March 23, 2007 at 11:04 am (bizzare, feminism, sociology)

I think that we can all agree that the cultural phenomena of misogyny exists. At worst, one could explain it by saying that “women are generally evil and some people understand that they deserve to be scorned”. I don’t have much background in the subject beyond personal anecdotal observations, but from these I would hypothesise that misogyny occurs largely as an inverse function of sexual vulnerability in men. The sexual drive is one of the more powerful attitude shaping drives that men have. Someone made reference in another thread to how difficult it is to rehabilitate a man with a mental disorder that has been enforced by orgasm. For this reason, heterosexual men are in a sense, ‘at the mercy’ of women. It is in a person’s interest to fear and attempt to regulate or control critical and unpredictable elements of their environment. The more women are viewed as foreign, the more unpredictable they appear, the more impetus there is to fear them and attempt to control them. Through a more inclusive view of gender (we’re all different people, but we’re all pretty similar too), don’t we limit the fear, hate, and desire for power that characterise misogyny?

Any alternate theories and/or appropriate empirical data would be welcome.


Permalink 44 Comments

Men should develop the feminine side of their natures

March 23, 2007 at 11:02 am (bizzare, feminism)

Split brain experiments by Prof Roger Perry have shown distinct differences of perception between the two hemispheres of the brain. Surgical separations of the cortex have shown that the left brain controls the motor reflexes of the right side of the body and is mentally attracted to analytical perceptions and evaluations of realty. The right brain controls the left side motor reflexes and is more attracted to intuitive perceptions of reality.

Broadly speaking we can say that the left brain deals with the physical or visible aspects of reality, while the right brain is concerned with the metaphysical or emotive aspects of reality. In practice one half of our psyche demands hard evidence in order to determine action and the other half tends to rely more on intuitive “hunches” and feelings to guide action..

Obviously we are all a mix of both halves of the psyche, but generally speaking, males are predominantly left brain/analytically oriented and attracted to mechanics. Females are more right brain/intuitively oriented and attracted to the arts.

This is not s to say that males cannot be more intuitive than they generally are or females become more analytically orientated. With conscious effort and plenty of practice both male and female can evoke the less actives side of their brain and end up more holistically balanced in their approach to life.

For instance, men who practice right brain drills and exercises have found to their surprise that they can evoke stronger nurturing feelings for their children and deeper insights into their wives psyches than previously. (Of course many men have discovered their female/artistic side naturally, without the need to take extra exercises)

Women are generally more conscious than men of the dual nature of the psyche, for they have endless opportunities in dealing with the practical aspects of everyday life, not including their schooling years, exercising their analytical half. But they too, with more practice can become more mechanically orientated and more balanced than they already are.

I personally have been practicing right brain drills and exercises for the past thirty years, and have developed a dual brain educational course for children. If there is any interest in this subject, I will be happy to describe some of the surprising results and explain some of the more effective exercises that can help in furthering dual brain development.


As right brain drills end up with subjective results with no two indiviuals expeiencing exatly the same reactions, I can only describe my own. There has been objection from this administration in giving personal takes on any subject. This objection needs to be clarified should there be interest in more information.

Permalink 14 Comments

You are what you look like

March 23, 2007 at 11:00 am (bizzare)

Look at somebody’s face. Their every feature, the whole of their look. And try to think what they are like as a person before talking to them.
Chances are, they will turn out to act the way that they look. Their personality seems to mimic their appearance in some way.

People seem to act the way they think they look in the mirror. We are self conscious beings, and I believe when we look in the mirror we have some sort of inbuilt mechanism that sets up a certain set of behavioral characteristics to go along with ones look.

If you have big eyes, with that sort of hope and sparkle in them, that will give you a certain set of behavioral characteristics.
Likewise, if you have a masculine jaw structure that will give you yet another set of behavioral characteristics. And so on.
I think this can only develop as we are growing up into adults. As I don’t believe you can have a nose job and then you’ll start acting differently. No no no, it must happen just after the age of becoming self aware and develop until puberty.

Take the next week to notice this around you. I think you’ll find that I have a good point…

And going back to my statement, you can look at somebody and sort of know what they are like as a person.

Let me know what you guys think – but please don’t reply if you have not yet tried to see the patterns.

Permalink 16 Comments


March 21, 2007 at 3:25 pm (bizzare)

Permalink 46 Comments

Six Base Emotions

March 21, 2007 at 2:37 pm (bizzare)

I’ve heard the psychological theory that all emotions stem from six base emotions, being:

So, for example, despair would be a mix of Sadness and Fear. Jealousy might be a mix of Anger and Sadness.

However, I also read a conflicting minimalist view that there are but three base emotions:


So all emotions are lesser degrees of these. So anger would be a mix of terror and despair, and irritation an even milder mix.

In the first theory all emotions can be reduced to six base emotions. The six base emotions are stated in their mildest form, however in the second theory the three emotions are at their maximum amplification, and everything else is a milder version of these. The first theory strikes me as more plausible. Also, in both, there is only one positive emotion, (One and a half if you include positive surprises), this strikes me as odd considering the amount of postitive emotions one can experience.

Permalink 15 Comments

To my fans II

March 7, 2007 at 8:50 pm (bizzare, ethics, feminism, general philosophy, Interzis minorilor, literature, philosophy of the arts, politics/law/economy, Rasfrangeri, Raspunsuri, sex, Uncategorized)

I’m not gonna say this twice. This is a blog ment to allow you to express yourself. My posts are not relevant in what concerns MY personality, MY lifestyle, and MY beliefs. Do not, under any circumstance, equalise my posts with ME. And stop sending e-mail on my adress, unless you have something to say. Something relevant, I may add.

Thank you for your cooperation. Tschus!

Permalink Leave a Comment

The victim

March 6, 2007 at 8:21 pm (bizzare)

I am not using any ” what probability is employed here?” in the treatment of the question…I have seen some severe examples…enough to provoke a response …

Permalink 8 Comments

To my fans

March 5, 2007 at 8:01 pm (bizzare, ethics, feminism, general philosophy, Interzis minorilor, literature, philosophy of the arts, politics/law/economy, Rasfrangeri, Raspunsuri, sex, Uncategorized)

As you can see, i am a very, very, very understanding and patient laddie. I am not banning your comments although what you are posting is neither interesting, nor well written, not even original. however, if you will continue to write in this manner, i will delete every comment that doesn’t rise to my expectations. After all, this is not a “my sexual fantasy” forum.
Thank you, Sonia Rott.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Is pleasure the highest good?

March 3, 2007 at 1:04 pm (bizzare)

The paradox of hedonism: if one seeks happiness, one will never find it. is this true? Can one achieve happiness by pursuing it directly? I am inclined to think not. Happiness is, I think, something derived from the pursuit of other goals. More particularly, can the pursuit of pleasure lead to happiness?

Permalink 34 Comments

Welcome back

February 20, 2007 at 2:14 pm (bizzare, Interzis minorilor, Rasfrangeri, Raspunsuri, Uncategorized)

Thank you all for your patience. After numerous attempts we finally managed to create te blog. I will be moderating your comments and I am also assuming responsability for all you have to say. You will have complete freedom of speech.

I hope that you will concentrate on writing in an original manner and will not post any comments that do not belong to you.


Permalink 2 Comments