Archive for September, 2008

Domestication

My “Formula”

[for teaching responsibility -- in response to this post]

Fix Them

Not like we do dogs!  Rather, fix their attention on a task.

Break Them

Not like we do [dogs or] horses!  Rather, give them a break when they wander off task.

Take Them In

Not in the sense of “tricking” them…

Set Them Up

… so, NOT like teaching a dog a trick.

(Rather ACCEPT them — take them into your lives — and GIVE them the resources they need to succeed at each step of their progress — set them up, in a business for example).

Put Them Down

Not like we do [dogs or] horses [...] NOR by using negative feedback (DON’T PUNISH!).  Rather, we stop supporting them at some point (putting them down gently).

PS

[left as a comment on the linked article]

“Domestication” comes to mean “ownership” (specifically, ownership of ones own domicile… or home). So, seeing as how you’re trying to get them to take care of YOUR home (before finally kicking them out)… the process ends with them either owning your home (your death) or your buying them their own first home. Either way, you lose and they win: It’s punishment for your sin (fornication).

Addendum

  1. Fix Them
  2. Break Them
  3. Take Them In
  4. Set Them Up
  5. Put Them Down

Notes

Fixation:  Transference -> Counter-transference -> CROSS transference (crucifixion / blame / guilt) ->  Cross Fixation (or transfixion … as to see but be unable to stop the process of ones own death).  Thus, “fixation” (a person remains attached to a persona or symbol appropriate to an earlier stage of development).  Or “fixation” (ability of the eye to focus on one point). So, finally, as in “to fix” (a problem… in this case through hypnotic regression).

The PROBLEM is understood in terms of having (a dog, for instance) “fixed” — that is, in terms of “phallus” (vs fallacy) and should be accomplished without demasculinizing.

Thus is “domestication” (ownership) rather than “domesticating” (the process by which wild animals and plants are brought under human control and are bred to possess special characteristics that enhance their usefulness for human exploitation).

Ownership: Defines property entitlement in terms of being responsible for said property.  Also in the sense of “to own up” (to one’s responsibility FOR).  But, further, it conveys the idea of “sense of self” (ie. self-ownership).

As applied to character:  Neither in the sense of ownership (that is not in the sense of “having complete legal control of the status of something”).  Nor as in responsibility (”obligation; duty; burden”).  So not that which determines “character” (”moral and ethical actions”).  But in the sense of  HAVING a character (or “a characteristic property that defines the apparent individual nature of something”)… that is, regarding personality.

So finally, I’d like to apologize for saying that parents are being punished (for the sin of fornication, even… ouch!) or for implying that they somehow owe anything to their children.  While the psycho-dynamics DO involve mating (transference and counter-transference); which I see as a result of (or which results IN) sexual confusion (or simply “sex”); AND regression (or, manifestly, childhood… as in “to have children”… which is the physical counterpart to the psychological mechanism suggested); nonetheless, I don’t believe in “sin” (in a religious sense) nor “punishment” (as might relate all of this to “eternal damnation” or hopelessness).  Instead, I do have “hope” that this can all be worked through (thus, I present a psychological model for doing so rather than merely giving up).

A Postcard a Day

The Stone Pillar of Tang Dynasty inscribed with Buddhist scriptures. Standing now in a primary school on East Zhongshan Road in Shanghai, this stone pillar was first erected in 859 in the Tang Dynasty.

A Postcard a Day

Stone Pillar

Another concept site.  And this is a concept I’d be proud to have come up with myself:  A postcard a day (obviously).  I like it for these reasons…

  1. A ready supply of original images,
  2. A wealth of information, and
  3. A storehouse of international trivia…
  4. … with a local flair.

In addition, you may find:

Dating the postcard seems especially useful.  The postcards often have a historical theme.  And postcards are, by design, meant to mark a point in time. Plus these images are sometimes “retro”.  And so it is prudent to place them into a time period.  And it is fun to reminisce.  Readers are encouraged to share whatever memories the postcards inspire.

The postmarks speak of foreign places.  There are towns and cities with exotic names.  And so the reader might also imagine himself traveling across great distances to say:  “Wish You Were Here” (Or, as in a favorite joke of mine from the Simpsons:  Envision a postcard with a bikini clad woman and the inscription “Wish you were HER”)!

As a hobby, I assume collecting postcards would be inexpensive and infinitely rewarding.  And a computer would allow you to store, categorize, and comment on your collection.  Plus, a the internet provides a wonderful way to display (that is to share) your treasures.  So, I can think of no other hobby that translates so perfectly to a website.

Add to this the irony:  Snailmail in a digital world!  The synergy creates exponential possibilities for your own re-creation.

Finally, visits to the site may be quick.  Your stay on the site may be short.  You might take in a lot with only a little effort.  Or, you might decide to stay and browse… or comment.  You might even find the author witty, friendly, or knowledgeable!  But any way, I think you will enjoy your stay.  You should bookmark this site and return often (even daily).


yahooBuzzArticleHeadline = "A Postcard a Day"; http://mindrec.org/score/2008/09/23/a-postcard-a-day/

Charging

Dear Kimmy,

At it again, I see!  Damn.  Inspired.  Borrowing another idea… this time from Sampling for Growth:

Right now, I am fried. So I wil sample other’s ideas, to help myself and share light with others. (You Said)

You have a list called “Snippet of Admission”?  Here’s my list: “Faves Sharing Light” (Sitehopping my favorite Entrecard blogs and sampling them for illumination).

I only wish I had time to comment on these!

Thanks,

BrettMan

Llama Ha

Brown llama

If it weren’t for caffeine I’d have no personality whatsoever!
Anonymous

September 23, 2008 • Tags: , , , • Posted in: Hooters MR • No Comments

Do Men Cry?

Dear Kimmy,

Here’s your “tag” (well, at least, a link-back for tagging me):  kimmysharinglight.com.  I don’t do tags but you convinced me it’s the “right” thing to do (socially).  Ok, so I’m a social retard.

Still, I’m intrigued by networking: Do you sample other people’s stuff?  The term could be taken the wrong way.  But, I like the idea.  Rappers do it.  And I think the concept defines the generation.  What do you get out of it (and how does that feel)?

Anyway, I used the term re-creation once.  And then I saw it in a post on your site.  I didn’t get upset.  But it made me wonder.  Plus, you still owe me an email:  Re. Your ex (boy) friend… the one who read Stephen King.

BTW, thanks for the one very good chat.  Though I’ve posted my IM, no one else has added me.  I like to see your name on my list.  I don’t say hi because I know you’re at work and I don’t want to get you in trouble.

Oh, what was that comment about me being a “Non-IM’er”?  Should I feel bad about that?

For all these reasons (and because I told you when we chatted that I might)… I’m borrowing your site format.  Well, this is the formula I thought you used on your site.  Then you “changed” it (in my mind):*

  1. A short paragraph about a spiritual technique.
  2. A short paragraph about your life and how the technique applied.
  3. An invite to your readers to share something similar.

* A comment on how your life has been in upheaval.  You haven’t shared any details.  Everyone is worried.  They leave encouragement.  And I find that all boring.  Besides, your formula has suffered.  The content of your site is different.  And I want the old Kimmy back!

My Take:  Brett Sharing Light

(see attached image)

When Tears are not Enough

I don’t cry when people die.  I don’t cry at weddings.  I don’t cry when I’m hurt: I may scream or get mad.  I cry when I watch silly movies!  And I cry “for no reason” (I’ll just be sitting around feeling stupid, or bad, and I’ll weep and moan).  I don’t trust emotions.  I don’t like shame or guilt… and that’s how people react when others cry.

When do you cry (male or female)?  How do people react? Is it a good strategy?  Does it help (How does it help?  Or how does it not)?  What else might you do?

I’ve decided not to cry when I watch movies anymore.  I know that I’m being manipulated.  That hasn’t worked, so far.  But crying for “no reason” seems healing and I allow that (as long as I’m not in public).  I know I shouldn’t get mad when I cry (Why does that happen?).  I think it’s a man thing.  I want to know why other people cry so I’ll know what else I could do in different situations that might be more helpful!

Your Friend,

Brett

Attachment:

Creative Commons: Ali K.

Creative Commons: Ali K.