there, the power lines finally came that far out of town, so I was able to experience the transition from using kerosene lamps as the primary lighting source, to using electricity as if it was nothing. The house had been wired for electricity so it has outlets and in-ceiling light fixtures. But prior to the power lines coming out, it needed to be powered by a diesel powered generator. Which was another machine he understood the workings of and made repairs to, but even with the farmers discounted fuel prices, it was expensive so we only ran it on the sabbath, the day of rest. It was a small luxury and a way to offer Grannie a bit more while deserved rest. What I’m trying to say is in a small way I was also able to experience some of the rapid progress of even the last century, and its extreme disruptions to everyday life. Growing up this way, it's natural that I would assume that immortality would be a blessing. That my time would be filled with constantly changing things, and always something new and exciting to learn and experience. 

But let's consider the experience of some eleventh century peasant. What would the prospect of immortality be to them? Labouring every day as their family dies around them for thousands of years isn't the same prospect at all. Sure they could probably look for ways to move into the aristocracy or noble class, and then at least there would be less monotonous labour. But monotony would be all they could expect out of the future. {the type of person that would be suited to surviving immortality then, wouldn't be the type of person that would be at all suited to surviving it now}.

Or put another way, Would Ann Rice’s Contemplative Louie or Thrill-Seeking Lestat, be more suited to eternal survival? (Using the character types from the later books, we are definitely in a Lestat era). 

Back To Q. In his existence, of being all powerful and immortal, he seeks novelty, he does everything he can to find something, Anything to fill his time. We get a sense of desperation from him, a need to do absolutely anything to find a new experience. There is an underlying feeling that even as he has a mastery over time, that time itself is his prison, that existence may be his true antagonist. {keeping in mind the current understanding of the heat-death of the universe, Q would then be aware that he will either be forever suspended in absolute nothingness, or he would have to also be spread out amongst it, essentially being the nothingness itself. None of the Star Treks from the Q era ever breach this subject though}. 

So Q is definitely the type of immortal that wouldn't be scared of periods of change, we see his character as one that would find the long expanses of time where change is slow and rare to be more a threat to him. His novelty-philic identity drives him through time. Where someone who would be comfortable being immortal during the long stretches of time of low change, the novelty-phobic, would be the type that would thrive. 

Currently there is a popular notion that our period of high change will continue indefinitely. But that seems unlikely, for if change is the only constant, then surely there must be changes in the rate of change? Or put simply, doesn't it seem likely that we will reach another plateau where life altering advancements become rare again. Our transition from hunter/gatherer, to villager/farmer was some high change, but we had literally thousands of years where the lifestyle of the average person changed little between then and the last couple hundred years. 

I want to take this back drop and return to the Addams family. One thing that sets them apart from most of our other stories of immortals, is they are a family. Not simply in individual. This would definitely help ease the tension between the novelty-philic and novelty-phobic. As they have the stability of their family group to offer support during times trying to any of them. 

We can see they have an old Victorian house, showing that they enjoy the comfort of predictability.

But they are as individuals some of the most open ones ever shown in common media. They judge no one, they are open to anyone, and welcome all who pass by into their house. The novelty they crave is through human interactions. The children are still immature and crave the experiences of pain and loss, while Gomez and Morticia are enthralled with the more nuanced experiences of love and sexual lust. Gomez with his slightly more contemporary look, shows that he enjoys much of the progressive changing world. While Morticia, is content to spend her days in the conservatory, tending to her plants. This leads me to believe that the primary driving force for each of the Addams is to experience all the internal and emotional experiences of the human condition. Their immortality is nothing more than a tool to help them find more experiences. They don't seek distraction like Q, because being alive isn't a chore to them. In fact they are quite immune to being distracted. What they seem to intuitively be able to ignore, are mostly the things we generally focus on. We see style of clothing, the markers of wealth and poverty, flesh markers of beauty and ugliness, even markers of the passing of time and the temporariness of life. And all of these things the Addams seem oblivious to. They see only other people who by interacting with, they may experience something new, or exciting. Something real.

And in this day where everywhere we look we see the faking of authenticity as a means to convince us that their distraction can give us something “real”, the Addams have a clear message to us. That, what we should fill our time with, is others. Their immortality and wealth remove the need that drives much of our daily lives. Who would you be if those concerns were removed. Truly removed so you weren't shaped by the things shaped by them. “Money can't buy happiness” is a quote only truly believed by those with enough money that trying to survive in its absence isn’t something they can even grasp. 

I hope our current time of technological advancement will continue at least until our need for money as a tool to deal with scarcity is gone. And until our lives are long enough to feel long enough to us and those we leave behind. 

But to survive, and to thrive in such a reality, we will need to lose our need for distraction that we hide as novelty, and our need for predictability that we disguise as stability. We will need to become disconnected with the world and the zeitgeist, and become more connected with each other and experiencing the now. 

marx was wrong. we are literally lost to time, and the next dark age.

 Some ideas on the drawing dark.

Over the years of human history, we see periods of time where information is stored in systems of raising complexity, but along with each rise comes a rise in precariousness. We have cave paintings, that took a long time, were low resolution images and held very limited data, and very limited portability. We see increases in the fidelity of images when we get to optery, then the great paintings then to film cameras and now to digital. The increase of information stored in each step is accompanied by a decrease in permanence and a proliferation of content. Now in our digital age we have high resolution images that not only hold more information than the human eye can discern, but also can hide geo-tags and timestamps. But they are stored on media that will not last. Your great grandchild will never see any of your selfies, as the hard drives, memory sticks and cloud storage will all degrade. While kodak images from the 70’s and 80’s will still remain, but those two will degrade long before the pigments in the mona-lisa do. 

We are diditising all our information, but we are simultaneously destroying bulky hard media. And the precariousness is more than you may think at first blush. I currently only intend to post these words online. Never to be printed by ink onto paper. Their only chance at long term survival being that the company that hosts the site continues to think its profitable to continue to host that page for me.  Even as they do, solar flares and the background radiation of the universe can flip the little ones and zeros at random making whatever system is trying to access them lose the pointer to the next letter in the series. Baring that i must rely on the company hosting it not experiencing any economic shocks, byouts by another company who would want to change or discontinue the service, and although Google and Facebook seem like interminable forces right now, there was a time when ask jeeves, yahoo, myspace, aol all felt the same, as did the immense reach of kodak and polaroid years before. Nothing lasts forever, “stange with eons even  microsoft will die”. 

And as our digital information is only selected to continue based on its current profitability, we are definitely living in a time that will be lost. The only question i have is will it be lost as irrelevant in a continuing digital economy, or if the age we live in, if our information becomes a dark age due the the collapse of that digital economy first. Either way, i see a time when a shock ether ecological, or economic, will have all the knowledge we are creating be lost. 

Its happened in history several time in the past. We don’t know the reason behind the collapse of the mesopotamia civilisation and the loss of information it accompanied. We have theories many competing ones but they all seem to suffer from the same lack of evidence to give us any reasonable certainty. 

So now that I’ve set the stage for our coming dark age, and how all our lives will be lost into it. let me give you one reason ive recently thought of that might make it seem a little less dire. 

Marx believed that the economic system would inevitably lead to workers understanding that all economic value is created by the labor of the working class and that the owning class provides nothing but to usurp that value living off the workers like a parasite. Writing in 1867, it may have seemed inevitable. But now that we are living in situations starting to resemble “late stage capitalism” as marx predicted, what we see is that owners are becoming able to continually make the labor of workers less important in their systems. And instead of worker class consciousness, we are seeing that workers are being forced to compete the ever shrinking tasks we are suited for. The pessimist in me is starting to think that the class war will be won by capital long before the workers are aware a war is even coming. We are moving towards a time where the owners with their wealth will be so rich and isolated that we will become the neo-peasant with no loards, only bosses, banks, and contracts to keep us enslaved. 

How will the coming dark age interplay with this, will it wipe out the information of a time where we once wanted to strive for individuals to be free, and sought higher ideals (Even as we have been wholly inadequate at having those ideals materialized for most)? Will it be a technologically advanced, but stagnating society? (stagnating due to the only innovations being implemented are ones that could promote next quarter profits, and stagnating due to us returning to our history where only the aristocrat class would have the time and resources to devote to innovation, while millions and millions of Einsteinin minds live entire lives without access to information or to a voice for their knowledge to be spread with.)

Or will the collapse be one of population contraction, accompanied by technological contractions, as the previous dark ages did. We wont have the alexandria library to worry about burning, as all human thought and advancement unfortunate enough to not be deemed worthy of printing on paper will vanish as if it never existed at all. 

For simplicity, lets use the highly unlikely, common zombie apocalypse trope… February of 2023 (14 months in the future as of time of writing) never arrives, as between now and then, the zombies come and kill off 99% of the world population. And then for whatever reason the zombie virus goes extinct. That would still leave 78 million people on the planet, but we would be far apart, wed be focused on trying to produce for our basic needs again. We wouldn't have the resources nor the time to repair the underwater cable giving us internet and phone connectivity between the continents. Its unlikely we’d be able to maintain a reliable power grid, and the power we would generate wouldn't be devoted to maintaining googles servers. 

Knowing that most people who were experts in anything would be gone, once we were able to produce enough food and shelter to allow for leisure time, what information could we find to help us recreate the mechanical advantages humanity held in the past? If your town still has a library, it's likely that their technical books are from the 1980’s. Any surviving university libraries or book stores may give us more current information, but how much of that requires previous knowledges that were assumed knowledge for entering students, or were to be taught buy the professors (whose notes are lost to the digital realm). All of this is to say that the digital lives we are creating, all cutting edge knowledge won’t be available for rediscovery by someone booting up an old laptop. (the laptops won't boot up as the information on the hard drive will have been degraded). As were about half way through (what I assume will be a 30 month pandemic), its interesting to think about how much of our electronic information couldn't survive only a few years of inattention. 

Anyways to my tiny thin glimmer of a silver lining. The last dark age was kicked off by a collapse of the power systems that were entranced before, and the ending of the dark age was again accompanied by the collapse of the entrenched power systems. So as I don't see the international proletariat rising up to grant liberty to the masses, my only real hope is that the coming dark will remove our current oppressors, and the next renaissance is kicked off by someone finding egalitarian writings. Either way I’ll probably be dead, and everything ive ever said of value will be lost never to be discovered or known (assuming something I’ll contribute will be valuable lol), and even the lives im able to have a positive effect on now, will be from a timeline never to be known.

the price of ADHD pills

I don’t have a problem with having ADHD, YOU do!

All of the “problems” with my ADHD are because of Your responses to me:

YOU have a problem when you can’t hold my attention while trying to express yourself

YOU have a problem with me getting mad at YOUR rules

YOU are the one who claims to be scared any time I’m happy and loud

YOU fire me

YOU kick me out

YOU decide to argue with me

YOU refuse to accept that while I may think different, it does not mean I think wrong.

Now I understand the economics that its less complicated for me to take a pill every day rather than you collectively getting your heads out of your asses. So I’ll take my pills and slow my thoughts, dumb myself down, because you can’t speed your mind up.  
but what I refuse to accept is that fact that its right, that I need to be spending $300 a month on that medication to solve YOU. To solve YOUR responses to my life.

Really Shouldn’t YOU be paying for the pills though? Seriously!

in defence of liberal, knowing, A liberal will get you killed!

A liberal will get you killed!
A prof of mine started a course with this statement. And although he was absolutely correct, I still defend liberal as correct.

Of all the traits that can be ascribed to the term liberal, the one thing that must be for a person to be a liberal is a belief in “human rights”. That there is some intrinsic , right, truth, or justice, that stands above mans laws. In this way the criticism that “liberals have a new religion” is not all wrong. As having a “truth” that stands above mans law, has as its most close parallel those that hold a “religious truth”.
In this way the US constitution, and its affirmation that its “self evident that all men were created equal” can be seen as a pure liberal statement.
The thing is because we do actually believe that there is a “right” above mans laws, liberals will not respect mans law as the final decider.
For the “right to life” side, they actually consider a blastocyst, or an embryo, as a human. Then as liberal thinkers, they have no choice but to intervene or fail to conform to mans law. They really do need to defend the rights of those humans. So even as its currently the “political right” that is against abortion, their fight is a liberal one. The only separator for “the left” is that currently the left doesn't consider the embryo as human life.

So now to why will a liberal get you killed. While because we believe that human rights are above mans law, we cant sit back in good conscience and allow, a government, nation, religion, culture, or group, to behave in a way that contravenes our ideas. In this way we invite the the calls of “thought police”, and all the parallels to  totalitarianism that's levelled against us.
The thing that the detractors don't seem to understand is that to a real liberal, the only real judgment we  consider valid is, if in the face of a wrong are you a coward or a responder.
So while “the right” by definition are concerned with stability and maintaining the status quo,  are not only willing but want nothing more than,  to live and be left alone. Its us, the liberal who insists on interfering with others.

In order to be true to our beliefs, its us, the liberal, that has to force a change. We are the ones who need to invade another country, we are the ones who cant abide by anothers religion or heritage, when we see a wrong. And its this imperative to interfere that will get you killed. (Because others hate being interfered with).

Thing is the writer of this does believe in human rights. I will admit that we occasionally have “misunderstandings” , or as outsiders would say, “wrong ideas”. I look back in horror and realize it was  ‘liberals’ who thought we needed to introduce the “savage” to our (at the time) “truth” of Catholicism. And now we feel the moral imperative to introduce peoples in the same area of our scepticism.

But as a liberal I do believe that there is  truth above mans law. I try to temper my actions with the knowledge that, all humanities, (let alone my), logic is far from answers on most things. Because of that I try and keep my intrusions into others lives at a minimum. But I have to respond in some way. As a liberal I have to either accept myself a coward or take an action. I do have sympathy for all those who are being “put out” by our actions. They don't really care about, gays, trans, hats worn by religious follows, or 99% of the things that us liberals want to fight about. It must feel shitty to be told your grammar is suddenly wrong, or that people are calling you “hateful” for doing the same thing you've always done.
Just like the other side of the political spectrum we have our fair share of emotionals and gut thinkers. For all liberals, I’d like to apologize to anyone who was shit on by a non-thinker. Instead of saying “Hay that term is considered an insult now”, I’ve seen liberals act like you are the actual haters, and they have forgot (never really spent the thinking time to understand), that we are trying to actually answer to our “higher truth”.
Anyway following a liberal may get you killed. But as a liberal, I choose that above cowardice in the face “evil” I must choose action.

Why the Burka-Ban wont stand.

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCoC) ruled that Sikhs were required to wear hard hats even though it was a restriction of their religious freedoms. (The seminal case on this is Canadian National Railway Co. v. Bhinder from 1985.) The Court applied a 3 part test to see if the employees religious freedoms could rightly be infringed. This test is where I think the Quebec law will eventually fall. Unfortunately that means that some provincial worker will need to be fired for wearing the Hijab, and she will also have to have enough money to raise a legal complaint (justice ain't cheep in Canada).

The test for a bone fide occupational requirement (BFOR), has 3 steps the rule must pass before its considered a justifiable infringement on religious freedoms: (adapted from the above mentioned hardhat case.)

Now looking to the “burka ban” lets go over the test.

• Step 1: Was the rule about hard hats or respiratory protection adopted for a purpose that is rationally connected to the job (safety)?

1) ScoC will have to rule if Quebec’s claim that seeing a face is rationally connected to the job of providing government service. If they can't this whole law fails right here. But if it passed we go to step 2.


• Step 2: Was the rule adopted in an honest and good faith belief that the standard is necessary for the fulfillment of that legitimate purpose (safety)?

2) Again the ScoC will have to decide if this law is adopted in “good faith” and if seeing a face is necessary for fulfilling that. Here each position will have to be considered. Does this face covering actually infringe on a bus drivers ability to do the job? How about the passenger? How about a call centre worker? Does not showing my face actually infringe on my ability to take a payment for a ticket? Lets say somehow the law passes this step as well, then we go continue on.



• Step 3: Was the standard reasonably necessary to accomplish that legitimate purpose? Can the employer accommodate individual employees without imposing undue hardship upon the employer?

3) The second part of Step 3 is going to be virtually impossible for Quebec to get passed. This “Duty to accommodate” clause is a big part of what makes Canada an "inclusive" nation. Quebec will have to show that it causes an “undue hardship” on them to accommodate a worker to wear a hijab. And that there is not a solution that can be easily implemented that meats both parties needs. For instance if they claim it is a security concern, can the issue be solved by requiring the lady to lift the veil and show her face briefly and privately on her way in to the facility? Or a whole host of other workarounds for each job. And I cant see How the Quebec government is going to be able to get this passed.

Keep in mind RCMP officers can wear the hijab, its going to be really hard for Quebec to argue that a kiosk worker cant do her job wearing the same thing. 

Now a lot of the concerns about allowing the hijab boil down to a few actually irrelevant arguments. 

* "If we cant see the face a criminal can get away"

This law only has bearing on those receiving and giving government services. So if you think a bank robber is going to stop and fill out a healthcare form on his way home you may have a point. But I think we can see that's not really connected to this law. 

* "I cant wear a hoodie or sunglasses in the liquor store"

While some places that sell alcohol are private stores and make up their own rules, those are not Laws. Agreed that in Quebec hard alcohol is sold in government stores though. Here we see another absurd part of the law. While they could say that the customer must show their face to match their ID, this is not what the law says, it says both the customer and the worker must show their face. And as the push of my argument is that the law wont stand because of its demand that the employees show their face, which has nothing to do with the customer proving their age.
*"we have other laws saying you cant be naked in public, how is this different?"

Again here we have a issue with the degree of the laws scope. The Indecent exposure laws, have been continually challenged to now women can walk around topless in much of Canada and it's likely that provinces that have not had the law challenged will either follow suit or simply refuse to lay charges. but again this is not related to the work aspect of the law. The "dress code" interpretation is just as open to religious freedom laws as any other part of the law, 

* "The government need to be non-religious"
This is actually the argument Quebec is using to put the law into place. The mistake is that they are equating non-religious with anti-religious. The government needs to pass laws that apply to all citizens, it cannot promote or discriminate based on religious beliefs.  Thats a Non-Religious stance. But by refusing to allow its workers to adhere to their religious beliefs while at work they are taking an Anti-religious stance. The claim that seeing a government worker wearing a religious item will make the average citizen falsely believe that the government is an agent of that religion is deeply condescending. 

NOTE: Its been pointed out to me that I have used "Burka", and "Hijab" interchangeably  and they are in fact different.   The RCMP currently only allow the Hijab which does not cover the face.
I fell the rest of the argument still stands, if you correct my other uses of Hijab to the Burka I was thinking of. (Thanks Reese) 

Sources:

National Post Quebec passes bill banning niqab, burka while receiving public services
CBC News RCMP allows Muslim women Mounties to wear hijab
Canadian Occupational Health and safety magazine /legal Clash of the titans

I dont understand Transgender

Ok I may be on the wrong side of history here. And am open to evolving my opinion if someone explains to me the error in my thinking.

It was only Like 2 years ago that “progressives” were touting the ideas that we should not force Gender Roles on children. “Let them play how they want to.” was the basic idea. It stemmed form the idea that as we move to actual equality between the sexes, little boys and girls, should be allowed to peruse whatever interested them. If little boys enjoy nurturing games with dolls, and little girls like construction games with Tonka Trucks, So be it. It didn't mean they were gay or “different”.

Over all Gender Equality seems to be a march toward a non-gendered society. Women CEO’s and Stay at Home Dads, should not be noteworthy, but should be just as common place. I remember thinking that Maxim Magazine was just Vogue for men, and a step toward non-gendered society.

So I am absolutely blown away by the surge in transgender issues. Why are we even discussing transgender? Or Any gender? Why do we want to enforce gender roles? Dude in a dress, Girl in work boots? Who cares? Wear and do what makes you happy.

Now I want to be clear here. I am in no way talking about transsexuals. Just transgender. (Transsexual is basically a person who feels the Sex of their body is misaligned with themselves. Transgender on the other hand is the feeling that their Gender is misaligned) *I am aware these are over simplified definitions, and also intend no value judgment on the term misaligned.

Terms like Gender Fluid are being thrown around now. I can relate to some of the ideas covered under that banner. There was a stir recently about a couple that wear cloths out of the others closet and being on the cover a magazine. That to me seems legit. The couple seems to have an understanding of who they are. They seem to be saying “the clothes don’t make the man”, or woman as the case may be. To me the term "Gender Fluid" is a half way of going to Non-Gendered, but scared to give anything up.

It seems to me that the discussion of transgender has eclipsed the discussion of gender roles. Now I’m not against treating people with respect, and giving equal rights to anyone. I’m just not seeing on how enforcing Gender Roles, is progress.

There was a time that the societal gender roles stated that women could be nurses, and men could be doctors. As women went through med school and men started taking nursing jobs, The ideas we were promoting was that it didn’t matter if you held the Stethoscope or the Thermometer, your social role was defined by what you choose to do, not your sex. So why now are we trying to say that your choice to wear a dress or makeup should be a relevant societal decider?

Anyway, We went from Sexual equality, to the erosion of Gender roles, and I don’t understand why we now need to fight for the right to assert those gender roles. Should not Trans-gender men just be viewed as a logical step in the feminist fight for equality?

The whole point of this post is, I don’t understand whats happening, not to “push back” against a movement. I am someone who would prefer a non-gendered society. I can assert that I don’t care what gender signalling items and activities any person wants to take part in. I don’t care if those signalling items match the gender role society has typically assigned to your sex.

I do however Care if you are being discriminated against. Is not transgender discrimination, simply sexism? A person of the other sex would not be discriminated against in the same situation, so the basis of the discrimination is entirely sex based. I thought we had already decided that your dangley bits are to be irrelevant to your role in society.

If you have the time, Please let me know if I have something wrong. Or if there is a way we can get back to the idea of equality for ALL.

Thanks  

Here are 5 things to know to have a happy dating life

Parents please teach your children this.

I’ve spent the last few days across social media and I have to keep reiterating versions of this. Its saddening.

Look, you don’t “get someone to like you”. There are 4 or things to know to have a happy dating life:

1) Get hobbies and interests.

Like more than one, and at least a few that have to do with going to places other people are. Look its OK to be into fashion and enjoy consuming media. But that cant be your main focus. If your on a date and don’t have other interests to talk about, don’t be so surprised that the only people who want to go on a second date are the ones who will treat you like an object. Put down the Fashion Mag and literally pick any other magazine off the shelf. You may never learn how to perfectly wear (latest fashion item). But you will read about something to make you an interesting person.

If you often find yourself Bored, then you may be a boring person. Cultivate more interests.

Your boy-friend or girl-friend should be your friend. Now pop culture has done a number on girls. If you are to believe movies and TV shows, girls are interested in talking about Fashion, and boys. What is she then going to talk about with her boyfriend. If however she meets someone at an archery range, they have things to talk about.

2) Learn how to be wrong.

Now that you have started having all these hobbies and interests, you are probably developing opinions. You are wrong on some of them. Everyone has incorrect opinions sometimes. Learn how to decide what types of information will sway your opinion. Learn to accept being wrong, and to accept others being wrong. And NO saying “we’ll just agree to disagree” doesn’t count. Thats basically saying my mind is closed to the possibility I’m wrong, and I am not smart enough to find a way to explain it to you. That is not to say you have to fight every battle. You can for instance decide, I think your wrong on how to hang the toilet paper but don’t care enough about the issue to discuss it.

3) Own your word

How do you keep from looking wisshy-washy now that you’ve accepted that you can be wrong and are able to change your mind? By owning your word in every other way. Make a habit of not making promises. Because when you make a promise, you keep it. If you promise to wash someones car, and Christ returns, You have to tell Christ to put judgment day on hold, because you have things to do. If you promise to be at your nieces birthday, and 3 people call in sick to work, you have to tell your boss your going, even if that means loosing your job. Be the kind of person that will not break a promise ever, and therefore only promises very few things. Owning your word also means not lying. Don’t insinuate or imply what you don’t mean. Talk flatly and openly the truth. I know your Dog or Cat, knows when your sad, but the only real way humans can share the emotions and ideas the have inside is with words. If you think people are believing your lies, you won’t believe they understand you when you need them.

4) Take care of yourself.

Dress for the body you have, not the one you are working towards. You don’t have to look like a model. (Even the models I know, don’t look like “that” when going to the lake to hang out.) But you want to take care of yourself. We all have differing bodies, and that's OK. You just need to be clean and look like you care about yourself. The way you look signals others how to treat you, so make an effort to look presentable. You don’t need to be “dolled up” just to go hang out, but take the time to be clean and groomed. Taking a little time each day to take care of your body also help you feel good about yourself.

Place a premium on yourself, by holding yourself to a standard of at least 10% higher than everyone else.

5) Love your life.

You are, interesting, adaptable, honourable, and healthy. Its OK to be happy. Happy people attract others. When you see someone loving their live its a huge turn on. So love your life. Take the time and effort to work on problems that may arise, and plan for your future. This is your life and you are the only one who is ever going to be in control of it. So love it.

Will this all prevent you from ever having your heart broke? No, of course not. Will all the people you attract be worthy of you and be as honourable as you? No. But you will be in the drivers seat of your life. You will have people wanting to be near you and date you. And as a bonus all the time that others spend feeling bad about themselves trying to “get” this person, or attract that one, you have spent learning and trying new things, and keeping yourself interested.

It wont always be simple, but with every choice, you try and do what you would respect the most if someone else had to make the same choice. This way you become the kind of person you would respect, and that will attract the kind of people you would want to be with.