Sex and Violence

Through various avenues, the point has been made how often, in movies, the ratings commission seems to be more concerned with sex than with violence. Many point out how ridiculous this is, but I wonder, how much of society would agree with them. Many, I'm afraid.

But why? Why does sex bother people more than violence?

Simply because violence is more acceptable than sex.

But why? Why are we, as a society, more accepting of violence than sex? Or perhaps we should re-phrase; why are we more uptight about sex than violence?

Simply because this country was founded on violence by people who were sexually repressed and religiously uptight. By people who lived in fear and who used violence as a way to over come that fear.

After all, let's be honest, anger, as an emotion is easier than the intimacy that comes with sex.

Some of the Struggles of Being an Atheist

“Ah, mon cher, for anyone who is alone, without God and without a master, the weight of days is dreadful. Hence one must choose a master, God being out of style.” Albert Camus, The Fall

“In order to overcome his sense of inner emptiness and impotence, [man]...chooses an object onto whom he projects all his own human qualities: his love, intelligence, courage, etc. By submitting to this object, he feels in touch with his own qualities; he feels strong, wise, courageous and secure. To lose the object means the danger of losing himself.” Erich Fromm

Fear of Life: “...the fear of the reality of the intense focalization of natural wonder and power; the fear of being overwhelmed by the truth of the universe as it exists,..” Ernest Becker

Getting Older

I have found that the older I'm getting, the more radical my thinking has become, and I certainly no longer give a rat's ass about letting my thoughts be known.

Work has also become a huge boring mass of bullshit. I want to work somewhere that the company's culture is to never ending-ly push the envelope. Companies that believe in what they do to the point where they would never sacrifice quality for the bottom line.

Companies that I admire: Apple, Same Adams--these are product oriented companies--they love what they do, they love making great products--keep doing it and the business will follow. These are companies that push the envelope of what they do, always innovating, always striving to create the best, the greatest. I want to find a company like that and work there.

I'm tired of conservative companies with no vision, full of Dunning-Kruger people. And the sheer lack of accountability; but then, hey, there's none in our Federal government, why should there be anywhere else.

2011 Thoughts: Moving Forward

When I was still married I was pretty damn sure I'd never go back to NJ. The reasons where:

1) The place is too damn expensive

2) Been there, done that

3) Why go back, try something different

So, now it's been six months since I moved into this apartment. Six months to do some serious non-intentional thinking. And I must confess, the thought of heading back to NJ has taken root.

1) There's certainly no reason for me to stay in TX, of all places

2) Now closer to 50 than 40

3) It is what I know

4) I really miss the entire east coast

But, I have kids. Though my daughter heads off to college (please dear girl, look at Rutgers) in a about a year and a half, my son is only 12. Recently, he has expressed interest in moving to NJ-brought up by himself with no influence from me.

Perhaps, my exile won't last the next 7 years, but only 2---but what of his mother?

America's School Systems

Yet, another fucking national debate on schools in America.

And they still have it wrong...here's the jackass quote from the article:

"So, where do we start? With the basics [always back to some fucking basic, PE]. As President Obama has emphasized, the single most important factor determining whether students succeed in school is not the color of their skin or their ZIP code or even their parent's income--it is the quality of their teacher."

[by the way, if you don't think money fucking matters--you're dead wrong]

Here, what's the difference between these two questions:

Do teachers make a difference in childrens' lives?
Can a teacher make a difference in a child's life?

The answer to the first question is, no, and that is as it should be.
The answer to the second is, yes, it's possible.

Of course, we have to go back to actual question and take it more at face value. Let's read that one section again: "...whether students succeed in school..." [my emphasis].

Not succeed in life, but in school. Are those mutually exclusive? I think so. One isn't necessarily predicated on the other.

And of course the article goes on bring up, yet again, that immeasurable of immeasurables in the current public education system: performance. How do you measure a teacher's performance? Isn't it measured by the % of kids in their classes who pass the state mandated standardized tests? After all, why else have mandated standardized tests.

In the work force, most employees leave because of a boss not the company because their boss, basically, sucks at managing them. Now, there are a lot of shitty bosses and while that may determine whether you stay at the company or not, the boss won't determine if you are successful at what you do (politics aside and not using "moving up the ladder" as a measure of success).

All this being said, it doesn't mean that quality teachers aren't needed nor that our educational system needs changes. There are many things that can be done (not in the scope of this post--but go to your local bookstore and head to the Education section and you'll find all kinds of books by authors with all kinds of ideas on how to change it..we certainly are not short of ideas).

Now, I'm going to throw out an idea that I have not really fleshed out yet but I think we really need to re-think the purpose of our public education system. What exactly are we trying to achieve? A better work force? Better citizens? Again, are these mutually exclusive?

It's a great topic of conversation not lacking opinions, but seriously lacking an constructive movement. And the latest "national debate" will be like the others--a bunch of bullshit will be spewed and nothing constructive will be done--oh, I'm sure something will be done but I guarantee it won't be constructive.

Giving A Rat's Ass

My son's teachers' feedback is this:

While somehow he manages to pull good grades out of his ass, he does not do the work or put in the effort.

Now, this is an old problem...and I won't go into the long discussion on the various things his mother has attempted or thinks. But I know, I know exaclty what the problem is...and it's hereditary...he gets it honest, directly down from me and my father (not sure about his father etc...nor am I sure about my mother's side)--but I do know me and my father.

Basically, when we are not interested in something, we just don't give a rat's ass about it.

Neither stick nor carrot will change the behavior, nor adjusting his medication or changing it. I believe he suffers from:
The Jonah Syndrome (Maslow's)--go down to section VII

I believe this trait is hereditary, just as other personality traits can be (including, to give an example, the dislike of organized religion--got that one too--look it up if you don't believe me--you can find a reference to it in Judith Rich Harris' second book No Two Alike.)

But the question does remain and haunts my thoughts--how, how to get him not to suffer like I did growing up and continue to battle? How? Yes, how?

And so, that got me wondering about the Strengths Movement--I need to read the book, but perhaps this might help him. I don't know if I think it's a catch all for all kids but for some, there is value, plus I certainly don't see a down side. I will need to do some investigating.

It's Been Such A Long Time....

I do miss Brad Delp....but it's been a very, very long time since I even looked at this site let alone posted anything...not that it matters as I'm the only one reading it. Yet, it does represent an external "gathering" of an inner dialogue.

I'm pretty sure I now know why my writing has gone by the wayside...

I drink not from mere joy in wine nor to scoff at faith--no, only to forget myself for a moment, that only do I want of intoxication, that alone.
Omar Khayyam

Basically, I just got tired of thinking, even though it's not like you can just "shut it off", it doesn't work that way, but you can "muffle" it; hence no writing.

But then I started talking to this woman, a very intelligent woman and shit, she's got me thinking again. Went back to Becker's and Harris' books and well...here I am...posting for the first time in nearly a year....

The Logic of Everything Happens for A Reason

When people say they believe "everything happens for a reason", what they are NOT sayings is that there are things that happen for no reason. What they really mean when they say it, is that they believe that everything happens for a "divine" or "pre-ordained" reason. And typically, they mean it happens for a reason that, while perhaps not understood, is for a "good" reason. [For the non-divine, everything DOES happen for a reason because everything has a cause and effect.]

Now, if we follow that logic, then anything that happens is, ultimately, for the best, for "me" the believer.

I believe that life is a journey not a destination and, like many journeys, companion travelers come and go along the way. If I believed that "everything happens for a reason" then I would except the coming and going as "pre-ordained" and hence, best or for the betterment of me.

Sometime after my first marriage ended, I realized that we had both ended up in better places than when we started. The question, however, is, had we not come together, would we have ended up, in the same time frame, better or worse than where we started? There is, of course, no way to answer this. But if I believe that "everything happens for a reason" then I should assume that it was better for both of us to have come together and thus, in the end, better for us to have come apart as that also was for the best of both of us. This would mean, then, that my journey and her journey needed to intersect for a time in order to bring us to a better point. Once that point was reached, our paths then led in different directions and we parted to carry on with our own journeys.

So, should I have looked upon my divorce as a bad thing or a good thing? At the time, we saw it as a bad thing and only in hindsight is it perceived differently. But, perhaps I should view all future "negative" events as really positive in that they are there to move me further along my journey. And while the "going away" of people we care about seems to be sad, perhaps we should not look at it that way but should instead rejoice that we have had the time we did together. Certainly, nothing that we know of precludes the possibility of our meeting again sometime in the future--with the assumption that we either 1) are better than when we parted or 2) perhaps are in need of each other again.

Chicago

I've been listening to Chicago's Greatest Hits Vol I--you know "Saturday in the Park" and such and I just wonder why there's nothing like this going on in today's music. Hell, I don't even know if anyone is using horns in their rock let alone filling the void of this kind of great music.

Admittedly, I don't listen to the radio...the iPod has made that unnecessary so I can't say for sure there isn't anything out there, but I do peruse iTunes and can't seem to find anything.

Anyone know something I don't? (besides all that....)

It's been a while...

Yeah, I know...but I been Tweeting...