Tim Finnegan's Tumbling Blog @tim-finnegan - Tumblr Blog

lemoneyes…

10 reasons our society is fucked up

1. We teach "don't be afraid" rather than "here's what to do when you're afraid" 2. Men and women gauge their own strengths in relation to each another, rather than independently 3. We would rather not be called wrong than actually be right. 4. We neglect to revisit past experiences and reanalyze them based on the awareness of new possibities 5. A society is made up of the varied individual relationships of people. Healthy relationships require a sense of empathy; empathy requires us to imagine what someone else is feeling; this requires imagination; imagination requires a creative mind. And yet creativity is one of the least valued--and therefore least taught--subjects in school. 6. We are attached to the idea that there is always some authority figure delegating fairness, either on earth or on a spiritual level 7. We teach people to say nice things to others but never how to respond when others don't say nice things to us. 8. We believe the misguided notion that justice always equals progress 9. We are content to accumulate knowledge for the sake of being valued for our knowledge, rather than to apply that knowledge and build a reputation based on our actions 10. We assume a behavior is moral simply if it can be classified as natural

How can you give unconditional love if you can only love under certain conditions?

Why The Average Person Continues to Disappoint Me

The average common individual has a certain unsophisticated cynicism, selfish bitterness and a cowardly passive-aggression. Their version of happiness manifests itself as little more than a temporary lack of discomfort, or even smug schadenfreude. They spend their lives soaking in chronic discontentedness, while surrounded by no real tragedy or sorrow, but instead, convenience, comfort, and lifeless expression (when they do experience real tragedy, they nail themselves to it like a martyr to a cross). They have an overly-sensitive, inflated pridefulness, yet lack any achievement worthy of such pride (their pride is instead based on things that were never in their control, such as ethnicity or geography). They spend all day comparing themselves to other people without doing anything to improve themselves. They believe they should be treated fairly, yet take no responsibility in creating a fair society. Instead, they assume fairness is delegated by someone in authority over them, such as an authority figure, social leader, or religious deity. If they feel they aren't being treated fairly, they take it as a personal insult instead of trying to understand why. Without a second thought, they will rush to release their cumulative bitterness in full force, wherever the opportunity presents itself. They will even frequently and intentionally position themselves in situations where that opportunity is likely. They are ever-lustful for vengeance when they have been wronged, yet have no desire to teach others how to do right so as to prevent others from being wronged (which would likely have prevented them from being wronged). (More Bitching TK)

Biological Destiny

"Biological Destiny" is the idea that our ultimate goal in life is to reproduce; to carry on our gene pool; to perpetuate the species. Many living creatures die after the male mates or the female produces offspring. They have fulfilled their biological destiny, and thus have no more reason to live. Because the act of reproduction signifies the apex of these creatures existence, they spend their lives in constant pursuit of that goal, or at least in a regular effort to stay alive until they reach that goal. They literally have no other purpose in life. But that purpose is intertwined with the goal of basic survival; the whole reason for a creature to carry on its DNA is so that the next generation can benefit from it's greater strength, intelligence, and ability to fight disease. In a sense, reproduction is how a species as a whole achieves immortality. But what is the goal of such immortality? Why should a species perpetuate itself generation after generation if only just to continue to exist? If the purpose of a creature's evolution is meant to enhance its ability to survive, what happens once it has reached a state of totally assured survival? What goal lies beyond that? As human beings, we seem to be on the verge of reaching such a state. While we may still not have reached a state in our genetic evolution where our bodies have become simply impervious to disease, we are (thanks to man-made medicines and technologies) able to fight off a great deal of illnesses, and have secured ourselves at the top of the food chain. For the most part, we are generally surviving--at least to the extent that we find a greater purpose to life than simply passing on our DNA. However, while we may have reached a stage in our biological history where reproduction is no longer the desparate imperative it once was, it has only been a very recent development in the grand scope of things. Old habits die hard, and drive towards biological destiny is perhaps the oldest of them all. This is perhaps why we find sex to be so important to us. Even if we consciously have no desire to actually reproduce, we find ourselves at the mercy of very powerful sexual urges. But while genetic inheritance increase the ability of our offspring to fight off disease, that is not the only threat to our survival as a species. Human beings have spread themselves over the entire habitable earth and continue to consume its resources at alarming rates. Humans are able to reproduce at a much faster rate than that at which the Earths natural resources can replenish themselves. Logic can easily show that such behavior is not sustainable. From a genetic perspective, a greater number of people offers more genetic diversity. The greater our diversity, the greater the chance of passing on disease-fighting genes. However, we also know that overpopulation allows disease to spread more easily, since there are more people around to spread it. We can much more immediately avoid disease with a reduced population than we can by waiting for evolution to do its job. So if it is no longer essential for so many humans to reproduce--and if in fact it can be beneficial for us as a species to reproduce less--what do we do with ourselves? What do we do with sex? We have followed this directive for so long now that we all seem centered around this idea that the most important thing for every living person to do is to go to school, get a job, find a mate, buy a house, and have a kid. Once you're done raising your child, you continue to work so that you can provide them with an inheritance. Once your body and mind are too old to work, you can only enjoy leisure activities. Half of us (stats tk) will develop some horrible disease that will make our final years a living nightmare, and we will die in pain and afraid. But all for what? Simply to propegate the species, just like every lizard, rodent, invertebrate, etc., that's ever walked the earth?

So What If Jealousy is "Natural"; It's Still Lousy!

Why do people always seek to examine whether a behavior is "natural"—as if "natural" is somehow synonymous with "good" or, "right?" Violence could also be considered natural; and, too, can be considered "functional and purposeful" (e.g., if you are being attacked, you may need to react with violence to defend yourself. ). However, there are many ways to achieve a desired end; that doesn't necessarily mean that the "natural" behavior is fundamentally right, or, the most optimal (e.g., if you are being attacked, there are certain forms of non-violent martial arts that will allow you to protect yourself without having to resort to violence.) Further, we should define what jealousy is: essentially, it's the fear that a particular person, of whose exclusive attention you desire (or expect), will deprive you of such attention by directing it to someone else. It assumes that: a) such attention will not be returned to you; b) that the lack of such attention deprives you of something essential to your existence; and, c) that this essential component to your existence cannot be found elsewhere (or via attention from a different person). It also implies that this person somehow owes you their exclusive attention; as if it's their duty. So what does jealousy actually do for us? What functional purpose does it fulfill? It alerts us to this potential loss of attention so that we can prevent it from happening. But that doesn't mean that it also triggers one to consider the situation consciously, and analyze whether it is justified; just because you "feel jealous," doesn't automatically signify that the person owes you their attention. Jealousy is nothing more than an instinctual response; it serves only the self-interest of the person experiencing it, while completely omitting any consideration for the free-will of the subject of that jealousy. If a person in our lives has the desire to give attention to someone else besides us—particularly if they derive happiness from that interaction—should our response really be to feel displeasure, and the urge to selfishly snatch them back? While empathy may be a more difficult and less "natural" instinct to us, shouldn't we want to be happy for the people that we care about—instead of guilty and ashamed, simply because that happiness doesn't come from us? So, why keep arguing whether a behavior is "natural"; why not instead, talk about behavior that leads us to healthier, happier relationships—even if we have to struggle against our very nature to learn such behavior?

Guarantees

I guarantee you, your heating unit is going to break down this winter. It's going to cost you way more than you would expect. I guarantee you you're going to have to put $1000 into your car, in the next year. I guarantee you, you're going to get a bill for at least $200, that you weren't expecting, sometime in the next 4 months. I guarantee you all these things are going to happen at the most inconvenient times. I guarantee you 8 out of the 10 things you are counting on from other people, they will let you down on. I guarantee you your parents are going to die, and I guarantee its going to be long and emotionally difficult for at least one of them. I guarantee you, both you and your spouse are going fall in love with other people that you can't be with. I guarantee you're not going to get what you deserve at work. I guarantee you that people are going to treat you unfairly. I guarantee life will frustrate you at every corner. I guarantee you that you'll never catch that break. I guarantee your roof will leak, your car will get towed, you'll injure your hand, you'll get food poisoning, your favorite mug will break, you'll get some kind of STD or bodily parasite, your identity will be stolen, you'll develop an uncomfortable health problem, the server never brings you your beverage, your internet stops working, and you lose your wallet and have to get everything replaced, all at least once in the next 2 years. And I guarantee that every time one of these things happens, you're going to stomp and curse as if you never expected it was going to happen, even though I just told you. So go ahead assuming everything will be fine, and that none of these things will happen to you; and if a problem does come at you from out of nowhere, get angry and stressed and feel awful; deal with it in the most ill-prepared, resource-less and hasty manner. Let it upset your whole life for a few days, weeks, months or years. Or, just assume that life is going to constantly throw you curveballs: everything breaks, there is no regulator of fairness, and you are in control of your life inasmuch as you can be prepared for future problems. Stress and anger, as motivators, are not the only mechanisms we have at our disposal for solving problems. If we can deal with a potential problem before it becomes urgent, we can use patience & intellect to solve it. If such tools are effective at solving the problem when the situation is not urgent, what changes when it is? We have only to decide how we want to feel about it. Do we want to feel stressed and crappy, or would we prefer to feel relaxed and confident?

Responding to Antagonism

When we confront something that antagonizes us, we have a tendency to also respond with antagonism. It's the basic evolutionary "fight" response: when someone gets aggressive towards us, we tend to get aggressive back—even if such a response is detrimental to resolution of the conflict. In evolutionary terms, this enabled us to have the kill some beast whose own intention was to kill us. This is the whole evolutionary basis of responding to antagonism with antagonism. In the modern world, however, there is rarely, if ever, any justification for a situation to escalate to the point of killing someone. Further, because everyone is embedded with this tendency, anyone with whom you interact aggressively is likely to respond in kind. Therefore, in the interest of conflict resolution, it does you no good to respond to antagonism with the same, since it will only result in the other person becoming increasingly aggressive. The tendency to respond in this way can present itself subconsciously, and we can become antagonistic without even trying to or realizing that we are doing so. There are also a variety of ways one can be antagonistic aside from being obviously physically aggressive. If you are confronted with a socially antagonistic person, you might respond by limiting the clarity with which you communicate with them. Another phenomena of human behavior is that we tend to judge things as fundamentally "wrong" or illogical solely because they make us feel unpleasant. If someone speaks to us in a way that is uncomfortable to us, even if they don't mean to be, we will treat them as an antagonist, and respond with our own brand of social antagonism. In all cases, social antagonism limits the clarity with which you communicate. If a person we are speaking does not speak with clarity, we might use inverse logic to assume they are being antagonistic, and purposely being obtuse. Therefore, we might respond by being obtuse ourselves. The less we are able to communicate, the less we are able to get things done—particularly, the resolution of our conflicts. Therefore, in order to resolve conflict—and avoid it altogether—we need to make a conscious effort to go against our programming to respond to antagonism with patience, understanding, and clear communication.

Fear exists to allow us to imagine, immediately, the worst case scenario of a given situation, so that our minds can wrap around it, and use our intelligence and wisdom to learn to be less daunted via being more prepared for that scenario virtually before ever having to face it in reality.

If you can't love each other, at least fuck each other.

An anonymous idea has more power then a credited idea That's because human beings are fallible And because we tend to gauge an ideas worth by how much we value the person behind it An idea that belongs to no one has no negative publicity associated with it

If you can fall in love with the art, you can fall in love with the idea. If an idea is being depicted through an artistic medium, and you are mesmerized enough by the artistry of it, your are very likely to be convinced of the idea. If a real-world example if it exists, you are sure to. Rhyming, for example, is one of the simplest forms of linguistic artistry, and it's been shown (source) that people are much more likely to believe a statement if it rhymes. Cooperatively (?) if you are first swayed by the science of it, you have totally bought it if it's also pleasurable. Our minds want to throw things at the wall to see what happens but our hearts need to feel good.

Why is it that we only seem to respect female characters that exhibit "stereotypical male" behaviors--like when they're kicking somebody's ass or shooting guns or brandishing a sword? Not that women can't be violent, too... But I consider violence to be a negative trait in people. Why don't we find kindness & gentleness--which, if anything, are "stereotypically feminine" attitudes--worthy of our respect?

http://www.stickycomics.com/poly-socks

#polyamory #non-monogamy #footwear #socks #sex

Everyone just wants someone they can give a gift to; and then give a gift with.

Our goal should be to bring love in the world to such a level that it is assumed and (legitimately) taken for granted by every being.

We have to learn to let go of our expectation of other people; it's okay to feel good when we are receiving positive, active attention from someone, but if we lose that attention we must be patient, understanding, and respectful of their freedom and personal style in interacting with you. There is no reason to feel negatively from the lack of attention or love from another person; just simply have that person less in your life; naturally gravitate to people who you do have positive interactions with; but know that sometimes you won't get it from anyone, and you must have enough love for yourself to sustain yourself in such droughts...

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Tim Finnegan's Tumbling Blog