Category Archives: a Social Mind 1

Social Mind 1

Social 1

“What would Charlie do?” – el Loco Gringo

Introducing the metaphorical Charlie Chimp. He is on the cusp of becoming human, living in a world full of new and dangerous things. Having recently abandoned his arboreal existence, he now wanders the savannas of Africa with his mate Polly Protohuman. The behavior patterns he learned in the jungle no longer are effective on the open savanna. “A-hah! He says, I’ll evolve an ANN that can control algorithms. That way I’ll be able to deal with these new threats in a timely manner”. It is necessary to consider the anthropological origins of our behavior to understand why we behave as we do. After all, it is one thing to chuck rocks across a stream at a rival clan, it is quite another to chuck ICBMs across an ocean at a rival clan. Just as Charlie no longer lives in the jungle, we no longer live in the paleolithic. But we act as if we do. Heres a link to download naked ape. Still a good book.


CT/RTSurvival QDFix Snap Ponder Derailment KnowNothing CupOfStupid Chrysalis BrainFart CircleJerk TheManThatIsn’tThere TheHumanZoo SteelMagnolia YayaSisterhood ArtOfManliness NakedApe ChimpFight DogBark



Dog Bark

The dog that doesn’t bark

This is something you might be interested in. an exerpt. Still trying to figure you out. (my neurons are hungry and must be fed.)

>Actually, this is true because the Indians are using categorization itself (like George Lakoff’s *Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things* as a lexical category in Dyrbal), while metaphor is a different kind of categorizing used extensively — some might say nearly exclusively — in Western European and other languages, and which they like to fancy is universal. While all of us have been subtly conditioned/brainwashed/socialized by our European language/culture complex (Imprinted) to believe in the “things” of reality as being more real than the invisible connections between them, valuing the dancers over the dancing, it’s a highly important antidote and counterbalance to know that Native American and other indigenous peoples value the dancing over the dancers, believe that processes and interrelationships are more real than the ‘things’ that grow out of them — that the physical is an epiphenomenon of the non-physical, and that cyclical timing is more real than linear time. We need both descriptions for a complete picture of how reality works for everyone, as well how language works for everyone, on this planet.< Dan Moonhawk Alford.

found here

AHA! notice the bold, this is how you think. concepts instead of symbols serial/parallel instead of binary/boolean. He thinks in the top down/bottom up method typical of western civilization however. (he doesn’t have the amerind imprinting, [if valid, i’ve only got a database of one.]) He’s a linguist so he might have much to say in re communication.


Yeah, I thought you might resonate with moonhawk. If he doesn’t want to restart the forum you can. Get permission to use his emails.

i was going to suggest an ‘epilogue’ instead of going back to the beginning and telling the reader where i was going to end up. sherlock holmes does many strange things in the course of his inquiry that don’t make sense until the viewer gets to see the ‘missing connections’, as in the epilogue where the detective brings everyone together and then reveals ‘who the culprit is’.

there would be no point in sherlock stating his hypothesis upfront. he would do better to invent some inquiry that would be ‘telling’ so as to validate his hypothesis without ever stating it, then each of the anecdotes that support the still unseen hypothesis build support for it, … support that would nto be there if the participants had not curiously observed these apparent ‘diversions’.

Well, there you go big guy. There’s your beginning. (a prelogue) A prologue would address DrB’s concerns and maintain the integrity of your thought process. In the final anaylsis we are all ignorant, only the wise admit it. There is no TRUTH, there is only truth. In reality, Dunno. But we can get less dunno if we admit it. We can sneak up on it. Orientals think occidentals think backwards. IE start with the conclusion and work our way back to the question. I agree. Note I was just passing on DrB’s comment. I use learn as a transitive verb, as in “I’m going to learn you something.” I present data and evidence, say what I think about it and invite criticism. It is this lack of communication in education that imprints the Aristotelian brain fart during the “critical stage” of children’s education.

“It makes sense to me…….does it to you?”

Which is what SH is doing. By comparing “patterns” we can see “ that curious incident in the night” the dog that didn’t bark (silver flash) something that should be there but isn’t. This “curious incident in the night” is in EVERYTHING in western civilization.

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”
Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

By pointing out the disjunct in the pattern, the answer “snapped” into place. That’s actually where I got the word SNAP, a person with SNAP (a Nexialist) can correlate many seemingly unrelated patterns to discern an overall rule. (shortcut) Then this “odd” pattern can be examined to find out why. THIS is what is missing in western civilization. The lack of SNAP IS the dog that didn’t bark. Something that should be there but isn’t . This is why people are dumb. THIS is the hurdle you must overcome in communication.

The algorithms (outputs) of the left mind and the right mind are compared, and if they disagree the “Does Not Compare” detector will (should) go off. This is what is not happening. This is the dog that doesn’t bark. This is the curious incident in the night. This lack of “does not compute” defines an idiot. The wires to this alarm have been cut by education.

Here’s one of my alarms> The man who isn’t there

BUT the ANN can.

The mind is elegant in it’s simplicity, incomprehensible in it’s scale, and glorious in it’s implementation.” – el Loco Gringo

Somebody’s nibbling on my site again, probably from SAND. (I just sent them something) I notice an odd pattern. Most people click through, and occasionally someone will read 20 or 30 pages. A few have spidered my site. As people who “go off the reservation” are stigmatized, anonymity is a problem. Maybe talk to Mr. Geoff about a proxy for gentlemen.

Check out Grobstein on this page

African Fractals

Ron Eglash has been doing some interesting research into the African Fractal thought mode. I find it particularily interesting to see that this thought pattern has come with the afro-Americans. This indicates, at least to me, that the imprinting period is sufficiently established to resist the educational overlay. The above image is of a fractal african village. Check on the bottom of the page of the ezakWantu site. excellent links showing african artifacts.

AfroAm RythmicFlow Breakwell TED EzakWantu RonEglash Transcript


The Ken Basket

Nexialist is a term coined by A E van Vogt in his novel “Voyage of the space beagle”. You can download this and other works of AE van Vogt below

Nexialist: One skilled in the science of joining together in an orderly fashion the knowledge of one field of learning with that of other fields.

The problems which Nexialism confronts are whole problems. Man has divided life and matter into separate compartments of knowledge and being. And, even though he sometimes uses words which indicate his awareness of that wholeness of nature, he con­tinues to behave as if the one, changing universe has many separately functioning parts. The techniques we will discuss tonight….”

He paused. He had been looking out over his audience, and his gaze had suddenly fastened on a familiar figure well to the rear of the room. After a moment’s hesitation, Grosvenor went on.

“….will show how this disparity between reality and man’s be­havior can be overcome.”

He went on to describe the techniques, and in the back of the room Gregory Kent took his first notes on the science of Nexialism.

And, carrying its little bit of human civilization, the expeditionary ship Space Beagle sped at an ever increasing velocity through a night that had no end.

And no beginning.

The Flight of the Beagle

Hmmm! Sounds like what I call normal, what maslow called transcendent.

the adjective transcendental and the noun transcendence convey three different but somehow related primary meanings, all of them derived from the word’s literal meaning , of climbing or going beyond:

one sense that originated in Ancient philosophy, a non-material self-consciousness that is outside of the world

one in Medieval philosophy, the characteristics, designated transcendentals, of unity, truth, and goodness.

one in modern philosophy. that, which goes beyond” (transcends) any possible knowledge of a human being

Keeping in mind that these are word games, I just like to stick to the basic concept of transcendence. That which goes beyond. Beyond what, you may ask? Dunno, if we knew it wouldn’t be beyond. It’s beyond my ken, the range of what one can know or understand. or anyone’s, unless you’re God. If any of you are God do leave a comment.

As van Vogt correctly deduced the scientific method has divided the world up and put the results in various baskets. I would like to add another basket to AE’s definiton, the ken basket. Our connectness with the universe. sometimes we know more than the sum of all the baskets. I’ll put two examples here and leave myself open. (asperataSupra and Dart)  AEvVogt always is thought provoking.  The world of null-A is also good.

TranscendentMan AsperataSupra Dart

CT/RT Survival value


Survival Value

This may come as a shock, but I am beginning to think that I may have been wrong. If true, this will be a first. I had made the comment “I don’t see the survival value in dumb”. But there may have been at one time in our evolution. Think of Ardi (creationists worst nightmare, we didn’t evolve from chimps, chimps evolved from us) in the paleolithic conscious constructionist thinking (CT) would have a definite negative survival value. Ergo selection (or de-selection if you prefer) would have favored restricting constructionist thinking to the un-conscious, ie dreaming. This is no longer the case, however.

CT requires the ability to hold several seemingly disparate concepts in the mind simultaneously. Not to be confused with the Orwellian “double think” in which several actually disparate and mutually exclusive concepts can be held in the mind comfortably. For instance, accepting the data presented in ratbrain-2 and and the tenets of psychology simultaneously strikes me as insane. One of them is obviously WRONG, For instance; I worked with a geophysical company that was manned by fundamentalists. They “knew” the earth was created 4,000 years ago. That was a “truth”. At the same time their job consisted of classifying rotifers to properly determine how many millions of years ago a geological structure was formed. That was also a “truth”. When queried they responded “I couldn’t understand secular humanism” (They’re right on that.) Think of CT as parallel processing. Hold that thought.
Reductionist Thinking limits the answer to what is actually “the best answer to date” as determined by CT, it dictates a single answer or conclusion for rapid response. It is not THE truth, but only A truth. One of many. Think of RT as serial processing. Hold that thought.
I am aware of only a handful of people who are capable of “switch hitting” IE volitionally able to go from RT to CT. Hold that thought.
CT is described as an “enhanced state” of consciousness. I don’t see it that way, it’s only different from RT. Hold that thought.
Many meditative techniques claim to enable one to enter this enhanced state, probably true, what they describe is what I experience. A sense of being one with the universe, (as perceived by me) a connectedness with my fellow man, a wholeness. Hold that thought.
One difference between RT and CT is that with RT you may “know” the answer but with CT you “understand” the question. BIG difference. Hold that thought.
As soon as my mind determines that the RT “truth” is bullshit it switches to CT (if I’m interested) else I just change the subject or inform them they are an idiot. Hold that thought.
I am aware of my mind, In the sense I am aware of any part of my body. I understand this is unusual. Hold that thought.

Consider the video on Jill Taylor “A stroke of insight”. She was a neuroscientist who was forcibly dumped into CT (right hemisphere) by a stroke which disabled much of her left hemisphere. (her mind went to “plan B”). She eloquently and effusively describes her experience, one result of which was an “explosion” of creativity. Consider, she was a person who had studied the workings of the mind for 30 years AND WAS NOT EVEN AWARE THAT THAT LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS EXISTED. WOW! She “knew” the answer before, she “understands” the question now. (you’ve got to ask the right question if you expect a reasonable answer). She is now a “switch hitter”, she can step into either mode of thought. She describes the experience as “overpowering”. It’s not, she’s just never been there before. It’s just CT thinking, asking the right question.

And where was I wrong? Dumb has an inherited component.



I am beginning to view psychology as a mental disorder in and of itself. I would define derailment as the inability of a reductionist thinking psychologist to follow a constructionist thought pattern. I don’t see the ambiguity in the first example, I wouldn’t have noticed it as being odd. The second seems flaky, but I don’t know what he was thinking, (I wasn’t there). (I’m not saying that the constructionist thinker is right, only that he doesn’t accept the goal as fact)

Derailment (thought disorder)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In psychiatry, derailment (also loosening of association, asyndesis, asyndetic thinking, knight’s move thinking, or entgleisen) refers to a pattern of discourse (in speech or writing) that is a sequence of unrelated or only remotely related ideas. The frame of reference often changes from one sentence to the next.[1][2] Examples:

  • “The next day when I’d be going out you know, I took control, like uh, I put bleach on my hair in California.”—given by Nancy C. Andreasen[3]
  • “The traffic is rumbling along the main road. They are going to the north. Why do girls always play pantomime heroes.”— given by Carl Schneider[2]

In a mild manifestation, this thought disorder is characterized by slippage of ideas further and further from the point of a discussion. Some of the synonyms given above (loosening of association, asyndetic thinking) are used by some authors to refer just to a loss of goal: discourse that sets off on a particular idea, wonders off and never returns to it. A related term is tangentiality— it refers to off-the-point, oblique or irrelevant answers given to questions.[1]

Entgleisen (derailment in German) was first used with this meaning by Carl Schneider in 1930.[2] The term asyndesis was introduced by N. Cameron in 1938, while loosening of association was introduced by A. Bleuler in 1950.[4] The phrase knight’s move thinking was first used in the context of pathological thinking by the psychologist Peter McKellar in 1957, who hypothesized that schizophrenics fail to suppress divergent associations.[5] In some studies on creativity, knight’s move thinking, while it describes a similarly loose association of ideas, is not considered a mental disorder or the hallmark of one; it is sometimes used as a synonym for lateral thinking.[5][6][7] Derailment was used with this meaning by Kurt Schneider in 1959.[4]

For instance; My ex-brother had a complaint filed against him for sexual harassment and was considering whether to led it slide or fight it aggressively. I made the comment, “you can’t leave yourself vulnerable, you can’t get away with doing nothing wrong twice”. (I suppose that would be viewed as “insane”, I don’t know, that’s what el Loco Gringo’s for) He was totally baffled until I explained it. What I meant was that if he let it slide, he would have a history of having sexual harassment complaints filed against him, which would come up again, and be considered, if another complaint were filed. His thought process precluded him seeing the big picture. He fought it aggressively and it turned out that the complaintant had been using these false claims to advance her career. (see, they do look at the history) By fighting it aggressively, he forced the issue, and it was resolved permanently (for him and several others, who chose to let it slide). The rule works both ways.

As I am not interested in genetics I had accepted DNA theory as valid. (it seemed reasonable) The same with evolution. Both theories have been smashed. They are even calling the DNA theory “the old dogma” in the textbooks. But the same pattern will re-establish itself and the “truth” of epigenetics will be the new “truth”. As will Ardi, when in fact, they are nothing but the best answer to date. The field of quantum physics is near collapse (or at least in an uproar) with the Lisi dudecohedron (D8) TOE. The debate is centering around the math. But reality doesn’t care about math. If the math does not agree with reality, the math is wrong. (Now THAT would be interesting.)

******Top down thinking is for implementing “the best answer to date” quickly, not for discovering new “truths”******

Letters to DrB>Here

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine


Why would you want to ponder anything? Unless there are time constraints, of course. It’s a waste of your awake time. Let the ANN handle it, that’s what its for. Your awake time is better spent watching out for lions and looking under rocks for grubs to eat. Occasionally a question will arise, that’s the ANN saying it is missing some data. NOW you do the research and allow the ANN to get back to pondering. When finished you will not only know the answer, you will understand it. The mind is POWERFUL if you don’t cripple it.

If the question is from the left hemisphere it will be in verbal form, if from the right in visual form. For instance, the image surfaced of you drawing squigglies with your left hand. The right hemisphere of the ANN wanted to know if you were left handed. I asked, the image went away.

Almost everything I am saying requires constructionist thinking. Do not try to understand or organize it as you are reading, consider it data input only. The ANN will sort it out in a manner that it can understand. AND it can do it in the background. The left hemisphere will soon get bored trying to make sense of what it considers drivel and will let the right hemisphere take over. The mere act of inputing data with the understanding that it will come up later, gets it past the doorman. It becomes relevant to interfacing with the world and can be collated. Once it is communicated and the response received, it becomes “set”.

This is the beauty of bottom up thinking, it works off-line.

Notice the eyes on the image above. I bet if the pupils were shifted to (her) right she would appear sinister (scheming). See “Left hand of ANN” and consider the implications. Left handed people are under a considerable disadvantage in our society.

Trust your bullshit detector

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine


Synchronous Neuron Access Potential

“Stupid is as stupid does” – Forrest Gump

What is insight? Intuition? Ok I’ll give you that, now the next question, What is intuition? You may be forced to go to your thesaurus to find a synonym for these words. Don’t bother. I’ll tell you what it is. It becomes obivious that the words insight and intuition are only pixie dust sprinkled on a counterfeit concept to give the illusion of understanding something one is totally clueless about. The right mind is primarily a collating device with limited intelligence. It is looking for non-inconsistencies. It is constantly corellating in the background. The correlations that are made are stored in the bottom up algorithm but remain opaque to the top down algorithm. When there is a top down logic fail (input inconsistency), the left algorithm accesses the right algorithm for the “best answer to date” and a new shortcut is set on the left algorithm. The answer has snapped into place. From many seemingly unrelated datum, a pattern emerged in the right mind that the left mind was able to analyze.

“The mind is elegant in it’s simplicity, incomprehensible in it’s scale, and glorious in it’s implementation.” – el Loco Gringo

Nothing illustrates the dichotomy between SNAP and intelligence as comparing “Forrest Gump” with “Concept Calculus”. Forest Gump being a story about a guy with limited intelligence and a lot of SNAP, while, on the other hand in Concept Calculus you have a guy with limited SNAP and a lot of intelligence. Top down and bottom up thinking are two sides of the same coin, each is meaningless on it’s own. The concept is transportable between domains. IE it is cross platform. One domain is the calculus with integral and differential equations. Perfectly valid perspective but Consider; (integral calculus IS bottom up thinking, differential calculus IS top down thinking as applied to math)

Concept Calculus is a new mathematical/philosophical program of wide scope. The development of Concept Calculus began in Summer, 2006. Concept Calculus promises to connect mathematics, philosophy, and commonsense thinking in a radically new way.
Advances in Concept Calculus are made through rigorous mathematical findings, and promise to be of immediate and growing interest to philosophers.
Developments in Concept Calculus generally consist of the following.
a. An identification of a few related concepts from commonsense thinking. In the various developments, the choice of these concepts will vary greatly. In fact, all concepts from ordinary language are prime targets.

And this isn’t a goober, this is Harvey M. Friedman of Ohio State U. THIS GUY IS TRYING TO QUANTIZE BOTTOM UP THINKING. It’s already been done, it’s called top down thinking. Googling “Concept Calculus” yields 14,000 hits. Scary.

I have seriously underestimated the majestic heights to which stupidity can rise, or the aggressive nature of it. Ayn Rand is right, “it is a slavering beast eating the minds of mankind.”

I had mentioned that perhaps intelligence will prove to be a dead end. Well, intelligence has proven to be a dead end. I am an atavar, a throwback to a time when mankind was more intelligent. All of the “people like me” in the US could fit into the waiting area of the VA. (if they were friendly) Half of them are probably institutionalized, shot up with smarticide. (kills off your smarts’) Half of the remainder are in hiding, the rest unknown. If all of them had a unity of purpose they would not have the momentum to alter the slide into dumb. There will be no enlightenment, there will be no “hundredth monkey”. The die has been cast, and it’s loaded.

Please tell me I lack the humor to detect the subtlety in the tongue in cheek positing of “concept calculus”. Please. PLEASE

“Stupidity has a definite evolutionary function. I’m all for abolishing stupidity, but before it goes, while there’s still a lot of it around, we should pay tribute to it. …The stronest conspiracy is the conspiracy of the stupid, To prevent schools from educating their children, because they want their children to be as dumb as they are. To prevent television from putting anything intelligent on.” – Robert Anton

“The time has come, dreamweaver says, to speak of many things, Of whereness and whenness, and gravity wells, of white holes, lifts and strings” – el Loco Gringo.

As to the percentages, I feel I’m closer to right. Heyleighen has done a paper on what he calls the “extremely gifted” He puts the figure at .07% Uh oh, I feel another page coming on. Let’s talk, instead of intelligence, about cognitive ability. Humans are unique in that we have two cognitive minds. One Boolean, one binary. The Boolean mind perceives the world in the frequency domain, this is the way an animal sees. The binary mind interprets the frequency domain as the time domain and throws away the extra dimension. Then a physicist comes along who hasn’t had his right mind crippled, (that’s you) looks at this interpretation and epiphanies. “Hey, the universe is actually composed of waves, adds the discarded dimension back in and finds that it has a beat of 8 and other good stuff” Not only is the math not the physics, but the math hinders the understanding of the physics. The mind does a much better job of interpreting the frequency domain than math. Look out the window, that’s it. All the computing power in the world can’t do what the mind is doing, real time. Now to the crux of it. When you use math on the time domain you are using a rubber ruler to measure shadows. Consider Ptolemy’s theory. It was beautiful, it was concise, it was comprehensive, it was elegant, it was conclusive, it was wrong. He was using a rubber ruler to measure shadows. Same thing happened to Einstein.

Back to cognizance. There are actually two aspects one is intelligence, this measures only the left mind, the other is what I call SNAP, it measures the right (simply, SNAP is a bullshit detector. In 80-90% of the population the SNAP has been hijacked by ideology, religion etc. These are idiots. They have had a social lobotomy. 10-20% of the population are what I called centered.

“The centered, being pragmatic, understand and accept the ambiguity of the situation, doing whatever it takes to survive, pretending to be idiots, but maintaining their individuation, however surreptitiously.” – el Loco Gringo This is your audience, my dear Mr Geoff. The rest don’t count. Stupid is forever.

Consider Ptolemy again, had he said that the earth circled the sun, he would have been burned at the stake. He may have been centered pretending to be an idiot. Rather than pretending to be an idiot, I pretend to be crazy, it’s a lot simpler, and more fun. An IQ test measures only the intelligence, I propose the SQ (SNAP quotient) which measures the Intelligence and the SNAP. Take me for instance, my IQ was measured at 161. My SQ would probably be twice that or 300, discounting synergistic effects. I suspect you’re the same (or more, how would I know?).

Using Heyleighen’s figures, that would mean that in the US there are 280,000.000 idiots, 21,000,000 centered, 2100 Nexialists and 21 transcendents. Sounds about right. Consider TED, there’s 1000 right there. What I am saying, my dear Mr Geoff, is that if you were to give a 20 minute talk at TED and left the math out of it, EVERYONE in the audience would understand. Wouldn’t that be delightful?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

The man who isn’t there

Men Opting Out

Return to Social Mind I

I was quite taken with the serenity and peace of the Japanese. A civil stable society, with an odd undercurrent of anime porn. Outside of Japan, however, they became boorish. Feng Shui Fooie! Even the Visigoths wouldn’t have had them over. On the other hand the English can be very rowdy at home yet quite civil overseas. Comparing these two cultures we see that the Japanese are bottom up and the English are top down. Opposite reactions to opposite imprinting? How odd.

Hikikomori – According to Michael Zielenziger‘s book, Shutting out the Sun: How Japan Created its Own Lost Generation, the syndrome is more closely related to PTSD. The author claimed that the hikikomori interviewed for the book had discovered independent thinking and a sense of self that the current Japanese environment could not accommodate. (1 million adolescents in Japan)

School Refusal – Approximately 1 to 5% of school-aged children have school refusal, (England)

My, this would make an interesting comparative study. Top down and bottom up opting out? I notice the same thing in the US, as increasing numbers of young men opt out of the system. 50 years ago it was rare to see a professional woman. It is becoming increasingly rare to see a professional man. What, exactly, is going on here?

Simplistic answers are easy to come by. A recent study shows 60% of male undergrads have no intention of marriage, viewing it as drawing a “go straight to jail” card, putting themselves at high risk of spending their life in poverty while paying for the rearing of someone else’s child. (cucoldry, the 5th horseman of the apocolypse) The thought of working at Burger King, riding a Harley, and sleeping with a different woman every night seems appealing. They would certainly have more money and sex.

Or consider there is no place for a man to be a male. Front line combat has become the preferred assignment in the military, it is the one arena women are not allowed to serve. I noticed this myself when I signed up for an aquabatics program. Sponsered by the VA it was hosted at YMCAs. At my first session I was greeted by 15 or so hippotomii, the smallest of which was a petite 300+ lbs. Every time one of them got in the pool, it overflowed. I was afraid to get in, one of them might step on me. I feigned an inability to get down the steps, and was informed of another YMCA that had a handicapped lift. I checked it out first before I put on the trunks. As I wheeled past the day care center in pastel tones I noticed that there were no men. (why is it called the Young Men’s Christian Association?) This class had one man (or a bald woman) at the far end of the pool. I passed.

Or consider the heavy discrimination endured by men.

A lack of social cohesion, crime, poverty, a general anomie in society.

Women used to be such magical creatures, with a delightful and insightful viewpoint. What happened?

I think the problem is more fundamental than this, Charlie Chimp has been time warped into the 21st century. The paleolithic survival skills can no longer cope with a savannah which has become a mysterious minefield with capricious explosions all around.

“Fuck it, I’m outta here, the jungles safer”.

Charlie has left the reservation and gone on the warpath.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

OPL walt