So, as I was sipping a growler from a local brew pub last night (The Yak & Yeti, awesome Indian/Nepalese food and home-brewed beer) I thought of something a little striking.
I have had a massive plethora of different beers this year. So, I thought I'd try to list them all. Now, I'm not including the varieties at the GABF because well... that's the point of the GABF. Further, GABF serves very small portions, which means the beer doesn't have time to settle on the palate over the course of say, a pint or two, and since you're drinking so many different beers, your palate tends to get corrupted. Yes, corrupted. Even after water.
So here's the list of what I drank, by brewery, in 2010. If there are no notes to follow, it's because it just wasn't worth much memory.
Abbey Brewing Oregon, US - A division of Port
Angel's Share - Burbon Aged Stout
Gift of the Magi - Oak Aged Golden Ale
Serpent Stout - Imperial Stout
Odell Brewing Company Ft. Collins, CO - 1 block from New Belgium!
IPA (on and off Nitrogen) - Self Explanatory
Red - Seasonal Dry Hopped Red
90 Shilling - Dry Hopped Scottish Style Ale
St. Lupulin - Extra Pale Ale
Easy Street Wheat - Hefeweizen
Town Pump Pail - The epitome of good shitty beer. It's some unknown variety of Ale.
Mountain Standard Reserve 2009 - "Deep Mahogany Ale"
Mountain Standard Double Black IPA 2010 - Darkly Malted IPA
India Barley Wine - Dry Hopped IPA style Barley Wine
Deconstruction Ale - 44% Golden Ale, 33% Oak Aged, 20% Burbon Barrel Aged, 3% Wine Barrel Aged
Woodcut No. 4 - Aged Double Marzen Lager
Hop Secret 393 - Scotch Ale brewed with a special breed of Hop that develops a maple taste as it warms.
Double Pilsner
New Belgium Ft. Collins, CO
Fat Tire - Classic Amber
Sunshine Wheat - Hefeweizen with Orange Peel and Coriander
Le Fleur Misseur - A Dry Hopped Golden wild fermented with Brettanomyces.
Sahti - A rye ale with Juniper
Biere De Mars - Barley, Oat and wheat malted pale ale, with lemon and again fermented with Brettanomyces.
Mighty Arrow - A Pale Ale with Honey
2 Below - Dry Hopped Amber (As a personal note, this beer is what fat tire was supposed to be.)
Hoptober - Golden Ale with 5 different hop varieties.
1554 - A Classic Belgian Black Ale
Ranger IPA - New Belgium's foray into the IPA sporting 3 World Class Colorado hop varieties; Simcoe, Cascade and Chinook hops.
Belgo IPA - A belgian take on the IPA, dry hopped then fermented with a Trappist yeast strain.
Rogue Oregon, US
Imperial IPA - Name says it all, a well aged IPA.
(I didn't like rogue much, if you didn't notice.)
Port Brewing Oregon, US
Anniversary Ale - Dry Hopped Imperial IPA
High Tide IPA - Fresh Hop IPA
Hop 15 - Carmel malted Double IPA
Avery Boulder, CO
duganA IPA - Colorado Hopped seasonal IPA
Joe's Pilsner - A classic pils brewed craft style
Stone Brewing - Escondido, CA
IPA - A dry hopped (chinook and target I believe) IPA
Pale Ale - A richly malted pale ale, of deep amber color.
Levitation Amber - A lighter take on the pale ale.
14th Anniversary Emperial IPA - Stone's dry hopped take on the imperial IPA.
Cali-Belgique IPA - A Belgian take on the IPA, fermented with Brettanomyces.
Ruination IPA - Carrying a record setting and immeasurable IBU levels thought in excess of 120+ IBU's. They really just don't know though. It's my favorite beer.
The Bastards:
Arrogant Bastard - The argued pinnacle of an even combination of hoppiness and maltiness.
Oak Aged Arrogant Bastard - AB... on oak.
Double Bastard - An "imperial" version of the Oak Aged Arrogant.
Lukcy Basartd - A culmination of the three previous bastards, mixed.
Vertical Epic(s): This year I drank the 090909 and 101010 - Having missed the 090909 last year. 09 was a stout of sorts, 10 was a golden ale brewed with three different GRAPE varieties (yes, grapes.)
The Sublimely Self-Rightous Pale Ale: A heavily hopped take on Arrogant Bastard.
Mikkeller Denmark, EU
Story: Mikkeller is a Danish brewing company, that ran a line of beers I followed directly. They released a series of IPA's that were American style IPA's brewed with a single hop variety. I was able to track down...
Simcoe
Cascade
Warrior
Tomahawk
Nelson Sauvin
I unfortunately could not find the Amarillo single hop.
Regardless, these five beers expanded my understanding of hops exponentially.
Russian River Oregon, US
Pliny the Elder - This may be the worlds greatest IPA to date. A multi-hop DIPA produced in small batches by RR. If you can get it, buy it, resell it on your local Craigslist at 100% mark up... or more. A local bar here in Denver occasionally has it on tap when they release a keg or two.
Two Brothers Brewing Warrenville, IL
Heavy Handed IPA - A seasonal release. Interestingly enough, I remember drinking the beer, but don't have a solid recollection of it's characteristics. Chicago was a busy time with many beers.
Cane & Ebel - This I DO remember, very distinctly. A dry hopped red ale, malted with rye and a touch of Thai cane sugar. This beer floored me. A slight creamy sweetness to offset the bitter of the dry hopping process. Quite possibly the best red I've ever had.
Hop Juice - An Imperial/Double IPA (Same thing I stick with what the brewer labelled) that carried distinct pine and citrus characteristics (likely from a combination of Cascade (or Citra) and Chinook Hops) and carmel malts.
Left Hand Brewing Longmont, CO
Polestar Pilsner - A very complex craft take on the typical Pilsner Lager. It's been a while since I've had it, I can't comment much on it's flavor.
Warrior IPA - A single-hop seasonal from Left Hand using only warrior hops, giving it a very unique citrus characteristic (almost that of a lime, compared to the grapefruit character in Cascade hops.) Carmelized malts are used to soften balance the bitter from high alpha hop varieties.
Milk Stout (on and off Nitrogen) - I'm not much of a stout guy, but the name comes from the use of natural sugars in milk in conjunction with darkly roasted malts. One of the better stouts in the world.
Great Divide Brewing Denver, CO
Titan IPA - A more piney IPA, very similar to the ranger, with a slightly darker malt, and no Cascade hops.
Fresh Hop Pale - This is a very "woody" beer. The hop variety has distinct pine characteristics, and the malt imparts a wooded flavor. A typical result of a fresh hop beer, but the standard by which all other fresh hops should be judged.
Samurai Rice Ale - An awesome session ale that imparts a slightly sweet rice character. Nice and light.
Hades Belgian Style Ale
Hoss Rye Lager
Hibernation Ale (Seasonal)
Hercules Double IPA
Rumble - Oak Aged IPA
Goose Island Chicago, IL
Matilda
312 - A solid Hefe.
Up Slope Brewing Boulder, CO
IPA
Pale Ale
Maui Brewing Hawaii, US
Big Swell IPA
Golden City Brewing Golden, CO
Evolution IPA - This is a genuine IPA. I mean GENUINE. The beer is nearly flat when it's opened, which is how traditional IPAs were served after a having sat on a boat during the trip from England to India. - It carries distinct Cascade and Simcoe Characteristics, which has a very fruity citrus character. Sad shame it's only available within about 1 mile of my house.
Clear Creek Pale Ale - A pale with a distinctly taste of grain - Clear and crisp for a pale.
The Legendary Red Ale - For those who don't know, GCB is the second largest brewery in Golden CO. Formerly owned in part by my old college Japanese professor, I first had this beer at Metro State in our Japanese class. I revisit it a few times a year. An all around good Red.
Elysian Brewing Washington, US
I just discovered these folks, who are now being bottled by their partner, New Belgium.
Jasmine IPA - I've said this is the best 4 dollar bomber you can buy. I'll stick to it. The character is that of a beer I'd expect to spend 12 or 13 bucks for. The Jasmine tends to sweeten the IPA, and in conjunction with a variety of hops I'm not entirely familiar with, the beer has the bitter freshness of an IPA, with a finish similar to a white wine without the sweetness.
Immortal IPA - After the Jasmine, it's hard to make this noteworthy.
BiFrost Winter Seasonal - A very unique take on a winter ale. Of note: It's color is similar to a hefeweizen, instead of a the more typical amber or darker ales. A light malt combined with earthy (likely Noble) hops make this a very unique winter seasonal. Worth a drink.
Meantime UK, EU
Meantime IPA
Bridgeport Bridgeport, OR
Hop Czar Imperial IPA
The Bridgeport IPA - A bottle conditioned IPA with a distinct pine flavor that finishes with a spicy taste similar to pepper. Sounds bad, it's very good. The spice likely imparted by the yeast left in the bottle for conditioning. Drink a Ruination first, and follow it with one of these.
Ska Brewing - Durango, CO
Nefarious Ten Pin Porter
Modus Hoperandi
Hoperation Ivy
True Blonde
Green Flash Brewing
The Greenflash IPA
Dogfish Head Brewing
60
90
120 Minute IPAs
Personal Note: Dogfish Beers are kinda like buying an expensive wine just because it's expensive. You may not like it. Hell, it might not even taste good, but it's expensive, so there's some sort of social "oh my gosh that MUST be good" aspect to it. I wasn't impressed with ANY of their IPA's, and many of their other beers, such as Jiahu or Pangaea are eastern-style beers. What I mean is that these beers aren't hopped, but rather flavored with fruits or herbs (such as the Jiahu.) While still legitimate beer, traditionally we think of beer as Barley, Yeast, Hops. If it wasn't blatantly obvious, I love hops. Ergo, I don't like Dogfish. /endrant
Lagunitas Brewing CA, US
Hop Stoopid
Deschutes Brewing Portland, OR
Hop Trip Fresh Hop IPA
Hop Henge IPA
Twilight Summer Ale
Inversion IPA
Obsidian Stout
Anderson Valley Anderson Valley, CA
Hop Ottin' IPA
Imperial IPA
Bear Republic CA, US
Racer 5 IPA
Kona Brewing Company HI, US
Longboard Lager
Fire Rock Pale Ale
Wailua Wheat
Ommegang Brewing
Hennepin - A spiced saison
Rare Vos
Redhook
Long Hammer IPA
Redhook Lager
Breckenridge Brewing Company Denver, CO
Remarkable Vanilla Porter
Lucky U IPA
Small Batch IPA
Misc:
McNair / Ballast Point / Stone Collaboration Session Ale
Moylan's Hopsickle DIPA
The Brewpub Section - Not officially bottled or sold outside the tap house.
The Yak & Yeti Arvada, CO
Himalayan IPA - GABF Winner. It's good but... I'm not sure who judges those things.
Namaste Pilsner - Probably the most noteworthy. A near hefeweizen taste, and coloration close to a Witbier
The Rock Bottom Brewery Denver, CO and other states
Falcon IPA - Traditional Standby, also had on the cask.
16th Street Wheat
Red Rocks Red
American Dream IPA
A Saison I can't remember the name of.
Blitzen Old Ale
Hop Bomb DIPA
Dry Dock Brewing Co Note: I put them here, because their beer is only sold in two places in Colorado. Aurora, CO
Paragon Apricot Blonde - An interesting thing, to fruit an otherwise ultra light beer.
USS Enterprise IPA - Pales in comparison to their DIPA
U-Boat Hefeweizen
Urca Vanilla Porter - I enjoy a vanilla porter every now and then.
Breakwater Pale Ale
HMS Bounty Old Ale
Seven Seas Double IPA - Up there along with Pliny, Ruination and a few others for a favorite IPA/DIPA. Clear use of simcoe and citra hops, and tastes almost like they used fresh hops, as it finishes with a very grainy/woody taste.
The Mahogany Ridge - Epic little brewpub in Steamboat Springs. Great food as well. Steamboat Springs, CO
Rodeo Rye
Lil' Lyddie's IPA
Alpenglow
The Wynkoop Denver, CO
Mile HIPA
Silverback Pale Ale
The Steamworks - Like Dry Dock - Here because they're not very well distributed. Durango, CO
The Conductor IPA - Another fruity IPA... small brewers love Simcoe hops, also very citrusy - Cascades or Citras. Very similar to Odell's IPA.
Spruce Goose - A beer brewed with spruce! Very unique, only worth a beer or two.
Third Eye PA - Their standard IPA
Carver Brewing Company Durango, CO
Cascade Canyon Cask IPA
Jack Rabbit Pale Ale
Well I think that's it. I'm actually pretty sure that's only the last six months of 2010, but I'm not sure that I can remember what came before. At any rate, the count is about 133 (123, if I miscounted) different beers this year. Now to wonder if I'm an alcoholic, or just a beer snob. Perhaps this is the first step - Admitting what you've done... or a matter of pride. I'm not really sure, I'm just amazed that I've had over 120 varieties of beer in one year. Colorado Rules.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Thursday, November 25, 2010
A note from 10/06/2010... Posted on Thanksgiving.
I write, inspired by the fact that I’m currently about 25,000 feet above the earth, on a plane.
“So what?” You ask. The point of this post is to say – “Stop and be a little awestruck at human beings and what we can do.” I’m currently flying to Chicago, a trip which will take about two hours. The distance is around 850 miles. I’m typing, not writing, on a portable device that can do math, run complex algorithms and logical arguments in a split second and is also playing music via tiny speakers in my ears. Think of your life, for a moment, two and a half centuries ago. You certainly wouldn’t fly, you wouldn’t drive. You would work your way to Chicago, on a month long trip on horseback. You’d run the risk of diphtheria, typhus, or just running out of food. Instead, I’ll be enjoying a coke in about 10 minutes, courtesy of these nice attendance whose job it is to fly around and serve me, the dude who paid for the seat. I have the opportunity to read a nice publication that came off an automated printing press, listen to some music through a device less than 1/1000th of the size of an orchestra, that was recorded on devices that control electronic pulses and wavelengths and interpret them into data that I ultimately hear on my ears. I imagine, and use this technology every day. I work on computers, build them, tear them apart, fix them. I use data networks to achieve goals and share information in a matter of time that once took days or weeks. I work at a place that, some few hundred years ago, was a day long trip just to GET there. It takes me 45 minutes. So the next time you pick up your phone and call your grandmother, buy something online, fly somewhere, or even just get in your car and drive, remember… Someone’s mind went into creating what you use. Everything, from your food, to your bed, your car, even your clothes. Without it, we’d be MUCH worse off.
11/25/2010 Note: Sometimes the most simplistic things we take for granted, are the most worthy of our gratitude.
“So what?” You ask. The point of this post is to say – “Stop and be a little awestruck at human beings and what we can do.” I’m currently flying to Chicago, a trip which will take about two hours. The distance is around 850 miles. I’m typing, not writing, on a portable device that can do math, run complex algorithms and logical arguments in a split second and is also playing music via tiny speakers in my ears. Think of your life, for a moment, two and a half centuries ago. You certainly wouldn’t fly, you wouldn’t drive. You would work your way to Chicago, on a month long trip on horseback. You’d run the risk of diphtheria, typhus, or just running out of food. Instead, I’ll be enjoying a coke in about 10 minutes, courtesy of these nice attendance whose job it is to fly around and serve me, the dude who paid for the seat. I have the opportunity to read a nice publication that came off an automated printing press, listen to some music through a device less than 1/1000th of the size of an orchestra, that was recorded on devices that control electronic pulses and wavelengths and interpret them into data that I ultimately hear on my ears. I imagine, and use this technology every day. I work on computers, build them, tear them apart, fix them. I use data networks to achieve goals and share information in a matter of time that once took days or weeks. I work at a place that, some few hundred years ago, was a day long trip just to GET there. It takes me 45 minutes. So the next time you pick up your phone and call your grandmother, buy something online, fly somewhere, or even just get in your car and drive, remember… Someone’s mind went into creating what you use. Everything, from your food, to your bed, your car, even your clothes. Without it, we’d be MUCH worse off.
11/25/2010 Note: Sometimes the most simplistic things we take for granted, are the most worthy of our gratitude.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Finding love... and what we forget in the process.
This post should be prefaced with a statement - I have had a beer or two, and while that may inhibit or obfuscate certain things I say, some level of clarity may be imparted in this post as well. Who. Knows.
So, my boy and I (Boy - a term I picked up from this same Jersey Shore star turned Death Metal bassist) were out tonight, with the goal of "finding a piece." I realize, it may sound crude, but hear me out. I've had this modus for quite some time, but perhaps never fully understood it. The goal was to go somewhere girls would be and, ostensibly, we would hit on and find our way home with said women. The end result is me sitting here typing this blog post so - I clearly failed in this endeavor. Yet the failure isn't a tarnish against my reputation or capacity for wooing the "fairer" sex. (I disagree with that colloquialism, in it's entirety, by the way. They're just as bad as men in many aspects. I'd argue worse, but that's likely motivated by being "on the outside looking in.")
But a great many thoughts occurred to me as I was driving home. I'll simplify and then extrapolate one statement.
Bar hopping for chicks is dumb. You can substitute "bar hopping" for "clubbing" too. Though there are some things that may result in some fun.
So, I say this not to demonize relationships that started this way or say anything negative about them, but more to say it's just not LIKELY to work. My reasons are this:
As I sat there at a bar tonight, surveying the ladies I thought to myself; "There's a lot of beautiful women here but... for some reason I'm just not motivated to go talk to them." I wondered why for some time, I didn't just walk over and attempt to strike up a conversation... It was a large amount of analyzing the lack of motivation to do so, given my own drive for a lady friend on multiple levels. After a moment the thought donned on me - Maybe it's more than just aesthetics that motivates us to begin with.
I thought back to every relationship I had been in, and everyone I had ever really been interested in and realized - Every girl I dated, I did so because I knew who they were before I even became interested in them in the first place. So, as I think about my rejection of barhopping, or cruising downtown to try and meet ladies, I can't help but think - I'd rather be going downtown WITH a girlfriend, than to try and find one. The experience is MUCH more enjoyable. I've even had a blast with "girlfriends" that I held no romantic interest in.
If trying to find a girlfriend isn't fun, then... I'd think something is missing. It's supposed to be fun to talk to a girl, not some anticipatory game played back and forth with a complete stranger.
So, to highlight a few thoughts;
1. Aesthetics isn't everything. - While I LOVE the effort women put into looking beautiful, and equate the joy I find in the sheer appearance of a distinctly feminine body with a fine beer or wine, exotic sports car and possible proof of the existence of God, it is not the whole scope. I would rather find a woman I can smile with, than one I can smile at.
2. Love is supposed to be fun. There are risks, certainly... there's always the threat of being shot down, but getting shot down by a total stranger is worse than someone you're at least partially interested in on more than an aesthetic basis.
3. I didn't mention this before but ladies... How many of you want to tell your children "your Dad and I met in a bar." Probably none of you. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I've always thought women wanted to be swept off their feet - how can I do that in a bar? I'm not saying it's not possible, just that it's probably not the best setting.
So, In the end - If you're going downtown, go with friends, go for a reason other than "maybe I'll meet a girl/guy." Go to have fun first, and let the rest fall into place.
As for me, I'm still waiting... and looking. Though in retrospect, perhaps this post was more for me, than it was anyone else... but this is the "INNER" workings of my mind so... perhaps some unintended reflection is a gimme.
So, my boy and I (Boy - a term I picked up from this same Jersey Shore star turned Death Metal bassist) were out tonight, with the goal of "finding a piece." I realize, it may sound crude, but hear me out. I've had this modus for quite some time, but perhaps never fully understood it. The goal was to go somewhere girls would be and, ostensibly, we would hit on and find our way home with said women. The end result is me sitting here typing this blog post so - I clearly failed in this endeavor. Yet the failure isn't a tarnish against my reputation or capacity for wooing the "fairer" sex. (I disagree with that colloquialism, in it's entirety, by the way. They're just as bad as men in many aspects. I'd argue worse, but that's likely motivated by being "on the outside looking in.")
But a great many thoughts occurred to me as I was driving home. I'll simplify and then extrapolate one statement.
Bar hopping for chicks is dumb. You can substitute "bar hopping" for "clubbing" too. Though there are some things that may result in some fun.
So, I say this not to demonize relationships that started this way or say anything negative about them, but more to say it's just not LIKELY to work. My reasons are this:
As I sat there at a bar tonight, surveying the ladies I thought to myself; "There's a lot of beautiful women here but... for some reason I'm just not motivated to go talk to them." I wondered why for some time, I didn't just walk over and attempt to strike up a conversation... It was a large amount of analyzing the lack of motivation to do so, given my own drive for a lady friend on multiple levels. After a moment the thought donned on me - Maybe it's more than just aesthetics that motivates us to begin with.
I thought back to every relationship I had been in, and everyone I had ever really been interested in and realized - Every girl I dated, I did so because I knew who they were before I even became interested in them in the first place. So, as I think about my rejection of barhopping, or cruising downtown to try and meet ladies, I can't help but think - I'd rather be going downtown WITH a girlfriend, than to try and find one. The experience is MUCH more enjoyable. I've even had a blast with "girlfriends" that I held no romantic interest in.
If trying to find a girlfriend isn't fun, then... I'd think something is missing. It's supposed to be fun to talk to a girl, not some anticipatory game played back and forth with a complete stranger.
So, to highlight a few thoughts;
1. Aesthetics isn't everything. - While I LOVE the effort women put into looking beautiful, and equate the joy I find in the sheer appearance of a distinctly feminine body with a fine beer or wine, exotic sports car and possible proof of the existence of God, it is not the whole scope. I would rather find a woman I can smile with, than one I can smile at.
2. Love is supposed to be fun. There are risks, certainly... there's always the threat of being shot down, but getting shot down by a total stranger is worse than someone you're at least partially interested in on more than an aesthetic basis.
3. I didn't mention this before but ladies... How many of you want to tell your children "your Dad and I met in a bar." Probably none of you. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I've always thought women wanted to be swept off their feet - how can I do that in a bar? I'm not saying it's not possible, just that it's probably not the best setting.
So, In the end - If you're going downtown, go with friends, go for a reason other than "maybe I'll meet a girl/guy." Go to have fun first, and let the rest fall into place.
As for me, I'm still waiting... and looking. Though in retrospect, perhaps this post was more for me, than it was anyone else... but this is the "INNER" workings of my mind so... perhaps some unintended reflection is a gimme.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Drawing Conclusions from Parthenogenesis.
Disclaimer: I am not a scientist.
I'm merely pining about logical possibilities. The joyous thing about being in a rational world, is that we can ponder the nature of reality without first-hand scientific knowledge... So long as we accept the possibility of being wrong. We can do that without rationality - look at most religions. Christians think the Earth has only been here about 5,000 years. Scientology is even more abstract in it's theory. When we examine reality from an objective perspective however, the scope of potential reality becomes a bit more tangible. Perhaps this is the feeling of being "Down to earth."
At anyrate...
While in the shower today, I was thinking about the Parthenogenesis (I'm not sure how it came up, but it worked it's way into my facebook status too.) To explain; Parthenogenesis is a means of reproduction without a same-species mate. Aphids are a great example. A single female aphid can reproduce with out ANY other contact among aphids... and not by that amoebic splitting of one's self either. They actually produce eggs that can hatch - no fertilization required. This is different from asexual animals, in that asexual animals may have a gender when born, but can become the opposite sex while they're alive. It usually happens when the species produces too many of one gender, and the animals need more of one gender or the other for reproduction's sake.
What humans do (I believe this is the right word, please correct me if I'm wrong) is Ephebogenesis. That is, we reproduce sexually, via one male and one female.
So what's my point in all this?
The purpose of Ephebogenesis is the genepool. An Aphid, which reproduces parthenogenetically, uses the same genetic material, same DNA to reproduce. It isn't until a male Aphid (which are rare) adds his DNA to the mix, that the genetic make up of the aphid ever changes.
So, genetic mutation doesn't occur in aphids without a male. Men carry the new genes to other women who produce offspring with their combined DNA. - That's how we work all the time.
I'm not really focusing on the scientific aspects of this, but more spitting out a few thoughts I had as a result...
So, first off, Parthenogenesis is an already existing NATURAL form of cloning. Same DNA, same EXACT creature as the one that gave birth to it.
Given this - while certain personality characteristics may be identical within the offspring, it's worth stating - The possibility of cloning a human and "resurrecting" the same person via cloning - Fundamentally impossible. You might create a person that looks the same, or similar and has the same genetic issues, the same disposition to certain diseases and the like but you can NEVER get the same actual person.
My point in all this, is to say... Sentience, personality and character are not programmed. There is no such thing as "genetic knowledge" of who you are. This also means we are born Tabula Rasa. Who you are, and who you become are a combination of conditioning, and choice. I say this, because were genetic make up the determinant in behavior, character, or personality, all these aphids would make the same turns, the same motions, land on the same leaves as their identical copies, all the time. In truth, they spread out across a plant as they consume it, and don't necessarily land all in the same little section of the plant... even though their genes are IDENTICAL to the one next to them.
Maybe I'm missing a fundamental element of meiosis, but when you have hundreds of offspring from a single mother, chances are at least ONE had the same exact development that another did.
I'm just sayin'.
Tonight's Brew:
Stone Collaboration Session Ale - Joint effort between Stone Brewing, Ballast Point and Kelsey McNair Brewing Companies.
The ever epic and awesome Odell Mountain Standard Reserve '09.
I'm merely pining about logical possibilities. The joyous thing about being in a rational world, is that we can ponder the nature of reality without first-hand scientific knowledge... So long as we accept the possibility of being wrong. We can do that without rationality - look at most religions. Christians think the Earth has only been here about 5,000 years. Scientology is even more abstract in it's theory. When we examine reality from an objective perspective however, the scope of potential reality becomes a bit more tangible. Perhaps this is the feeling of being "Down to earth."
At anyrate...
While in the shower today, I was thinking about the Parthenogenesis (I'm not sure how it came up, but it worked it's way into my facebook status too.) To explain; Parthenogenesis is a means of reproduction without a same-species mate. Aphids are a great example. A single female aphid can reproduce with out ANY other contact among aphids... and not by that amoebic splitting of one's self either. They actually produce eggs that can hatch - no fertilization required. This is different from asexual animals, in that asexual animals may have a gender when born, but can become the opposite sex while they're alive. It usually happens when the species produces too many of one gender, and the animals need more of one gender or the other for reproduction's sake.
What humans do (I believe this is the right word, please correct me if I'm wrong) is Ephebogenesis. That is, we reproduce sexually, via one male and one female.
So what's my point in all this?
The purpose of Ephebogenesis is the genepool. An Aphid, which reproduces parthenogenetically, uses the same genetic material, same DNA to reproduce. It isn't until a male Aphid (which are rare) adds his DNA to the mix, that the genetic make up of the aphid ever changes.
So, genetic mutation doesn't occur in aphids without a male. Men carry the new genes to other women who produce offspring with their combined DNA. - That's how we work all the time.
I'm not really focusing on the scientific aspects of this, but more spitting out a few thoughts I had as a result...
So, first off, Parthenogenesis is an already existing NATURAL form of cloning. Same DNA, same EXACT creature as the one that gave birth to it.
Given this - while certain personality characteristics may be identical within the offspring, it's worth stating - The possibility of cloning a human and "resurrecting" the same person via cloning - Fundamentally impossible. You might create a person that looks the same, or similar and has the same genetic issues, the same disposition to certain diseases and the like but you can NEVER get the same actual person.
My point in all this, is to say... Sentience, personality and character are not programmed. There is no such thing as "genetic knowledge" of who you are. This also means we are born Tabula Rasa. Who you are, and who you become are a combination of conditioning, and choice. I say this, because were genetic make up the determinant in behavior, character, or personality, all these aphids would make the same turns, the same motions, land on the same leaves as their identical copies, all the time. In truth, they spread out across a plant as they consume it, and don't necessarily land all in the same little section of the plant... even though their genes are IDENTICAL to the one next to them.
Maybe I'm missing a fundamental element of meiosis, but when you have hundreds of offspring from a single mother, chances are at least ONE had the same exact development that another did.
I'm just sayin'.
Tonight's Brew:
Stone Collaboration Session Ale - Joint effort between Stone Brewing, Ballast Point and Kelsey McNair Brewing Companies.
The ever epic and awesome Odell Mountain Standard Reserve '09.
Monday, June 21, 2010
My birthday speech. A.k.a. How I feel most of the time.
Please note: While this is exactly what was going through my head, I do have a flair for the overly dramatic. Please keep this in mind as you read.
All,
Today is my birthday. I'd like to think that there is at least one day a year that we can tell everyone just how we feel, without people judging, hating, disagreeing or looking down on us. Maybe that's what a birthday should be, instead of an excuse to party, get drunk and take the day off. Using similar words, we could also call it a "sick day." Just replace "party" with "sleep" and "get drunk" with "Take lots of meds."
"So I walked upon high. And I stopped within the edge, to see my world below... and I laughed at myself while the tears rolled down, 'cause it's the world I have known..."
I linked a youtube video on my facebook page. This is often how I feel every day as I watch the world work. People on the light rail. Friends and family. Relationships I've set in motion, and ones I've stopped. People's reactions to me and the world around them. Politics. Philosophy. Economics. Humanity.
It brings me to tears daily. Watching violence in the world, among people. Watching politics brawl it out over minutia, like "saving the economy" and gay marriage. The whole while the Pedagogy tries to cram a particular political ideal down the throats of the college bound and politicians vie for constituency through populism and misdirected fiscal oppression of groups the "public" views as bad.
To the Christians that might get upset at the idea of gay marriage:
Who are you to execute the will of God on your fellow human beings? Right or wrong, it is, and was never for you to decide. Let them come before St. Peter for judgment.
In the same context - To the liberals and conservatives: Is it not ironic, that your own modern politics seeks the same thing? To impose their version of morality on the whole of society?
Our society is enveloped in the idea of imposing our notions of right and wrong on our neighbors. Some have even come to believe that it's not possible to be politically free, without doing so. We've forgotten the difference between freedom from and freedom to. We've lost the core of what makes a right "inalienable."
Every action we take, is an exchange. We debate and trade criticisms we ourselves, do not see. We speak and exchange ideas, and good will. We trade goods, and exchange what we can produce, for that we cannot. We exchange our masculine traits for the feminine ones we do not possess. We burn fuel or catch wind to spin a turbine, and exchange heat or force into energy. The essence of all of nature relies on exchanges. Even microorganisms - Mitochondria allows the lungs to exchange CO2 for O2.
Yet as I see the world attempt to force these transactions between existents, as I see people forced to do business with others, forced to pay sums for nothing, forced to continue when they've said "no more, I'm done" I can't help but feel pained. As I watch Christians attempt to impose their ideology on the homosexual. As Liberals and Conservatives alike attempt to impose their morality on one another's politics. As a thief imposes his will upon a victim to get a paycheck.
"One of the judges, acting as prosecutor, had read the charges.
"You may now offer whatever plea you wish to make in your own defence," he announced. Facing the platform, his voice inflectionless and peculiarly clear, Hank Rearden answered:
"I have no defence."
"Do you --" The judge stumbled; he had not expected it to be that easy. "Do you throw yourself upon the mercy of this court?"
"I do not recognise this court's right to try me."
"What?"
"I do not recognise this court's right to try me."
"But, Mr. Rearden, this is the legally appointed court to try this particular category of crime."
"I do not recognise my action as a crime."
"But you have admitted that you have broken our regulations controlling the sale of your Metal."
"I do not recognise your right to control the sale of my Metal."
"Is it necessary for me to point out that your recognition was not required?"
"No. I am fully aware of it and I am acting accordingly."
He noted the stillness of the room. By the rules of the complicated pretence which all those people played for one another's benefit, they should have considered his stand as incomprehensible folly; there should have been rustles of astonishment and derision; there were none; they sat still; they understood.
"Do you mean that you are refusing to obey the law?" asked the judge.
"No. I am complying with the law - to the letter. Your law holds that my life, my work and my property may be disposed of without my consent. Very well, you may now dispose of me without my participation in the matter. I will not play the part of defending myself, where no defence is possible, and I will not simulate the illusion of dealing with a tribunal of justice."
"But, Mr. Rearden, the law provides specifically that you are to be given an opportunity to present your side of the case and to defend yourself."
"A prisoner brought to trial can defend himself only if there is an objective principle of justice recognised by his judges, a principle upholding his rights, which they may not violate and which he can invoke. The law, by which you are trying me, holds that there are no principles, that I have no rights and that you may do with me whatever you please. Very well. Do it." "Mr. Rearden, the law which you are denouncing is based on the highest principle - the principle of the public good."
"Who is the public? What does it hold as its good? There was a time when men believed that 'the good' was a concept to be defined by a code of moral values and that no man had the right to seek his good through the violation of the rights of another. If it is now believed that my fellow men may sacrifice me in any manner they please for the sake of whatever they deem to be their own good, if they believe that they may seize my property simply because they need it - well, so does any burglar. There is only this difference: the burglar does not ask me to sanction his act.""
These are the things that bring tears to my eyes. The core of what depression I experience. This is the world I have known. In many ways, I wish to no longer be a part of it - Yet I cannot simply turn and walk away, the action of suicide it's self, being immoral and contradictory as I cannot value anything if I'm dead. Plus, there's so much good in this world, at times, I can't help feeling anything but gratitude, for every single moment of my stupid little life.
All,
Today is my birthday. I'd like to think that there is at least one day a year that we can tell everyone just how we feel, without people judging, hating, disagreeing or looking down on us. Maybe that's what a birthday should be, instead of an excuse to party, get drunk and take the day off. Using similar words, we could also call it a "sick day." Just replace "party" with "sleep" and "get drunk" with "Take lots of meds."
"So I walked upon high. And I stopped within the edge, to see my world below... and I laughed at myself while the tears rolled down, 'cause it's the world I have known..."
I linked a youtube video on my facebook page. This is often how I feel every day as I watch the world work. People on the light rail. Friends and family. Relationships I've set in motion, and ones I've stopped. People's reactions to me and the world around them. Politics. Philosophy. Economics. Humanity.
It brings me to tears daily. Watching violence in the world, among people. Watching politics brawl it out over minutia, like "saving the economy" and gay marriage. The whole while the Pedagogy tries to cram a particular political ideal down the throats of the college bound and politicians vie for constituency through populism and misdirected fiscal oppression of groups the "public" views as bad.
To the Christians that might get upset at the idea of gay marriage:
Who are you to execute the will of God on your fellow human beings? Right or wrong, it is, and was never for you to decide. Let them come before St. Peter for judgment.
In the same context - To the liberals and conservatives: Is it not ironic, that your own modern politics seeks the same thing? To impose their version of morality on the whole of society?
Our society is enveloped in the idea of imposing our notions of right and wrong on our neighbors. Some have even come to believe that it's not possible to be politically free, without doing so. We've forgotten the difference between freedom from and freedom to. We've lost the core of what makes a right "inalienable."
Every action we take, is an exchange. We debate and trade criticisms we ourselves, do not see. We speak and exchange ideas, and good will. We trade goods, and exchange what we can produce, for that we cannot. We exchange our masculine traits for the feminine ones we do not possess. We burn fuel or catch wind to spin a turbine, and exchange heat or force into energy. The essence of all of nature relies on exchanges. Even microorganisms - Mitochondria allows the lungs to exchange CO2 for O2.
Yet as I see the world attempt to force these transactions between existents, as I see people forced to do business with others, forced to pay sums for nothing, forced to continue when they've said "no more, I'm done" I can't help but feel pained. As I watch Christians attempt to impose their ideology on the homosexual. As Liberals and Conservatives alike attempt to impose their morality on one another's politics. As a thief imposes his will upon a victim to get a paycheck.
"One of the judges, acting as prosecutor, had read the charges.
"You may now offer whatever plea you wish to make in your own defence," he announced. Facing the platform, his voice inflectionless and peculiarly clear, Hank Rearden answered:
"I have no defence."
"Do you --" The judge stumbled; he had not expected it to be that easy. "Do you throw yourself upon the mercy of this court?"
"I do not recognise this court's right to try me."
"What?"
"I do not recognise this court's right to try me."
"But, Mr. Rearden, this is the legally appointed court to try this particular category of crime."
"I do not recognise my action as a crime."
"But you have admitted that you have broken our regulations controlling the sale of your Metal."
"I do not recognise your right to control the sale of my Metal."
"Is it necessary for me to point out that your recognition was not required?"
"No. I am fully aware of it and I am acting accordingly."
He noted the stillness of the room. By the rules of the complicated pretence which all those people played for one another's benefit, they should have considered his stand as incomprehensible folly; there should have been rustles of astonishment and derision; there were none; they sat still; they understood.
"Do you mean that you are refusing to obey the law?" asked the judge.
"No. I am complying with the law - to the letter. Your law holds that my life, my work and my property may be disposed of without my consent. Very well, you may now dispose of me without my participation in the matter. I will not play the part of defending myself, where no defence is possible, and I will not simulate the illusion of dealing with a tribunal of justice."
"But, Mr. Rearden, the law provides specifically that you are to be given an opportunity to present your side of the case and to defend yourself."
"A prisoner brought to trial can defend himself only if there is an objective principle of justice recognised by his judges, a principle upholding his rights, which they may not violate and which he can invoke. The law, by which you are trying me, holds that there are no principles, that I have no rights and that you may do with me whatever you please. Very well. Do it." "Mr. Rearden, the law which you are denouncing is based on the highest principle - the principle of the public good."
"Who is the public? What does it hold as its good? There was a time when men believed that 'the good' was a concept to be defined by a code of moral values and that no man had the right to seek his good through the violation of the rights of another. If it is now believed that my fellow men may sacrifice me in any manner they please for the sake of whatever they deem to be their own good, if they believe that they may seize my property simply because they need it - well, so does any burglar. There is only this difference: the burglar does not ask me to sanction his act.""
These are the things that bring tears to my eyes. The core of what depression I experience. This is the world I have known. In many ways, I wish to no longer be a part of it - Yet I cannot simply turn and walk away, the action of suicide it's self, being immoral and contradictory as I cannot value anything if I'm dead. Plus, there's so much good in this world, at times, I can't help feeling anything but gratitude, for every single moment of my stupid little life.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
from Facebook.
A Franklin quote, to identify...
"Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Men, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a 1000 Services small and great, and are the most tender and useful of all Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an old Woman who is not a good Woman."
Unfortunately, at this juncture in my life, an exceedingly large percentage of women still wholly exist and define themselves through beauty, having not yet come to grips with the diminution inevitably caused by age. Ergo, the link. "If I tear you open wide, take a look inside are you pretty? Can I get inside your mind, see what i can find, are you pretty? So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only... pretty on the outside."
Another Ben Franklin Quote on older women...
"Because as they have more Knowledge of the World and their Minds are better stor'd with Observations, their Conversation is more improving and more lastingly agreable."
Read: Older women are far more pleasant to talk to.
Last one:
"Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part: The Face first grows lank and wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower Parts continuing to the last as plump as ever: So that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old from a young one. And as in the dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal, and frequently superior, every Knack being by Practice capable of Improvement."
Read: This is the paper bag effect, as quoted on June 25, 1745, by Benjamin Franklin... And you all think we're so innovative and new with our ideas, two hundred years later.
Am I saying the "less than attractive" women are better? No. I'm just saying that for the most part, the VAST majority of women my age put so much into their own appearance (that most don't even realize) that they have spent little to no time developing the intellectual faculties that would make a relationship enjoyable.
Ergo, they attract assholes who don't give a damn about anything beyond the way they look... - "Yeah brah. I hit that." And having spent so much time riding on the influence their own aesthetics achieve (both through employment benefits and social ones), they never discover what a real relationship could be, and only understand what relationships have been. It isn't until much later, when their physical beauty begins to wane, that many realize what a real relationship could be - Right about the time their husbands tell them they're fat and are only still married because of their kids (but are likely cheating on them with their hot secretary at work.) But don't get me wrong. Men are shallow too, I just lack the perspective, as that's not really my bag.
I know what makes me unattractive to most women in my age group. The word is Machismo. My current stance on the issue: if women want something that will hump an ottoman to show it's dominance, go buy a dog.
"Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Men, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a 1000 Services small and great, and are the most tender and useful of all Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an old Woman who is not a good Woman."
Unfortunately, at this juncture in my life, an exceedingly large percentage of women still wholly exist and define themselves through beauty, having not yet come to grips with the diminution inevitably caused by age. Ergo, the link. "If I tear you open wide, take a look inside are you pretty? Can I get inside your mind, see what i can find, are you pretty? So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only... pretty on the outside."
Another Ben Franklin Quote on older women...
"Because as they have more Knowledge of the World and their Minds are better stor'd with Observations, their Conversation is more improving and more lastingly agreable."
Read: Older women are far more pleasant to talk to.
Last one:
"Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part: The Face first grows lank and wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower Parts continuing to the last as plump as ever: So that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old from a young one. And as in the dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal, and frequently superior, every Knack being by Practice capable of Improvement."
Read: This is the paper bag effect, as quoted on June 25, 1745, by Benjamin Franklin... And you all think we're so innovative and new with our ideas, two hundred years later.
Am I saying the "less than attractive" women are better? No. I'm just saying that for the most part, the VAST majority of women my age put so much into their own appearance (that most don't even realize) that they have spent little to no time developing the intellectual faculties that would make a relationship enjoyable.
Ergo, they attract assholes who don't give a damn about anything beyond the way they look... - "Yeah brah. I hit that." And having spent so much time riding on the influence their own aesthetics achieve (both through employment benefits and social ones), they never discover what a real relationship could be, and only understand what relationships have been. It isn't until much later, when their physical beauty begins to wane, that many realize what a real relationship could be - Right about the time their husbands tell them they're fat and are only still married because of their kids (but are likely cheating on them with their hot secretary at work.) But don't get me wrong. Men are shallow too, I just lack the perspective, as that's not really my bag.
I know what makes me unattractive to most women in my age group. The word is Machismo. My current stance on the issue: if women want something that will hump an ottoman to show it's dominance, go buy a dog.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
A conversation between me and my brother.
Me: ... Thanks dude.
My Brother: No Problemo.
Me: Question, does gratitude in this context carry any more or less weight than it would if it was spoken?
My brother: Wall of text warning...
Me: In truth, I already know what you'll say, and I already understand it. I'm just trying to imply that there's something else in the background. But please, wall of text me.
My brother: What more is there in the background? The nature of our relationship carries with it an understanding that, usually, implies gratitude.
Me: Never in my life have I had a relationship wherein the implication of that nature was so obvious that I KNEW, beyond a shadow of a doubt that gratitude was there. Not with you, not with Dad, not with a woman or anyone else in this world. I've come close with two people, you and one other. I've spoken before of my mild Misogyny. It's because I don't believe that women are capable of understanding on that level. In fact, I wonder if ANYONE is so similar to myself, male or female, that a bond of that nature is possible.
So, I'll admit... I compromise. A life barren and devoid of social contact would be far worse in my eyes, than one of empty but present relationships.
In truth, I've yet to find a fulfilling personal relationship with much of anyone, beyond perhaps you and Jonathan. But even that's on the border.
Dad thinks my expectations are too high... I'm starting to agree.
My brother: I know, and that is one of the things that causes a rift in our relationship which impedes upon the level of understanding necessary to truly understand emotions implied within a relationship like that. - In reference to what I said a few lines ago, by the way.
Me: What? My desire to have a personal relationship, even if it's empty, or knowledge of gratitude without explicit statement?
My brother: I mean specifically in our relationship.
Me: well right, you realize though, that you're asking for the same thing religion does?
My brother: Nah. For example, what I mean in regards to us, is that your desire for social contact, even if it is mostly empty is not something I desire, and can only relate to on the minor level of understanding the degree of loneliness associated with strict guidelines as to whom I'm willing to associate and make a connection.
It's a pretty fundamental difference between our values regarding ourselves and humanity which impedes on the level of connection and understanding with which words are often unnecessary.
Me: So, I guess I'm just left wondering why I hold such a value in social interaction. Well, I mean I know... but...
My brother: It's not that it is less of a value to me than it is to you, I'm just unwilling to compromise my standards in regards to who I consider a friend no matter how painful and lonely it might get.
Me: Doesn't it ever make you feel horrible though?
My brother: Sure, but it makes me feel worse to hang out with people with whom I share little to no connection, and with whom I'm forced to be someone I'm not to try and force a connection that's not there.
Me: Then I'm wondering why I feel better when I'm hanging out with people I'm not really connected with... thought often times I don't. I just think I have a hard time coping with the loneliness.
My brother: Possibly, and I don't blame you. It sucks ass.
Me: I think that "sucks ass" is where I stop and go... "well why not? Maybe there's something there I'm missing?"
My brother: Maybe, and if it makes you happy to hang out with people, even if you don't share any connection at all, then go for it.
Me: It does and it doesn't. In the end I'm still alone. It's really just a bandaid. Covers the problem for the time being, but it doesn't really solve anything.
A lot of people are at a state of perpetual human contact, and never really realize their relationships are probably pretty empty. They maintain a "high" of sorts for a very long time and never really have a relationship that's significant enough to fill the entire void. I think I realize that's what I'm looking for, but the knowledge of such a lack is killing me.
My brother: The knowledge that most people subsist on that shallowness, and never really go any further?
Me: No, the knowledge that I want a real relationship, that the rest are mostly shallow and that I feel like shit without one.
My drive to diagnose and resolve is what drives me nuts. As a corollary, this is why I like House.
My brother: I wish I could be of more help to you, aside from just telling you to stick to your guns.
Me: That's probably the best advice you could give, really.
The problem I have, is that I need to accept the fact that not everything is "Diagnose and resolve."
My brother: That's pretty much what it is, really. However "resolve" is sometimes your acceptance that no further action is possible.
Me: That's the hard part.
Spontaneous conversation we have. It's pretty awesome. Still working on resolving that issue... though perhaps, there's nothing else for me to do right now.
My Brother: No Problemo.
Me: Question, does gratitude in this context carry any more or less weight than it would if it was spoken?
My brother: Wall of text warning...
Me: In truth, I already know what you'll say, and I already understand it. I'm just trying to imply that there's something else in the background. But please, wall of text me.
My brother: What more is there in the background? The nature of our relationship carries with it an understanding that, usually, implies gratitude.
Me: Never in my life have I had a relationship wherein the implication of that nature was so obvious that I KNEW, beyond a shadow of a doubt that gratitude was there. Not with you, not with Dad, not with a woman or anyone else in this world. I've come close with two people, you and one other. I've spoken before of my mild Misogyny. It's because I don't believe that women are capable of understanding on that level. In fact, I wonder if ANYONE is so similar to myself, male or female, that a bond of that nature is possible.
So, I'll admit... I compromise. A life barren and devoid of social contact would be far worse in my eyes, than one of empty but present relationships.
In truth, I've yet to find a fulfilling personal relationship with much of anyone, beyond perhaps you and Jonathan. But even that's on the border.
Dad thinks my expectations are too high... I'm starting to agree.
My brother: I know, and that is one of the things that causes a rift in our relationship which impedes upon the level of understanding necessary to truly understand emotions implied within a relationship like that. - In reference to what I said a few lines ago, by the way.
Me: What? My desire to have a personal relationship, even if it's empty, or knowledge of gratitude without explicit statement?
My brother: I mean specifically in our relationship.
Me: well right, you realize though, that you're asking for the same thing religion does?
My brother: Nah. For example, what I mean in regards to us, is that your desire for social contact, even if it is mostly empty is not something I desire, and can only relate to on the minor level of understanding the degree of loneliness associated with strict guidelines as to whom I'm willing to associate and make a connection.
It's a pretty fundamental difference between our values regarding ourselves and humanity which impedes on the level of connection and understanding with which words are often unnecessary.
Me: So, I guess I'm just left wondering why I hold such a value in social interaction. Well, I mean I know... but...
My brother: It's not that it is less of a value to me than it is to you, I'm just unwilling to compromise my standards in regards to who I consider a friend no matter how painful and lonely it might get.
Me: Doesn't it ever make you feel horrible though?
My brother: Sure, but it makes me feel worse to hang out with people with whom I share little to no connection, and with whom I'm forced to be someone I'm not to try and force a connection that's not there.
Me: Then I'm wondering why I feel better when I'm hanging out with people I'm not really connected with... thought often times I don't. I just think I have a hard time coping with the loneliness.
My brother: Possibly, and I don't blame you. It sucks ass.
Me: I think that "sucks ass" is where I stop and go... "well why not? Maybe there's something there I'm missing?"
My brother: Maybe, and if it makes you happy to hang out with people, even if you don't share any connection at all, then go for it.
Me: It does and it doesn't. In the end I'm still alone. It's really just a bandaid. Covers the problem for the time being, but it doesn't really solve anything.
A lot of people are at a state of perpetual human contact, and never really realize their relationships are probably pretty empty. They maintain a "high" of sorts for a very long time and never really have a relationship that's significant enough to fill the entire void. I think I realize that's what I'm looking for, but the knowledge of such a lack is killing me.
My brother: The knowledge that most people subsist on that shallowness, and never really go any further?
Me: No, the knowledge that I want a real relationship, that the rest are mostly shallow and that I feel like shit without one.
My drive to diagnose and resolve is what drives me nuts. As a corollary, this is why I like House.
My brother: I wish I could be of more help to you, aside from just telling you to stick to your guns.
Me: That's probably the best advice you could give, really.
The problem I have, is that I need to accept the fact that not everything is "Diagnose and resolve."
My brother: That's pretty much what it is, really. However "resolve" is sometimes your acceptance that no further action is possible.
Me: That's the hard part.
Spontaneous conversation we have. It's pretty awesome. Still working on resolving that issue... though perhaps, there's nothing else for me to do right now.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
So Beautiful... So Evil.
I should preface this post.
The fact is, I shouldn’t even write this, because it may very well be fuel for a terrible fire. The tragedy I’m about to write about, isn’t a result of love, or even associated with it. Perhaps I’ll change the title before I post it.
What I want to reference starts at 1:12.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs6qBZtMGgQ
This whole blog post should be started off with that excerpt from a recent episode of House MD.
A few months back, I met a girl at the Olive Garden. My brother worked with her, she seemed awesome. She was one of the few girls that actually seemed interested in the conversations my brother and I have and had her own viewpoint she threw in! Add to this all she was everything I would want in a girl, physically and mentally. Beautiful hazel eyes, gorgeous hair, incredible ass, inquisitive, and unafraid of change or challenge. She seemed willing to learn, willing to be introspective… I thought. Obviously with this kind of title and stage set, it’s not a happy blog post, but one I should make for myself, and to explain a situation.
I asked this girl out, hoping to figure out more about her, see who she is and find out if she was genuine. We dated and I had a blast. We laughed and seemed to hit it off very well, that night, I told her we should do it again some time. I went home and wrote, for the first time in a LONG time. I looked forward to the next time I would see her, that following Wednesday. We set up a second date. Had another awesome dinner, then hung out at a place she called the “903” saw some deer that walked right past the car… It was fantastic. I sent her a text one day a week after, and didn’t get a response. Felt kind of down and upset. I thought things were going so well. I was doing everything I could to be amazing. Come to find out the next day, she got into a very bad car accident. We texted while she was home ridden, but couldn’t go out very much, and couldn’t even work. I did what I could to hang around, even just meeting up at her house to hang out while she smoked. We were talking one night and said she really missed having these ice cream sandwiches she talked about. I jumped in my car, ironically, knowing that she probably said something for a reason, but I wanted to deliver. I felt bad for her situation and I thought it would brighten her spirits. I didn’t say anything immediately after she said she had a hankering for ice cream, and followed up with a text later that said “You might be surprised at what you find outside your front door.” I felt great after I did it, and after the responses she gave, I felt like I had given her a smile. It’s all I needed to know.
We started seeing each other regularly and time went by. I asked her what she was doing for New Years around that time, and she said she wasn’t sure. I invited her to Travis’ place and said maybe we should just go party hopping since we had a few invites around town. I wasn’t going to press but I was hoping. The week of new years came around, and she had decided to come to Travis’ place with me, though with the tentative plan of being open to going other places too. That night, we headed out to Travis’ place and she started drinking a little bit. I was going to stay sober that night, figured I’d drive anyway and I didn’t want to start my new year with a hangover. That night she started dancing, and a few other guys started dancing with her. I felt like I should try as well. (I’d emphasize the word try.) Time passed that night and a LOT of guys were talking to her. I blew it off, knowing she was a beautiful girl around a bunch of single guys at a house party. Then something odd happened. She kissed a guy and gave him her number. Again… I mostly blew it off but it still struck a chord. Granted we weren’t “exclusive” or whatever, but she had come at my request, and I felt pretty betrayed. I asked her about it later, and she told me the guy force himself on her… it became the subject of debate and upset between us, but every time we had a debate like this, we’d talk things over and I didn’t let it bother me. The subtext here, is that she could have easily pushed this guy away… but didn’t…
My brother and I used to hit buffalo wild wings every Tuesday, and on my way out one night (after 1 too many beers) I noticed her car in the parking lot, so I turned around and went to say hi. We talked for a while, and I went on my merry way. She hung around, said she was going to show her friend’s boyfriend the cologne/perfume she was selling to make some cash on the side, and was going to give him a ride home. So I took off and headed home. As I pulled into my parking space, I decided I wanted a beer at home, and turned around to go pick it up from the liquor store down the street. As I drove down Wadsworth about 5 minutes later, I looked over at Buffalo Wild Wings, and noticed her car still sitting in the parking lot, with the light on and two people leaning close. I reacted without thinking (and thanks to alcohol) and whirled around into the parking lot as the guy was getting out of her car, and she was starting to drive off. I pulled up close as she was turning out of the parking lot and gave her a half-confused and half angry look. I had no idea what to think, and the only thing going through my head was that she wasn’t giving me the whole story. She sent me a text and asked what the look was for. I told her, she got pissed and thought I was stalking her. I wanted to tell her to get over herself, but being a little too drunk and weepy, I just let emotion take over. I called upset and half in tears thinking I’d been screwed over and led on. She told me she wasn’t going to talk to me then, and ended the call. The next day, having returned to my senses, I figured it was over. Her birthday was the next weekend, and I wanted to do something awesome for her, but figured that was out the door.
I tried to keep in touch. The Saturday after her birthday party, I went on to do my usual routine, and got a text at about 9:15pm. The text was from this girl, telling me where her party was, and when it started, but was addressed to “everybody.” I figured it was a mass text, but the funny thing was… I got it at 9:15, not 9:00, when the text said her party started. So I sent a text back that said I’d be there later that night. Got back an “I don’t really care.” I went by the party and hung out with a few friends we both knew, didn’t say much to her, didn’t want to get in the way of this party she was having and figured she was still upset, but I had an invite so I figured I should show.
I left that night, just saying bye. We met up one Sunday and talked over coffee. It became a regular trend. As the school season started, she was still unemployed and we started to car pool on Tuesdays and Thursdays. She needed a ride to class, since I started work at the same time she started class. We talked about some of the incidents past, like the Buffalo Wild Wings thing, and she said she was upset because she thought I was stalking her. There were points I wanted to tell her to get over herself but I kept it to myself. I kept writing to her, as I had in the past (she has a notebook full of about 15-20 pages worth of letters and poems I wrote) but the letters started to change, as I kept pouring my heart out and never got much of anything back. She had told me about her ex, and that she still wasn’t over him and I thought to myself, well… so I’ve been pouring this out all for nothing? Again, it didn’t bother me. I figured I’d just hang on the sidelines. Let her get over the situation.
We always had a blast when we hung out together. We got giggly and silly just being around each other and no matter how pissed either of us could be, we always smiled when we were around one another, even if we were in the middle of an argument. She texted me one day while I was at work, really excited because she had gotten an interview at Old Chicago. I was really excited for her. That day, we went down to Subway before class, after I got off work. I met her at the Tivoli, as was often the norm. When I sat down with her, she asked me, “have you ever met someone so perfect you can’t help but think they’re lying to you?” I looked at her, smiled and said yes. She went on to explain that she had done some low-end background search through some website on her phone. I was curious, concerned it wasn’t me, but dropped the subject. She brought it back up. I finally asked her who it was, and she said she wouldn’t tell me, but it “definitely isn’t you.” Guesses on how I felt?
The letters I wrote got worse after that. She always told me she wanted the truth and wasn’t afraid of it, so I wrote the truth. I wrote how I felt and that I loved her, but I was feeling like I had been manipulated and frustrated. She got her job, and I wrote about my frustrations, every time I told her that all I wanted was something from her, on par with what I had given. She always responded saying she was saddened by the letters, and wanted to be left alone. So, that’s what I’ve done since.
There you have the story from the heart. But… that’s not what this was. Prior to asking this girl out, I had told myself that I wanted to make a foray into the world of emotionalism that I had left a long time ago. I wanted to go back and see what I missed. Well my project is now complete, and I write to extrapolate on my research. That’s right. Research. The thing is, I left behind a way of thinking. I used to be guided only by my heart and did nothing but react to the world around me. Now I follow my mind, and shape the world around me. I see how the world reacts to me, and how I work with the world. I stopped letting my spirit be so malleable and easily changed by the world and others around me, and I shaped myself and started analyzing the way I shape the world around me. My research was two fold. To discover what I may have left behind (which, by the way, I’ve found) and to read more into the nature of this girl’s mind, and how it relates to actions and behavior I’ve seen in others.
The entire time we were in contact, she “played a game” (for lack of a better word.) It was all some gigantic ruse for control and manipulation, as well as getting to know someone. I played the fool and followed the part to see if she was actually intending on attempting to use me for her own emotional satisfaction. There were a great many points during our “relationship” (if you could call it that) where she would try to blow me off, without making me think I was being blown off. I’d ask her out some night and she’d tell me she couldn’t because she had to stay in and study, or cite family reasons. We’d meet up later during the week and I’d find out through the course of our conversation, that she went to a movie with one of her friends. That’s just a small example of the daily dodging she did. She did it because she likely didn’t actually want to be around me, but didn’t want me to just disappear. She wanted me to feel something for her, and be around whenever she felt like it, gone when she didn’t… her own emotional satisfaction.
The best of all, were the baited text messages I’d receive. The best example of this was the text about her birthday party. She said she never sent it, yet I certainly received it. If it was a mass text, I would have received it when she sent it out to her friends (one of which I know) long before 9pm that night. I got it 15 minutes AFTER 9, when her party was dead and only a few people showed up. She said she didn’t send it, and showed her phone but frankly…. How else could I have received it? Magic? Another example would be recently after she told me she wanted to be left alone. She texted me about two weeks later, and said it was “imperative that we talk.” I told her I was free the next day, but she wasn’t. I told her to drop me a line when she was free. Think I heard back after that? Her entire purpose in sending me a text, was to see if I’d respond to her, see if she still had someone that would be around if she wanted them to. In so far as I can tell at this point, she’s found someone she’s interested in, so I haven’t heard anything from her since.
I could go into useless theories about what she seemed to want in a relationship (which, by the way was borderline abuse) but they don’t serve much purpose. The bigger interest for me, was this game she thought she had to play, and how she interacted with people. I simply gave her what she said she wanted, and she walked away. The truly strange thing, was that she presumed people would always put up the same façade she did, or that their intents were malevolent. Given her history, I could easily see where that kind of behavior came from. Yet, I still can’t get past the fact that, when given what she attempted to draw from someone, she walked away. Her only goal was to actually draw what she wanted out of someone, instead of it being given willingly. Her separation from her ex (as she described it) is a wonderful example. She had what she wanted, and tried to push it away for the sake of drawing it back.
What she expressed, acted and conveyed was that she wanted control and to be herself, but in truth, she wanted to BE controlled, in a manner of speaking. “Controlled” is perhaps a bad word to use to explain the situation (though on a deep, fundamental basis, that’s what it is.) It’s better explained as pursuit, or challenge. She wanted someone who would walk away from the game she played, so she could go after them. Someone she had to work to attain the affection and attention of. I say control, because really… that’s what she ultimately gave, by looking for a relationship in that context.
On a whole, what I’ve discovered is again, two fold. First is this game that some women play. It’s done to attempt to discover more about the person they’re interested in, or that is interested in them. An attempt at poking for strengths and weaknesses, socially. A good example would be the “necessity” test, which attempts to solicit a response from a guy to allude to their need or desire for a woman in a subvert way. There’s also consistency tests, that attempt to prove statements that a guy has made about what he’s done or who he is. The other purpose of this game is for the sake of “fun” and what seems to be an outward method of “Sparking” the fire of a relationship, or “drawing” it out of someone. Like a halfway meditated game to try and feel something with another person. The biggest irony about this little game, is that… it doesn’t really work for much of anything. Often times the analysis made by woman (and men) that participate in this game is wholly false. The people who play the game well are trying to attract another, and end up putting on a huge façade for the sake of that attraction, ultimately conveying a false image about themselves (which they likely aren’t comfortable with in the first place.) The end result is falling in love with someone who, in all actuality, isn’t the kind of person that “works well” with you, or that you actually want to spend a lot of time with. The opposite is also true, becoming someone you really aren’t for the sake of finding someone you think you want. Entering into the situation with truth and honesty about yourself ultimately alienates you from the game.
The second discovery, is the cat-like behavior I’ve seen. Cats often run from direct attention and love, unless they’re conditioned differently. The best way to obtain attention from a cat, is to ignore it or give it reason for curiosity or challenge, and the cat comes running to try and get your attention. Cats want to “earn” the affection they get. (This is an analogy to the behavior I saw before, and I may believe, the reason for the analogy between cats and some women.) Now obviously not all women operate in this manner, and I certainly don’t want to give B. F. Skinner too much credit (since I disagree with him on many fundamental levels, and advocate for free will) but some people are “conditioned” differently, others just realize exactly what they want, and make no facades about it. I will admit, I’ve met few women who truly act without the facade, and without the games. (And have been attracted to most every woman that has.)
At the end of this whole situation, I’m not sure whether or not I should feel pity for this person, or whether or not it’s just a phase of development. She has a great personality in many ways, a great sense of what life should be, but throws it all away to fear and her desire to follow someone, instead of making something of herself, and finding someone she has to fight to gain the attention she seeks. I also kind of feel bad about defaulting on who I am for the sake of this research project, but at the same time, I’m glad having learned what I did. I told her once she taught me so much. What she doesn’t realize, is that it isn’t “taught” in a pedagogical sense of the word, but more from an observational sense. What I learned from her, I learned in how she acted. Even when she got upset at me, she told me everything about who she is and why she reacted that way.
Someone once told me that she may be a great date in about 5 years. For this girl’s sake, I hope they’re right.
So, there you have the story of the last four months of my life. Glad to have learned what I did, and glad to be getting back to myself.
The fact is, I shouldn’t even write this, because it may very well be fuel for a terrible fire. The tragedy I’m about to write about, isn’t a result of love, or even associated with it. Perhaps I’ll change the title before I post it.
What I want to reference starts at 1:12.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs6qBZtMGgQ
This whole blog post should be started off with that excerpt from a recent episode of House MD.
A few months back, I met a girl at the Olive Garden. My brother worked with her, she seemed awesome. She was one of the few girls that actually seemed interested in the conversations my brother and I have and had her own viewpoint she threw in! Add to this all she was everything I would want in a girl, physically and mentally. Beautiful hazel eyes, gorgeous hair, incredible ass, inquisitive, and unafraid of change or challenge. She seemed willing to learn, willing to be introspective… I thought. Obviously with this kind of title and stage set, it’s not a happy blog post, but one I should make for myself, and to explain a situation.
I asked this girl out, hoping to figure out more about her, see who she is and find out if she was genuine. We dated and I had a blast. We laughed and seemed to hit it off very well, that night, I told her we should do it again some time. I went home and wrote, for the first time in a LONG time. I looked forward to the next time I would see her, that following Wednesday. We set up a second date. Had another awesome dinner, then hung out at a place she called the “903” saw some deer that walked right past the car… It was fantastic. I sent her a text one day a week after, and didn’t get a response. Felt kind of down and upset. I thought things were going so well. I was doing everything I could to be amazing. Come to find out the next day, she got into a very bad car accident. We texted while she was home ridden, but couldn’t go out very much, and couldn’t even work. I did what I could to hang around, even just meeting up at her house to hang out while she smoked. We were talking one night and said she really missed having these ice cream sandwiches she talked about. I jumped in my car, ironically, knowing that she probably said something for a reason, but I wanted to deliver. I felt bad for her situation and I thought it would brighten her spirits. I didn’t say anything immediately after she said she had a hankering for ice cream, and followed up with a text later that said “You might be surprised at what you find outside your front door.” I felt great after I did it, and after the responses she gave, I felt like I had given her a smile. It’s all I needed to know.
We started seeing each other regularly and time went by. I asked her what she was doing for New Years around that time, and she said she wasn’t sure. I invited her to Travis’ place and said maybe we should just go party hopping since we had a few invites around town. I wasn’t going to press but I was hoping. The week of new years came around, and she had decided to come to Travis’ place with me, though with the tentative plan of being open to going other places too. That night, we headed out to Travis’ place and she started drinking a little bit. I was going to stay sober that night, figured I’d drive anyway and I didn’t want to start my new year with a hangover. That night she started dancing, and a few other guys started dancing with her. I felt like I should try as well. (I’d emphasize the word try.) Time passed that night and a LOT of guys were talking to her. I blew it off, knowing she was a beautiful girl around a bunch of single guys at a house party. Then something odd happened. She kissed a guy and gave him her number. Again… I mostly blew it off but it still struck a chord. Granted we weren’t “exclusive” or whatever, but she had come at my request, and I felt pretty betrayed. I asked her about it later, and she told me the guy force himself on her… it became the subject of debate and upset between us, but every time we had a debate like this, we’d talk things over and I didn’t let it bother me. The subtext here, is that she could have easily pushed this guy away… but didn’t…
My brother and I used to hit buffalo wild wings every Tuesday, and on my way out one night (after 1 too many beers) I noticed her car in the parking lot, so I turned around and went to say hi. We talked for a while, and I went on my merry way. She hung around, said she was going to show her friend’s boyfriend the cologne/perfume she was selling to make some cash on the side, and was going to give him a ride home. So I took off and headed home. As I pulled into my parking space, I decided I wanted a beer at home, and turned around to go pick it up from the liquor store down the street. As I drove down Wadsworth about 5 minutes later, I looked over at Buffalo Wild Wings, and noticed her car still sitting in the parking lot, with the light on and two people leaning close. I reacted without thinking (and thanks to alcohol) and whirled around into the parking lot as the guy was getting out of her car, and she was starting to drive off. I pulled up close as she was turning out of the parking lot and gave her a half-confused and half angry look. I had no idea what to think, and the only thing going through my head was that she wasn’t giving me the whole story. She sent me a text and asked what the look was for. I told her, she got pissed and thought I was stalking her. I wanted to tell her to get over herself, but being a little too drunk and weepy, I just let emotion take over. I called upset and half in tears thinking I’d been screwed over and led on. She told me she wasn’t going to talk to me then, and ended the call. The next day, having returned to my senses, I figured it was over. Her birthday was the next weekend, and I wanted to do something awesome for her, but figured that was out the door.
I tried to keep in touch. The Saturday after her birthday party, I went on to do my usual routine, and got a text at about 9:15pm. The text was from this girl, telling me where her party was, and when it started, but was addressed to “everybody.” I figured it was a mass text, but the funny thing was… I got it at 9:15, not 9:00, when the text said her party started. So I sent a text back that said I’d be there later that night. Got back an “I don’t really care.” I went by the party and hung out with a few friends we both knew, didn’t say much to her, didn’t want to get in the way of this party she was having and figured she was still upset, but I had an invite so I figured I should show.
I left that night, just saying bye. We met up one Sunday and talked over coffee. It became a regular trend. As the school season started, she was still unemployed and we started to car pool on Tuesdays and Thursdays. She needed a ride to class, since I started work at the same time she started class. We talked about some of the incidents past, like the Buffalo Wild Wings thing, and she said she was upset because she thought I was stalking her. There were points I wanted to tell her to get over herself but I kept it to myself. I kept writing to her, as I had in the past (she has a notebook full of about 15-20 pages worth of letters and poems I wrote) but the letters started to change, as I kept pouring my heart out and never got much of anything back. She had told me about her ex, and that she still wasn’t over him and I thought to myself, well… so I’ve been pouring this out all for nothing? Again, it didn’t bother me. I figured I’d just hang on the sidelines. Let her get over the situation.
We always had a blast when we hung out together. We got giggly and silly just being around each other and no matter how pissed either of us could be, we always smiled when we were around one another, even if we were in the middle of an argument. She texted me one day while I was at work, really excited because she had gotten an interview at Old Chicago. I was really excited for her. That day, we went down to Subway before class, after I got off work. I met her at the Tivoli, as was often the norm. When I sat down with her, she asked me, “have you ever met someone so perfect you can’t help but think they’re lying to you?” I looked at her, smiled and said yes. She went on to explain that she had done some low-end background search through some website on her phone. I was curious, concerned it wasn’t me, but dropped the subject. She brought it back up. I finally asked her who it was, and she said she wouldn’t tell me, but it “definitely isn’t you.” Guesses on how I felt?
The letters I wrote got worse after that. She always told me she wanted the truth and wasn’t afraid of it, so I wrote the truth. I wrote how I felt and that I loved her, but I was feeling like I had been manipulated and frustrated. She got her job, and I wrote about my frustrations, every time I told her that all I wanted was something from her, on par with what I had given. She always responded saying she was saddened by the letters, and wanted to be left alone. So, that’s what I’ve done since.
There you have the story from the heart. But… that’s not what this was. Prior to asking this girl out, I had told myself that I wanted to make a foray into the world of emotionalism that I had left a long time ago. I wanted to go back and see what I missed. Well my project is now complete, and I write to extrapolate on my research. That’s right. Research. The thing is, I left behind a way of thinking. I used to be guided only by my heart and did nothing but react to the world around me. Now I follow my mind, and shape the world around me. I see how the world reacts to me, and how I work with the world. I stopped letting my spirit be so malleable and easily changed by the world and others around me, and I shaped myself and started analyzing the way I shape the world around me. My research was two fold. To discover what I may have left behind (which, by the way, I’ve found) and to read more into the nature of this girl’s mind, and how it relates to actions and behavior I’ve seen in others.
The entire time we were in contact, she “played a game” (for lack of a better word.) It was all some gigantic ruse for control and manipulation, as well as getting to know someone. I played the fool and followed the part to see if she was actually intending on attempting to use me for her own emotional satisfaction. There were a great many points during our “relationship” (if you could call it that) where she would try to blow me off, without making me think I was being blown off. I’d ask her out some night and she’d tell me she couldn’t because she had to stay in and study, or cite family reasons. We’d meet up later during the week and I’d find out through the course of our conversation, that she went to a movie with one of her friends. That’s just a small example of the daily dodging she did. She did it because she likely didn’t actually want to be around me, but didn’t want me to just disappear. She wanted me to feel something for her, and be around whenever she felt like it, gone when she didn’t… her own emotional satisfaction.
The best of all, were the baited text messages I’d receive. The best example of this was the text about her birthday party. She said she never sent it, yet I certainly received it. If it was a mass text, I would have received it when she sent it out to her friends (one of which I know) long before 9pm that night. I got it 15 minutes AFTER 9, when her party was dead and only a few people showed up. She said she didn’t send it, and showed her phone but frankly…. How else could I have received it? Magic? Another example would be recently after she told me she wanted to be left alone. She texted me about two weeks later, and said it was “imperative that we talk.” I told her I was free the next day, but she wasn’t. I told her to drop me a line when she was free. Think I heard back after that? Her entire purpose in sending me a text, was to see if I’d respond to her, see if she still had someone that would be around if she wanted them to. In so far as I can tell at this point, she’s found someone she’s interested in, so I haven’t heard anything from her since.
I could go into useless theories about what she seemed to want in a relationship (which, by the way was borderline abuse) but they don’t serve much purpose. The bigger interest for me, was this game she thought she had to play, and how she interacted with people. I simply gave her what she said she wanted, and she walked away. The truly strange thing, was that she presumed people would always put up the same façade she did, or that their intents were malevolent. Given her history, I could easily see where that kind of behavior came from. Yet, I still can’t get past the fact that, when given what she attempted to draw from someone, she walked away. Her only goal was to actually draw what she wanted out of someone, instead of it being given willingly. Her separation from her ex (as she described it) is a wonderful example. She had what she wanted, and tried to push it away for the sake of drawing it back.
What she expressed, acted and conveyed was that she wanted control and to be herself, but in truth, she wanted to BE controlled, in a manner of speaking. “Controlled” is perhaps a bad word to use to explain the situation (though on a deep, fundamental basis, that’s what it is.) It’s better explained as pursuit, or challenge. She wanted someone who would walk away from the game she played, so she could go after them. Someone she had to work to attain the affection and attention of. I say control, because really… that’s what she ultimately gave, by looking for a relationship in that context.
On a whole, what I’ve discovered is again, two fold. First is this game that some women play. It’s done to attempt to discover more about the person they’re interested in, or that is interested in them. An attempt at poking for strengths and weaknesses, socially. A good example would be the “necessity” test, which attempts to solicit a response from a guy to allude to their need or desire for a woman in a subvert way. There’s also consistency tests, that attempt to prove statements that a guy has made about what he’s done or who he is. The other purpose of this game is for the sake of “fun” and what seems to be an outward method of “Sparking” the fire of a relationship, or “drawing” it out of someone. Like a halfway meditated game to try and feel something with another person. The biggest irony about this little game, is that… it doesn’t really work for much of anything. Often times the analysis made by woman (and men) that participate in this game is wholly false. The people who play the game well are trying to attract another, and end up putting on a huge façade for the sake of that attraction, ultimately conveying a false image about themselves (which they likely aren’t comfortable with in the first place.) The end result is falling in love with someone who, in all actuality, isn’t the kind of person that “works well” with you, or that you actually want to spend a lot of time with. The opposite is also true, becoming someone you really aren’t for the sake of finding someone you think you want. Entering into the situation with truth and honesty about yourself ultimately alienates you from the game.
The second discovery, is the cat-like behavior I’ve seen. Cats often run from direct attention and love, unless they’re conditioned differently. The best way to obtain attention from a cat, is to ignore it or give it reason for curiosity or challenge, and the cat comes running to try and get your attention. Cats want to “earn” the affection they get. (This is an analogy to the behavior I saw before, and I may believe, the reason for the analogy between cats and some women.) Now obviously not all women operate in this manner, and I certainly don’t want to give B. F. Skinner too much credit (since I disagree with him on many fundamental levels, and advocate for free will) but some people are “conditioned” differently, others just realize exactly what they want, and make no facades about it. I will admit, I’ve met few women who truly act without the facade, and without the games. (And have been attracted to most every woman that has.)
At the end of this whole situation, I’m not sure whether or not I should feel pity for this person, or whether or not it’s just a phase of development. She has a great personality in many ways, a great sense of what life should be, but throws it all away to fear and her desire to follow someone, instead of making something of herself, and finding someone she has to fight to gain the attention she seeks. I also kind of feel bad about defaulting on who I am for the sake of this research project, but at the same time, I’m glad having learned what I did. I told her once she taught me so much. What she doesn’t realize, is that it isn’t “taught” in a pedagogical sense of the word, but more from an observational sense. What I learned from her, I learned in how she acted. Even when she got upset at me, she told me everything about who she is and why she reacted that way.
Someone once told me that she may be a great date in about 5 years. For this girl’s sake, I hope they’re right.
So, there you have the story of the last four months of my life. Glad to have learned what I did, and glad to be getting back to myself.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Markets WILL Prevail – Even if we don’t want them to.
Markets WILL Prevail – Even if we don’t want them to.
“If we once again guide the market’s invisible hand with a higher principle, our markets will recover, our economy will once again thrive and America will once again lead the world in this new century as it did in the last…” Part of President Obama’s speech on February 25, 2009 cites a principle some economists (and some history buffs) know well. What Obama is attempting reference to, is Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand.”In a current context, most understand this idea to be the notion that the government must influence the market covertly to stabilize the market through direct government intervention and monetary policy. I.e. Bail outs, tax credits, and anything else you can come up with that the government can legislate to control the market in whatever manner is necessary. The problem is that the interpretation of the principle couldn’t be further from the truth. The invisible hand is actually the hand that influences equilibrium price, created by the effects of supply and demand on the market.
A few clarifications.
Demand: Demand is pretty obvious. Demand deals specifically with the willingness of consumers to purchase a good at any given price. The higher the price, the lower the quantity demanded. The lower the price, the higher the quantity demanded.
Supply: The first most common economic fallacy is the presumption that Supply is directly related to the quantity of a good in a market. IT IS NOT. “Supply” is the producer’s version of demand. It reflects the producer’s willingness to sell a particular quantity of a good at a particular price. The higher the price a good sells for, the more willing the producer is to sell. The lower the price a good sells for, the less inclined a producer is to sell.
So, supply is the willingness of a company to sell X amount of product at Y price, and demand is the willingness of a consumer to purchase X amount of a product at Y price. Where those two curves cross on a graph, is what we call “Equilibrium price.” Equilibrium Price is the point at which consumers willingness to buy matches a producers willingness to sell. Markets, by their nature, will always balance price and quantity at this equilibrium price. Why? While a producer certainly wants to sell their goods at a higher price, consumers always want to buy their goods at a lower price. Markets work on voluntary exchange, so as a consumer I may want to purchase a new Nissan GT-R for $5.00, there is no producer in their right mind that would want to sell me that car for that price. On the converse, Nissan may want to sell me that GT-R for $500,000 but no consumer in their right mind would pay that price for that car. Ultimately, consumer wants and producer wants balance themselves at an equilibrium price (that isn’t necessarily a mid-point.) This is Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand.” “When we enter into an exchange, we are only interested in our own well being, and producers are seeking their own. Both are pushed by that invisible hand to an equilibrium position.”
The thing is, it doesn’t mean that it will make everyone happy.
The effects of government control is a topic for a future date, but note the effect of rent price controls in New York City and Cairo, Egypt. Both government imposed rent ceilings caused a massive increase in demand and accordingly, the price actually INCREASED. A black market for rent subleasing came to exist, as those lessees who were lucky enough to rent an apartment maintained their lease at the ceiling price, and subsequently subleased their apartments out at a higher rate. Demand at that ceiling price was huge, but producers weren’t willing to sell as many units at that price (and so converted some to commercial property, or simply did not lease them.) This is what’s called the Law of Unintended Consequences.
The same thing happens with the illegalization of a particular good. The market doesn’t simply disappear when we make it illegal, or attempt to control price, it simply alters the supply and demand (primarily supply) and alters equilibrium price, almost always increasing it. Illegal narcotics for example, if legalized, would likely find a lower equilibrium price, as there are fewer risks for suppliers to grow, produce and market the product.
Fact is, markets will exist whether we want them to or not. Its part of human nature to trade and exchange, and voluntary exchange is the basis upon which all human beings communicate and socialize. Be it legal or illegal, controlled or uncontrolled, the market will still exist. The only difference is that we make the sale of a good at that equilibrium price black, or white. Illegal narcotics, medical procedures (abortion anyone?), all will have a market no matter how moral or immoral we think they are, and no matter how much we like or dislike that market. It will still exist no matter how much government gets involved.
Now, with a little tearing apart of our President’s speech, I have to ask… “What invisible hand are you talking about?” With a $1,000,000,000,000 price tag (Looks different when you write out all the zeros, no?), the bailouts certainly weren’t invisible. If we presume a population of 300 million US citizens, that equates to about $23,333 per person.
While a fantastic speech writer, it’s obvious to me that our current president fits the mold of what John Jay warned in the Federalist Papers #64. “Brilliant appearances often mislead as well as dazzle.” Barack Obama is a bullshitter. He clearly has no idea what he referenced in his own speech. I’d give him the credit of intellect, but if that’s the case, it would put him on an ideological par with Adolf Hitler. I think he lacks the intent and truly believes that what he is doing is right. Hitler knew it wasn’t. The more and more I hear Obama’s speeches, the more and more he sounds like a more articulate G.W. Bush.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Following my Folly.
Well, I told the world that I was done drinking. That I'd never touch alcohol again. For all intents and purposes, I was correct. I was ardent about not drinking. To a great degree, I still am and will be.
But I had the chance to hang out with two of the most awesome people on earth, and one of them started talking about beer. About how he liked certain Belgian style beers because they were a bit sweeter than most. I listened and broke out into an analysis of hops, explaining that certain hops have different characters in beer, how some hops add a citrus character and some add a more pine character. About the difference in taste created by roasting a malt for a different period of time, and the difference between an Ale and a Lager.
Once I stopped talking, he just looked at me and went... "dude, you can't quit drinking beer."
He's right. I can't. Not because I physically cannot, but because it's too much of a hobby for me.
So tonight I sit with a beer in my hand. An anomaly that shouldn't be, but is. I realized that I don't like drinking, but I love beer. Even the beer I hold is an anomaly.
I'm doing what was suggested by one of my favorite brewers in the world. - "Follow your folly."
Anomalies:
1. I'm following a slogan.
2. I've found something I both love, and hate.
3. I presumed that hell would freeze over before the beer I'm drinking was created.
So, I would like to salute New Belgium Brewery.
I am currently drinking a beer called "Ranger" made by New Belgium, the first ever of it's type created by a brewer that normally sticks to Belgian style beers yet has deviated from the norm. I always said - Whenever New Belgium does it, they do a DAMN good job of it, whatever it is. I had always said how much of a shame it is that New Belgium never made an IPA...
True to the expectation, the New Belgium Ranger IPA is worthy of the title, "Christ-like." Being a hop head, this beer is everything I wished Hoptober would have been. Mind you, Hoptober was absolutely fantastic, this is the next step of awesome, for the Hophead.
The bottle advertises the use of Cascade, Simcoe and Chinook hops. It's a similar taste to what I noticed in Hoptober, though with a bit less potency, though the fact that the only hop similarity is Cascade, it leads me to think that these are the dominant hops.
Chinook hops give the primary character found in the Stone IPA, and Cascades seem to be the primary character found in the Odell IPA (won't lie though, it could be Citra hops.) - These two beers are the personification of each respective hop. The difference? The Stone IPA is as piney as you get, and the Odell IPA has a taste comparable to Grapefruit (how's that for citrus character?)
What New Belgium has done here, is created a new line in between the two poles. The Ranger IPA is as piney as it is citrusy, and the effect it carries on a trained (or likely, untrained) palate is awestriking. Many may not be able to handle the bitter, but for those daring enough... I'll finish your six pack if you don't like it.
I love beer.
But I had the chance to hang out with two of the most awesome people on earth, and one of them started talking about beer. About how he liked certain Belgian style beers because they were a bit sweeter than most. I listened and broke out into an analysis of hops, explaining that certain hops have different characters in beer, how some hops add a citrus character and some add a more pine character. About the difference in taste created by roasting a malt for a different period of time, and the difference between an Ale and a Lager.
Once I stopped talking, he just looked at me and went... "dude, you can't quit drinking beer."
He's right. I can't. Not because I physically cannot, but because it's too much of a hobby for me.
So tonight I sit with a beer in my hand. An anomaly that shouldn't be, but is. I realized that I don't like drinking, but I love beer. Even the beer I hold is an anomaly.
I'm doing what was suggested by one of my favorite brewers in the world. - "Follow your folly."
Anomalies:
1. I'm following a slogan.
2. I've found something I both love, and hate.
3. I presumed that hell would freeze over before the beer I'm drinking was created.
So, I would like to salute New Belgium Brewery.
I am currently drinking a beer called "Ranger" made by New Belgium, the first ever of it's type created by a brewer that normally sticks to Belgian style beers yet has deviated from the norm. I always said - Whenever New Belgium does it, they do a DAMN good job of it, whatever it is. I had always said how much of a shame it is that New Belgium never made an IPA...
True to the expectation, the New Belgium Ranger IPA is worthy of the title, "Christ-like." Being a hop head, this beer is everything I wished Hoptober would have been. Mind you, Hoptober was absolutely fantastic, this is the next step of awesome, for the Hophead.
The bottle advertises the use of Cascade, Simcoe and Chinook hops. It's a similar taste to what I noticed in Hoptober, though with a bit less potency, though the fact that the only hop similarity is Cascade, it leads me to think that these are the dominant hops.
Chinook hops give the primary character found in the Stone IPA, and Cascades seem to be the primary character found in the Odell IPA (won't lie though, it could be Citra hops.) - These two beers are the personification of each respective hop. The difference? The Stone IPA is as piney as you get, and the Odell IPA has a taste comparable to Grapefruit (how's that for citrus character?)
What New Belgium has done here, is created a new line in between the two poles. The Ranger IPA is as piney as it is citrusy, and the effect it carries on a trained (or likely, untrained) palate is awestriking. Many may not be able to handle the bitter, but for those daring enough... I'll finish your six pack if you don't like it.
I love beer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)