It could be that I'm using sloppy language somehow, but I notice there are certain thoughts I have about race in America that seem, based upon repeated comments in this blog, easy to misunderstand. It may be that people are finding meaning in my words that was not consciously intended, that they are simply misunderstanding, or are projecting their own stuff. Maybe there are internal inconsistencies in my position that people are seeing, or that my sometimes teleological philosophy conflicts with yours--we can't really discuss events until we are viewing the world through a perceptual lens with sufficient similarity that a common language of thought can be devised between us. Otherwise, words just bounce off each other. ﾠ But a few things kept coming up, and I think it important to address them. Some folks seem to think that: ﾠ 1) I think white people are different from black people: more racist, evil, whatever. No, no more than I think they're more intelligent or closer to God. I think that people are people, and that certain human tendencies get REALLY damaging when you outnumber the "other" group largely, or hold massive power advantages. If I say "white people can see the humanity in demons more easily than the humanity in black people" is it really that difficult to think: "oh. So Steve thinks blacks can see the humanity in demons more easily than that in whites? And that it just doesn't matter as much because there are fewer of them, and they don't control the economic and judicial systems. Hmmm." You can agree or disagree with this, but its fascinating how few of you seem to grasp what I'm saying. I suspect there is HUGE cultural programming, much of which you are not consciously aware of, to believe groups are very different, at core. ﾠ 2) I want white people over 50 to die. Hmmm. No more than I want black people to die, no. I think there would be certain positive changes when they do, as certain negative attitudes will die off to a critical degree. But that doesn't mean I'd push a button, even in secret, to make it happen. ﾠ 3) I want Hollywood to make more movies with black and brown people represented as fully human beings. No. I want Hollywood TO BE ABLE TO make more movies with black and brown people represented as fully human beings. A subtle difference, perhaps, and one that people keep missing. I think that America, as a whole, has voted against it with her dollars, the only vote that counts in a capitalist system, or to a corporation. Am I being politically incorrect to say, specifically, "white Americans"? No, just honest and seeking greater clarity. Do you think BLACK people are refusing to watch sex scenes with black actors? Please. I've spoken endlessly about a universal 10% disconnect, that the average person empathizes about 10% less with members of another group than members of their own. It's enough to doom movies---but also fill prisons and cause shootings. Now that means that 10% of people are actually "Xenophiles"--actually feeling extra love for the Others. Of course, that means an equal number on the other end feel actual venom. You are perfectly welcome to consider yourself in this group. But it's a small boat, folks. And you'll rapidly notice that more people CLAIM to have tickets than will actually fit. Make of that what you will. ﾠ ﾠ 4) I expect white people to do something about this situation. No, I don't. I expect time to fix it, so long as people are honest and follow their long-term selfish interests. I've never asked anyone to do anything specifically to "fix" this. I've never asked anyone to do anything other than take care of themselves, live balanced, healthy lives, follow their dreams, and be gentle and strong. Can anyone out there remember a single time when I ever, to a single person, black, white or whatever, given any advise that was less than positive? Actions speak louder than your interpretation of my words. How could I want white people to die out, and simultaneously encourage them to actions that lengthen their lives? You are perceiving a duality that doesn't exist. My pain doesn't control my desires. ﾠ 5) Although I certainly see innate differences between individuals, I don't believe in them between groups when it comes to basic qualities of humanity like goodness, sanity, or intelligence. I am perfectly aware thatabout 20% of good, intelligent people DO believe there are such differences. And I also believe they rarely state this belief bluntly in public. In other words, about 20% of whites think blacks less capable, 20% of blacks think whites intrinsically evil, 20% of women think men are innately less "good" than women, 20% of men think women less capable than men, etc. ﾠ I've been crystal clear that I believe the differences in performance and attitudes in racial groups in America is due to different starting contexts and perceptual lenses. That means that black culture was horribly damaged by slavery--and is still healing. I am horrified by the criminality, justifications of abandoning children, lack of reading, misogynistic music, and so on--all symptoms of damage and disease, passed from generation to generation: and until the late 60's reinforced by legal pressure. You expect us to get over this in a generation? People damaged in childhood routinely take decades to sort through their shit. I find the expectation that a culture could overcome 400 years in 40 years to be sheer blindness. ﾠ But it also means that whites were just doin' what comes naturally--to all human beings. Nothing especially sick and twisted on either side, just a burp in history that we're still getting over, and that it sucks to be in the middle of. ﾠ But if you have a different philosophical position, I suspect it is difficult to believe that this is actually mine. I get the sense that you think I'm kidding. That deep down, yes, I think whites are especially bigoted. Yes, you think that I secretly, deep inside, fear blacks are inferior (frankly, before I read "Guns, Germs, and Steel" I had to fight a bit to keep from worrying about that, yep.) ﾠ But when I talk about differential behaviors, and you KNOW I believe the negative behaviors on either side are mostly historical and environmental, not innate, it is interesting how few of you take the next step: "if Steve thinks this stuff is mostly programming and environment, what programming or environment would cause differential criminal behavior, prejudice, violence, or whatever? Who created the context? Can it be changed? Is it changing?" ﾠ Etcetera. Instead, constantly, the assumption leaps to: "you're saying whites are especially bad! Racist!" Or, even more interestingly, there seems to be a bit of "how dare you say that whites aren't special!" ﾠ Of course there are biological factors. It is even possible that they are the cause. But until I see the playing field level, I reserve the right to suggest that that is the basic problem--especially since the only people who believe the problem is biological are members of the group who "win" that contest. Not exactly courageous to devise, administer, and interpret a test, and then declare yourself the winner. And even then, is looks like only about 30% of the experts agree that the results indicate racial differences in capacity. When black experts agree, I'll look more carefully. Or are you saying that blacks, (even those few you believe are operating at that intellectual level) wouldn't be honest about what they see? I can understand that position, but what reason would I have to believe a higher percentage of blacks would lie about it (for the sake of political correctness, perhaps) than whites would lie in the other direction (for the sake of political correctness to racial identity?) If we suppose an equal percentage of liars and bigots on either side, the whole thing looks like the absolutely standard "we rule, you drool" scenario, just monkeys climbing trees and throwing shit at the other monkeys, then saying "who, me?" ## The point is: have you ever heard me suggest black people ask white people for anything? That blacks shouldn't raise their children, pay their bills, study hard, whatever? Why not find a single instance, and get back to me. ﾠ But this doesn't just go for black versus white. That would also go male versus female, rich versus poor, gay versus straight, Christian versus Muslim, and a few others. I don't buy ANY of this shit, remember? Dan, how many times have we argued because I don't believe different violence statistics mean men are worse? ﾠ And if you think they are...then I ask you how you come up with one answer for men, and another for blacks? I mean, if men are worse than women, because they commit more violent crimes, shouldn't blacks be worse than whites on the same account? ﾠ But the reflexive corollary applies: if there is something wrong with blacks because we commit more violent crime...isn't there something "wrong" with men, by the exact same standard? It seems to me that anyone who attributes one but not the other to basic "goodness" or whatever isn't thinking clearly, or is changing their beliefs whenever it is convenient, whatever makes them feel good about themselves. ﾠ ﾠ I have taken shit from black people for suggesting, yes: there is damage aplenty. Our culture has some serious holes. There is work to do, and no one to do it but us. ﾠ And I have taken shit from white people for suggesting: nope, I don't think you would have done one whit better if the shoe was on the other foot. ﾠ That's my attitude, my only core attitude. If you're irritated that I keep bringing up the movie thing, think how it feels to be the only one who seems to see it, or have the courage to speak. Think about how it might feel to run into this stuff every day, and have the perpetrators constantly deny its happening, or that it might affect behavior and potential on a wider level, in more important arenas. ﾠ I have counseled entirely too many smart white people on their obesity, lack of money, and poor relationships. And it always goes back to choices, and those choices are always based upon damage that happened to them early, rotten beliefs, distorted values. Their software is buggy. Their hardware is fine. Black hardware is fine. Our software is buggy, or designed for an operating system we are always just a little incompatible with. We didn't create it, but we have to find a way to cope with it. And are. But in my experience, software emulators always run just a little slower than native software. ﾠ No, I don't want white people to do anything except be honest, work hard, and love one another. Live long, and prosper. And: if you think you would have done better, given the same situation, please say so clearly, and not hide behind political correctness. That serves no one.
Monday, July 14, 2008
What you hear is not what I say
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Hellboy II (2008)
Hellboy II: The Golden Army ﾠ Well, any worry that the great Guillermo Del Toro wouldn't be able to direct "The Hobbit" can be laid to rest. For the first fifteen minutes of Hellboy II, I thought I was watching another film on the level of "Lord of the Rings"--I was honestly tempted to consider it that level of masterwork. No, it isn't. What it is is an exceptional piece of fantasy, and a phenomenal comic book movie. I think that we can now safely consider comics to be as much of an art form as any other medium: stage, novel, film, television, whatever. Mostly crap. But capable of rising to the level of the sublime. ﾠ None of Hellboy's effect would be possible without Ron Perlman, who is as close to perfect as the cigar-chomping, beer-swilling son of Satan as it is possible to imagine. This time "Red" and his companions at a "Men In Black" style paranormal investigation force, including pyrokinetic girlfriend Liz (Selma Blair) and geeky amphibian Abe Sapian (Doug Jones) are up against an entire army of the Fairy Folk, resurrected to spearhead an assault against humankind. I don't want to get into it too much, because the joy is in the telling of it. And Del Toro delivers an avalanche of visual wonders unlike anything I can remember in commercial American film in many, many years. Simply wondrous. And at the core of it all is a touching love story--two of them actually, one between Red and Liz, and the other between Abe and a princess of the netherworld. This is cinema at its most purely entertaining and imaginative, with a dash of real humanity. Just great summer entertainment. And if it isn't quite classic, it's still a mile above most of what passes for film these days. Or any days. A very easy "A". ## WARNING...SAMBO ALERT ﾠ You knew THIS shit was coming, didn't you? Even a demon from hell can get the girl. Compare with "Hancock." Del Toro understands very well that the core of most story, second only to survival itself, is love. In my opinion anyone who thinks men hate women is either out of touch with their own emotions, or doesn't understand men at all. Men love women desperately, feel incomplete without them, will die to touch them, and pay just to look at them, especially naked. They are men's only route to immortality, (especially for heterosexual men) and that urge to control the reproductive function leads to loathsome levels of possessiveness and jealousy. The need leads to fear, and the fear to violence. But the primary emotion is love, and fear of loss or rejection. That drive powers a fantastic amount of literature, and the joining between male and female is the fusionary energy powering all of human life and civilization. ﾠ Hellboy uses that yearning beautifully, in the on-off relationship between Liz and the misshapen, ugly spawn of Satan. Hancock couldn't touch that third rail. Del Toro's last foray into comic books: "Blade II" couldn't touch it. ﾠ The oblivious will immediately say something like "But Hellboy didn't get laid, Steve"--oh, please. Haven't you been listening? I use "laid on screen" simply to have an objective statistic to point to, otherwise those of you who benefit from this situation (and trust me, if you are white, you and your children, on average, have benefited from the image systems showing you as more beautiful, intelligent, successful. As men have benefited by images of women subservient. As women have benefited by images of men willing to die to protect them or compete for them). The point is the lesser degree of humanity accorded black actors and characters. What does it say that I've seen black men playing God more often than being simply genuine human beings? If you can't progress up the chakras, you can't get there. The "Spiritual Guide" image is purely for the entertainment of whites. There is no way to get there. We can survive, be sexual, develop the power to raise our families safely, open our hearts to love, learn to express our truth, develop the ability to communicate, develop a map of the world, and prepare ourselves for death. And the Path opens in that order. Cut off the earlier steps, and the later ones rarely develop. ﾠ Let's just put it bluntly: on an unconscious level, white people can see the humanity in a demon from hell more easily than in a black man. They can empathize with his yearning for love, his need to touch. True, we don't see him make love to Liz (I'm not sure they even kiss) but Hellboy is clearly accorded the greater intimacy. Someone might say that this is reflective of the source material. Fine. Then how should I phrase this: "when whites create black characters, they invest them with less humanity than when they create either white characters or fantasy characters". What have I said about the SF/Fantasy field? "SF is 99.9% White people and their imaginary friends." ﾠ Just as the tendency to shoot black suspects more rapidly than white ones can be ameliorated by training (bringing the conscious drive up to the level of the unconscious, imprinting images from childhood on), I believe that honest discussion about this can bring about changes in the media. ﾠ Remember: the images on the screen wouldn't matter if I didn't think they connected to cops shooting black men dead in the street, as well as unemployment, incarceration, and violent death statistics. On both a conscious and unconscious level, for 400 years we've gotten the following message "you are, on average, less than us. Less beautiful, less intelligent, less important. If you cannot be utterly subservient, please go away and die. We like your beautiful women, and some of your men...if they promise not to cock-block, or complain that we screw your women and program your children to think us closer to God. If you forget what we did to you, and never, ever seek redress." ﾠ Well, that's fine. Remember my theory: every group tries to keep all the power for itself, and then tries to pretend that's not what it's doing. Men want what they want. Women want what they want. Black people want what they want, and White people want what THEY want. Hell, adults want what they want, and children want what they want. And each of these groups will do whatever it can to gain as much control as they can, in every way that is pleasing for them. Everyone wants the world to revolve around them. ﾠ Popular media responds to culture and also drives it. In these comments, I'm talking about film as evidence of widely-spread unconscious drives, like looking at the grass bending to know if the wind is blowing. Those committed to remaining unconscious will try to blame it on "Hollywood" or "Racist Liberal filmmakers" or "sexist rich men" or something. ﾠ If you take a look at those 300 or so films that earn above 100 million, you'll find only about eight of them with stars over the age of 50. About six male, and about two women. Clearly ageism. But suggesting that this is "Hollywood" is blind. Hollywood has no ethics. They certainly respond to conscious and unconscious drives, but their primary drive is to make money. While studio execs tend to be young, the OWNERS and primary stockholders are older. They could push decisions to make any movies they want, and know that their American audience doesn't want to see themselves age. The vast majority --if not the totality of stars in 100-million plus films are those who are in the "Breeding Circle"--young, heterosexual, lean-bodied. Note that the males who appear in 100-million plus films who ARE over fifty (Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford, Sean Connery) are, almost without exception, demonstrated to still be "fit and powerful"--in other words, still warriors of their tribe, capable of reproducing and protecting those babies. Women are almost exclusively young and fertile--or still have the "hourglass" body configuration that signals youth and fertility to the male hindbrain. First and second chakra stuff, kiddies. That's what America wants. Considering that our films are the most popular in the world, it is arguable that that is what all the world wants. We want to survive: as individuals, as a family, as a nation, as a race, as a species. Right after those two chakras, it's tribalism. Race. So we get into conflict. Denzel, Will Smith, Eddie Murphy, Wesley...these are all smart, fit, sexual warriors. Women drool over them. But they are also, on a racial level, warriors of the "other" tribe. So the male hindbrain will feel entertained by them...as long as there is no sex, reproducing, potential cock-blocking, ESPECIALLY no interracial yum-yum. Fantasy characters represent the unconscious longings of the creator. Look at Del Toro's composition of secondary characters. Fantasy in the front. White actors with 100% of the dialog. A tiny sprinkling of non-whites way in the background. Blink and you'll miss them.
The racial complexion of this country is changing. Your white children are going to be on the losing end of this one day. I promise when that happens, if brown people do the same shit to you you've been doing to us, suddenly you'll notice. And be angry that we "don't notice."
I wonder: had the shoe been on the other foot, would I have noticed? Probably. But I doubt if I would have spent much time worrying about it. Oh well. What does it matter? It's just movies. Make your own movies! I would say, pointing to the bending grass, over and over again, no matter how many times white people said: "you're looking at the symptoms, not the disease. I'm talking about the hurricane, and you insist on focusing on the grass." And I would nod my head, tsk-tsk, and know, deep inside, that white people are simply obsessed with long-dead history, trivia, and obscure pop statistics. Why don't they just get over it?
Because when it comes right down to it, humans forgive, but we never forget.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
A little help with sex and violence?
ﾠ Because a few people have said something to the effect of "most sex scenes in movies are misogynistic" I have to admit to confusion. The dictionary definition of misogyny is: "hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women. " If I assume that a lot of people feel this way, then clearly I'm missing something, and would seriously like a few questions answered. Those who feel this way, please answer some questions for me: 1) is this the definition you're using? Or is there another one? 2) Can you PLEASE give me examples of love/sex scenes you did NOT consider misogynistic? If there are some easily avoided traps, I'd like to know them. 3) I have a chain of thought I find unavoidable. Sex in gay porn is more aggressive and dominating (from what I've seen) than typical heterosexual porn. If the level of aggression/domination in heterosexual movies means men hate/dislike/mistrust women, does this mean they also hate/dislike/mistrust men? Or just their sexual partners? 4) Wouldn't that ultimately mean that men hate/dislike/mistrust themselves? Is that what's really being said? 5) Do women like/trust/love men more than men like/trust/love women? Do they like themselves more than men like themselves? ﾠ I guess this troubles me because it points to a really pale, ugly view of humanity: everyone mistrusting everyone, and hating themselves. I am truly confused on this one, and wonder if I'm missing something, or a lot. If you feel men hate women more than they hate other men, is it an "out-group" thing? (Hate them because they are the "other"). If so, why have I had to fight so hard to convince people that there might be a "10% disconnect" between white people and black people? Wouldn't the same reasoning lead you to believe that racism is deep, pervasive, and incurable? ﾠ I honestly don't get it. And I'm really trying. A little help, please? ### http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily /2008/07/police_usually_are_able_to_cur.php ﾠ This article, sent by a reader, has to do with racial bias in police shootings, and how they can apparently be trained out by conscious awareness. I am not sufficiently savvy to interpret their data, and would love if readers who are would take a look. It would seem to go along with what I've been saying. It also helps explain why I am apparently "obsessed" with racial images. Conscious awareness can overcome innate tendency/prior conditioning. If I am the only person who notices the racial stats regarding black male sexuality in film, it would be cowardice of the very worst kind not to continue to beat the drum. I may lose some readers, but you know? I knew the job was dangerous when I took it, George. ﾠ
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Sex in Films
Because several folks have specifically commented that they aren't fans of sex in movies, (and therefore wonder just a bit why I like it, even wondering if I'm "overcompensating") I thought I'd address that. Most simply, I enjoy, and enjoy depictions of, all the pleasurable animal aspects of life, as well as the intellectual aspects, and the spiritual ones. The whole thing, right up the chakras. Fighting, mating, eating, falling in love, self-expression, whatever. I like watching people drive fast cars expertly, and teaching babies to walk.
I find attractive male and female bodies aesthetically pleasing, a form of living art. And watching two beautiful people couple is delicious. Now, that said, I've never liked porn much: sex devoid of context is meaningless to me. I'd be just as bored by fight scenes without a surrounding story: just choreography.
Interestingly, there are similar rules: a fight scene can't just stop the plot for athletic choreography. There must be something at stake, and ideally, the scene must explore or reveal a character. Ideally. The best Rocky films did that: twelve rounds of boxing that turn the plot and reveal character. Anyone EVER seen a love/sex scene in a Hollywood movie that lasted as long as the fight scene in any Rocky movie? Ever? I haven't. Now, why in the world should it be more offensive to see two people making love than two people beating the living hell out of each other?
Frankly, the only reason I can think of is that deep down inside, you were taught that sex is "dirty", "nasty" and so forth. "Bumping uglies," "fuck you" as the ultimate insult (instead of the highest complement!) "screwing someone" as a negative, "filthy movies" gutter talk" and on, and on and on. We get a gigantic amount of reinforcement for sex as a negative. Violence in film is ten times more tolerated, and while I have a theory as to why, it still strikes me as pretty sick.
Why do I think society is more cautious about showing sex than it is displaying violence? Because every child WILL eventually have sex. Few of us will kill. The only question about sex is "when," not "if." Children are physically mature long before they are emotionally or financially prepared for the responsibilities of adult relationships. We need to slow them down.
I further suspect that societies get a lot of their power by putting toll booths on the sexual highway. You have to be "approved" by parents, church, state before you can express your sexuality. If they can convince you of this, force you to finish school, have a stable job, be presentable to parents and so forth, you can support the next generation, pay your taxes, and continue society as it currently exists. I think there are REAL disadvantages to boys and girls screwing before they are emotionally mature--both for them, and for society as a whole.
But what this means is that the easiest way to control sex is to try to anchor enough pain to it to balance the fantastic amount of pleasure. Literally, Hellfire is the punishment. Shunning. Sometimes death.
All this does, of course, is often make it more forbidden and delicious instead of a natural pleasurable human function, capable of being as expressive as dance. Moreso. No human activity expresses as much about human beings as quickly as sex: smell, touch, taste, sight, hearing, all going at once. The baud rate of communication during sex is fantastically high.
We enjoy "eavesdropping" on people's private, intimate conversations in film, so saying "it's too intimate" strikes me as avoiding the real question. Why, unless sex is dirty, or wrong, should there be any greater taboo for adults to watch it than to watch dancing, eating, or any other basic social or personal function? We discuss basic body functions in G-rated movies: poop and pee and vomit and eating. What is the problem with sex...unless it is in some way dirty? We watch people kill each other with incredibly graphic prosthetics and CGI--but you'll never see a vagina or erect penis in a film. A little pubic hair, sure. But that's about it. (Yeah, there are very rare instances of a flash of pink, but you know what I'm saying.)
I don't have real hang-ups about sex. Well, I have some kinky friends who think I'm very, very vanilla. I can live with that. But my drives are fairly simply, and direct. I love sex, and I love making love even more, and have zero guilt about it. I like my own body, and am not intimidated by beautiful bodies onscreen. I honestly don't see what the problem is...unless there is something intrinsically evil about sex. And since there is a huge amount of reinforcement for that attitude (there are, so far as I can see, no positive references to sex in the entire New Testament. There are NEGATIVE ones, but no positive ones. Now, the Old Testament rocks in this regard) But since we are in a Christian culture, I honestly think that a lot of the negatives have seeped in.
I remember talking to one very Christian lady about "The Last Temptation of Christ" and the premise of "The Da Vinci Code." In my mind, if Christ ate and slept (and apparently approved of wine), he had basic body functions, and I failed to see what all the uproar was that he might have been sexual, or lived in a sanctified marriage. She was absolutely horrified. "I don't want to think about my Lord screwing some bitch" she almost screamed. What? I backed away from THAT conversation. Minefield. Minefield. Danger, Will Robinson.
So...I would love to hear from people about this. I am most especially interested in your opinino if you are in a healthy, active sexual relationship (and therefore not resentful), think sex intrinsically neutral at worst (and therefore not dealing with guilt and disgust), and find yourself physically attractive when naked (and therefore not jealous, or fearful your partner might be more attracted to what's on the screen than what is in your bedroom). Please, take away any of my automatic suspicions about the kinds of people who are offended by sex onscreen, and help me understand this.
Why exactly is sex onscreen more objectionable than a car chase, fight scene, or whatever? Or watching people eat? If you mean "unmotivated sex" or "abusive sex" or something, well sure...but if sex isn't evil, and you aren't intimidated, and you are happy in your own sex life..what exactly is the problem? What exactly is confusing to you about why healthy adults would enjoy watching depictions of other adults making love? The number of times someone has said: "well, you don't watch people go to the bathroom" is telling in two ways: first, they are in denial. I've seen people peeing in G-rated films. Second, equating sex with producing filthy and near-poisonous body waste like feces tells me that they have a MASSIVE aversion.
If I'm wrong here, can you help me understand what's going on?
#
Today I did Steve Maxwell's "300 Kettlebell Workout." Dear God. Amazing, brutal...and I used a smaller KB, and took rest breaks. Twenty-six minutes of brutal fun. This guy is a monster, and HE only used a 16 KB bell. Now, yes, he was talking instruction while doing it, but still sweating like a horse and blowing like a steam-shovel. I used a 12 Kb, and Tananarive used an 8. Lethal. Really comprehensive, and brilliantly designed. A few days back, someone mentioned Maxwell's joint mobility work. I'm sure it's excellent, but it is my belief that he "borrowed" a good deal of it from my dear friend Scott Sonnon. If you like Maxwell, check Scott out at www.rmaxinternational.com.
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
The Same Garbage In Different Bags
ﾠ 1) In body, people blame diets that make them hungry and uncomfortable, exercise that is "boring and painful" and the cruelty of people's attitudes. Lack of social support, and early family programming. Genetics. 2) In relationships, people blame lovers who lie and deceive, matchmaking services that don't deliver, bad role models when they were children, a judgmental society. 3) In finance, people blame the economy, dishonest customers or partners, inability to save money, the pull of advertising to buy useless goods, and lack of fulfillment at work. Lack of role models for success. ﾠ I'm sure there are others, but are we seeing a pattern here? Let's try to boil this stuff down to the smallest possible number of excuses/reasons, separate from specific context: ﾠ (and by the way, PLEASE remember that the main reason for this blog is reminding MYSELF of the principles I try to live by. I'm talking to myself, not to any of you) ﾠ 1) Confusing the external and internal worlds. "Society doesn't support me being fit/making money/finding love." That may well be true, but that is a child's excuse. "They don't like me at school. My friends are doing X, why can't I? They won't help." All may be true. Would you accept these reasons from your children? Then why the hell do you accept them from yourself? And if you do, don't you DARE expect to guide your children to maturity, when you won't accept it yourself. ﾠ 2) Not knowing how to motivate yourself. Boredom is internal, not external. There is nothing intrinsically boring or interesting--it's all our perceptual filters. Children do the "homework is boring!" routine, and we have to tease and cajole them. Adults learn how to pull their own strings, to align their goals, values, and beliefs. To know WHY they are doing things, and attach pain to the negative results, and pleasure to the positive ones. It is boring to pay your bills, study, exercise, help kids with their homework, listen to your spouse's stories of daily trial. Unless it isn't. Would you tell your children that you lost their home because going to work was "boring"? If so, you are a child, and should never have had sex in the first place. Adults don't have that luxury. ﾠ 3) Mistaking short term for long-term action. Do you know people whose savings plan is buying lottery tickets? I do. And diets, dating services, and get-rich-quick schemes are roughly equivilent--unless they are integrated into a plan designed to last a lifetime. ﾠ 4) Lying to yourself. Remember Musashi's first principle? "Do not think dishonestly." Let me give you a perfect instance, from my own life. Over my career, I've made a LOT of money. Millions of dollars. Not LOTS of millions, but millions nonetheless. Since childhood, I've known a simple principle about money: Pay Yourself First. 5-10% of everything, right off the top. Goes in a secure savings account, never to be touched. Now, what do I actually do? Spend it almost as fast as it comes in. I take trips. I buy electronics. I have a great time. And when my career has a burp, or I have unexpected expenses, what happens? I suffer, and so does my family. Because I don't have the discipline to do what must be done. And how do I avoid the discipline? By avoiding the personal pain. I blame the economy. I blame the industry. (No, I don't blame racism in the industry for any financial problems I have. I blame that for my inability to meet certain lofty goals, or to express myself at the highest level, or stay on the specific career path I desire. I CHOSE to make a living in the arts, and knew that would be difficult. Racism is just a specific difficulty. Has nothing to do with how I pay my bills.) I put the blame everywhere except where it belongs: on the Adult Steve. Now, I grew up lower-middle class, although we were broke a lot. There are people who are GENUINELY poor, barely enough to eat...but note that in America, a sign of poverty is obesity. That's not poverty the way the rest of the world experiences it.) What I'm saying is that in my entire circle of acquaintances, including inner-city folks, poor-as-churchmice fans, and so forth, a VERY tiny percentage of these people literally have no money for color TVs, entertainment, non-essential calories, etc. In other words, it might be very difficult to save 5-10% of their money, but it would be difficult to pull your daughter out of a burning building, too. The burning building is your finances. Or your relationship. Or your collapsing health. ﾠ I have lied to myself, and done it chronically, for years, and am now correcting that. And you know what? As soon as you begin to discipline yourself to live on 90% of what you earn, surprise surprise, you find yourself making more money, and automatically finding other ways to save it. But as long as I lied to myself (as most Americans do) that I HAD to have that toy, or vacation, or whatever, my life conspired to support the notion that I could not save. As soon as I admitted I was lying, and FORCED myself to Pay Myself First...things started moving in the right direction. ﾠ People lie about not having enough time to exercise. Or meditate. Or manage their time (!) It's all bullshit. If you have time to watch television, you have time to perfect your life. Period. ﾠ A few principles that arise from Musashi's first principle: 1) You should never accept an excuse from yourself that you would not accept from your children. 2) You have no right to expect the world to work better than you do. Can't balance your budget? How dare you complain about the economy. Can't balance your metabolic checkbook in terms of calories in/calories out? Don't act confused by beaurocratic bloat. Can't keep your house clean? Stop complaining about the environment. Can't have an honest, open-hearted conversation with your spouse or lover? Stop wondering why there are wars. It starts with you. And curiously enough, when you DO master these things, you will gain huge compassion for the people around you, and the source of all the world's problems will be revealed. It is us. We are the problem. We are the solution. People who mock "We are the one's we've been waiting for" scare me, just a little. But they don't surprise me. 3) You will never be able to trust other people more than you can trust yourself. Never. 4) You will never know other people better than you know yourself. 5) You cannot lie to others and be honest with yourself. 6) You are as sick as your secrets. 7) A corollary to #6: there really aren't any secrets. We wear our wounds on our sleeves. But for every lie you need the world to believe about you, you must buy into a lie from others. If you didn't need people to buy into your bullshit, you wouldn't buy into theirs. Every single time someone disappointed you in the past, I ask you honestly: weren't there clues? Didn't you feel something wrong? Why didn't you pay attention? Because you twisted "judge not lest ye be judged" to mean "don't pay attention." 8) Your relationships are only as healthy as the flow of information. I don't know a single relationship that went bad where lying, or the withholding of information was not at the core of it. Do you? If you fall out of love with someone, that's sad, but hardly tragic. If you conceal your emotions and cheat, or savage your partner by withholding your beauty or sexuality or power, on the other hand, you can destroy your family. 9) Your relationships with others will NEVER be healthier than your relationship with yourself. 10) Tomorrow doesn't exist. Neither does yesterday. There is only Now. Saying: "I'll wait until I'm healthy" to lose weight, or explore relationships is often just your ego trying to slow you down. It's like saying "I'll wait until I'm making more money to save" NO NO NO!!! You have it EXACTLY backwards. You start saving money while you are poor. The excuses for not saving money loom just as large when you have more money. 11) Operating on theory rather than demonstrated reality. The engagement with the process of health teaches you where you are, and where you are not. Otherwise, you are merely hallucinating, working on theory, practicing A Priori as opposed to A Posteriori philosophy. Hell, any exercise system, relationship theory, diet, economic policy or whatever will work in your mind. 12) Listening to experts who have not themselves accomplished the goal. Would you take economic advice from someone who is broke above someone who is self-made wealthy? Weight-loss advice from someone who yo-yo diets as opposed to people who lost and kept the weight off for a decade? Relationship advice from someone married eight times as opposed to someone who has been married and happy for thirty or forty years? I'll tell you why we do this: we don't want to hear the hard truth. ﾠ We are desperate to remain children, to blame the world, genetics, or whatever for our health and happiness. The instant we admit that WE are responsible for our health, wealth, and happiness we have nowhere to hide. Yes, in a bad economy, 20% of people might be unemployed...but why are YOU one of them? If you have a slow metabolism inherited from your parents, how exactly does that stop you from exercising every day that you eat, and learning more efficient techniques? If only 50% of marriages survive, why isn't yours one of them? Where is personal responsibility? Where is the belief in yourself? WOULD YOU ACCEPT THESE EXCUSES FROM YOUR CHILDREN? ﾠ If not, how can you call yourself an adult? I have been a child in too many ways, through too much of my life, and will not do it any longer. Nor will I speak less than my truth at any time...anything less than that is dooming my children to repeat my errors, rather than face the future with courage and hope.
Monday, July 07, 2008
The Biggest Lie
Kukulkan: ﾠ you quoted me talking about Clinton supporters voting for McCaine, thinking that I resent them if their reasons are racial (and am therefore hypocritical because I don't call blacks to task for voting along racial lines). Nonsense. I resent people who don't admit that many votes have been lost on this basis, and do the "Obama has an advantage because he is black" routine. You were detecting sarcasm, not resentment. I know damned well that many blacks vote for him BECAUSE he is black. Maybe even two or three times the percentage of whites who vote AGAINST him because he's black. But because whites outnumber us ten to one, he's lost one hell of a lot more votes on that basis than he's gained. That's people's right. But it pisses me off when people don't ACKNOWLEDGE that that has happened. That's really all. Frankly, I am far too busy being tickled that whites have been as accepting as they have. I would have to have been either incredibly naive, or harboring seething, murderous hatred for whites to be pissed by something that is so glaringly obvious and predictable. Anyone who knows me can tell you I am in neither category. Why in the world would I resent people following completely typical human behavior? It really sucks being on the losing end of that equation, but hey, that's the biz. ﾠ I understand people who harbor such resentments (about this and other issues) but unless I was willing to go out and kill some white folks, the anger and pain would do nothing except poison my own life. THAT is the real reason for forgiveness. Not for the other person's benefit, but for your own. The philosophy that I evolved to deal with this stuff is tied intimately to my sense of what it is to be a human being, and how the basic biological drives of our physical shells motivate our individual and social behaviors. It is this reason that I can't be swayed by arguments that men are less than women, or Muslims worse than Christians, whites worse than blacks...or vice versa. This stuff is all tied together. The exact same evaluative procedures that would create any "this better than that" about one of these arenas (say, men less moral or evolved than women) would lead me in an instant to believing whites were less than blacks, for example. I would be one lonely, isolated, unhappy, and unhealthy dude. # In the last two weeks, Jason has made HUGE strides in his swimming. From being scared to stray beyond the steps in the shallow end, he's now leaping into the deep end without his Floatie vest. Amazing. Not quite swimming, he is completely oriented to the pool, and knows how to thrash his way to the sides. Heck, I'm not much better than that, and I snorkle in the Bahamas and swim with dolphins. Watching your kids grow up is a neverending circus. # I'd been planning to try a new workout today, one of Steve Maxwell's kettlebell complexes. Maxwell is the very best designer of such programs out of Pavel's whole crew (he and Pavel seem to have had a falling out) but at 52 Maxwell is in smokin' shape, and his "Cruel and Unusual Kettlebell Exercises" is an awesome series of 4 KB complexes that are designed to whip your metabolism through the roof in 10-20 minutes. Really amazing stuff. # The second season of Dexter is being rerun on Showtime. Simply an amazing show, morbid, violent, sexy, heartbreaking...I just love it. Almost perfectly performed. T and I feel like it's Christmas in July. # Apparently, both Hellboy and The Dark Knight look to be superb comic book movies, with real heart as well as spectacle. Can't wait. And of course, both reflect the human reality of love at the center of our existence. Apparently, Dark Knight has six action scenes shot in IMAX, so see it in this format if possible. # We can't predict the future behavior of others, but I remember something one of my teachers said: "Do not trust people. Instead rely upon them. Rely upon them to do whatever it is they consider to be in their own self-interest." The only way to do that is to be able to determine what that self-interest is. And in my mind, the only way you can possibly do that is to know yourself. To look fearlessly at your own flaws and fuck-ups, and take responsibility for them, to get real about the way you've lied and sold yourself out...or stood up for yourself and been courageously honest in the face of pain and disappointment. If you take responsibility for all three aspects of your life, you have a good chance to see right through other people's B.S., because you'll know all the rationalizations. Over and over again, I've had people with weight problems straight-up lie about being "unable" to lose weight because of physical issues, when eventually it turned out the problems were really emotional. A student recently emailed me, confessing that when she loses weight her sex drive increases, and her husband's lack of sexual interest frustrates her more deeply, risking their marriage. In other words, she slows herself down to remain hobbled to a man with low energy. ﾠ I've run into versions of that many, many times. But here's the trick: I'd bet ANYTHING that there are parallels in the domain of money and relationships: people who blame external circumstances for lack of financial success, but actually cripple themselves out of resentment, fear, or programming. It isn't the economy: in the worst economies, the top 20% are still doing fine. The real question is: why aren't YOU in the top 20% of your field? Or ladies who say that there are more women than men, and that's why they're not in a relationship. Really? All that does is explain why X percentage of your group is unmarried, NOT why YOU are one of them. Stats don't have that much to do with the individual. ﾠ But I suspect it is miles easier to blame genetics, or the economy, or gender statistics, or racial statistics or whatever than it is to examine your own motivations, beliefs, values, and actions. So easy. For one thing, when you stop behaving like a typical member of your group, you lose your protective coloration. You stand out and become a target. ﾠ You take the chance of being alone. The trouble is that we are all "alone" and the "protective coloration" is just an illusion. I am male, American, of mixed ethnicity, a writer, etc....but all of these are just interesting labels. If I hide behind any of them, I inherit not just their strengths but limitations. It is simple: in terms of playing the game of life, either you take responsibility or you do not. Life doesn't care. You can be happy, healthy, and successful, but the doorway to adult rewards comes from adult responsibilities. And the instant you blame society, your family, or your genetic circumstances for anything that can be modified by action, you are being a child. Adults realize that they are all that stands between the next generations and chaos, and that they are going to die...and vow that their death, and therefore their life, will have meaning. That that meaning will be found in their actions. ﾠ If you can't admit the ways in which you sell yourself short, lie to yourself, are asleep, you cannot rise to your greatest level, and walk the world awake and alert. Complaining about injustices is one thing. Suggesting that those injustices control how you feel about life is quite another. Every day, you have to polish your perceptual lens, and take responsibility for living fully and honestly. Either you make that commitment, or you allow the external world to control your internal experience. And that is one of the great existential fallacies. ## Who you are to yourself influences the way you are with others. The lies you tell yourself will blind you to the lies others tell to you. The more honest you are with yourself, the harder it is to be conned. ﾠ And the question of the day is: what is the biggest lie you ever bought into from a friend or lover?
