Monteverdi: Ohimè ch'io cado - Jaroussky (Pluhar)

Chasing Manhood

It's probably true that every man (and many women) wonders at some point what it is to be a man.  Masculinity.  Testosterone.  Other buzzwords.  Some men think that masculinity is modern rape and pillage.  Some women think so, too.  Some men think that masculinity is being able to be a woman, sometimes.  Some women hope this is not true.  There are those of us who see and acknowledge a quantum leap between biological human men and the things that we are now.  While once we performed outrageous feats of strength and athleticism merely as a daily necessity, we now throw up after running 10 kilometres.  Do you hear what I am saying now?

One of my favorite blogs recently pointed out one of my favorite truisms.  Scientists and the such rebuilt Viking longboats and tried to replicate their, um, adventures.  They used Olympic rowers, but found that it was impossible to conduct the same things that the Vikings are documented to have conducted for hundreds of years.  It was too hard for Olympic rowers (considered the best rowing athletes in the world, apparently) to power Viking long ships.  It was too difficult to navigate with their technology.  It was too cold.  Is this registering?  Some of our best living athletes could not even temporarily perform the task that peoples of old routinely performed.  ROUTINELY.  There is something missing.

Has anyone thought about work?  What does this have to do with the world?  What does this have to do with being men, and being women?  What did your money...save?  Prevent?  Create?  I don't think there are answers to these questions, of course.  This is something that most everyone thinks about.  It is related to the question of masculinity.  I think that, biologically, it is very much related.  People like to think of the differences between men and women as being the differences between "Hunters" and "Gatherers."  I don't think that it is this simple, of course.  Cavewomen, as I will refer to them, probably hunted a ton as well.  They were bigger than modern women.  Most muscular.  More like what modern people consider men to be?  Don't know.  The point is that they were well equipped.  They were strong.  They were vicious and biologically inclined, and they killed.  Is killing the key?  I hope not.  Or, at least, if it is, I hope that nature does not abhor a metaphor.  Men killed too, of course.  Until civilization, men killed for dominance.  Men killed for food.  Men killed for sex.  Dominance.  Food.  Sex.  Not necessarily in this order, I suppose, but definitely IN.  To be a man, it appears that you must care about domination.  You must care about food.  And you must care about sex.  Don't be an idiot.  Nothing I ever say is literal.  Unless, I say it is.

It appears that every important thing any man has ever done that was great enough to be remembered by the collective consciousness was done for food, domination, or sex.

What would you kill for?

I am looking for something to dominate.
I am looking for food.
I am looking for sex.

"There must be something we can eat
Maybe find another lover...
...Try to see it once my way
Everything zen...
...There's no sex in your violence"
-Bush

Photos of animals in the womb

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/4G8S3e/www.thisblogrules.com/2009/12/stunning-photographs-of-animals-inside.html/r:f

Hey Leslie, remember when we talked about this?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34482178/ns/health-skin_and_beauty/?gt=43001

Why am I so ahead of the times?  It's because time is an expanding sphere - not a line - and I am a 4th dimensional doughnut.

Duh, lil' 'piph'nies

Sometimes I have "duh" moments.  Moments when super obvious things finally occur to me in real time and in real words.  The latest is the concept of "worth."

A person's worth is directly related to the amount of time one is willing to spend with or on them (notice the use of the words 'worth' and 'spend' which are obviously linked).  This means that a person's worth can be consistently quantified in units of time.  In other words, what a man's worth is may be answered by "2 hours."  A person is worth time.  People who are especially valuable (for one reason or another), remain present in timespace far beyond their actual living time.  Think of any now-dead historical figure.  They will be worth the aggregate total amount of time ever spent with or on them.  I think that I would like to add the personal caveat that time defined by negative energy (time spent bad mouthing a person, or perhaps planning and executing their assassination, just to give examples) is akin to negative time.  So here is a concrete example in super basic time: 

A ruler of a land.

Total amount of positive time spent on this person DURING their lifetime: 50,000 hours (remember, this would include time spent willingly WITH the person, as well as ON the person, which may include buying gifts or doing favors, or whatever).

Total amount of positive time spent on this person during all time AFTER their lifetime:  100,000 hours (students doing proud history projects in school, people debating this ruler's creative ruling style, et al)

Total amount of negative time spent on this person DURING lifetime: 65,000 hours (this person may have been a despot and a tyrant, which a large group of people constantly wishing them death and a few actually planning his assassination).

Totaly amount of negative time spent on this person AFTER lifetime:  750,00 hours (his legacy was well known by history).

This would mean that total positive time equaled 150,00 hours, while total negative time was worth 815,000 hours.  This human being's net worth was -665,000 hours.  This was not a worthy person.  This person COST existence that much time.

The fun part about this line of thinking is that it begs the question: How much time are you willing to spend on YOURSELF?  How long can you stand to be alone, without feeling the need to obtain company?  Your answer will apparently be directly related to your concept of self-worth.  Your self worth should always be a positive amount.  If you spend your time hating on your looks and your abilities, you are depreciating your own value.  You are devaluing your most abundant resource.  Stop it.  Start investing in your self, and your self worth will increase in value.  USUALLY, this translates into other's worths of you, as well, which will help give positive time back to creation, in turn helping to make up for the massive empty hole left by the aforementioned cruel leader. Anyways, this is sort of rambling, but I do believe that I've made my point.  Let's start reinvesting positive time into the universe in order to increase our worth and expand timespace.  Or, at the very least, let's start being  honest about how we rate the worthiness of our friends and family.  How much is that person ACTUALLY worth to you in measurable units?

Realty II

I was not able to get in to the 22nd st and Highland townhouse because the key only opened a little storage area.  I did, however, check out a place on Central just north of Northern (on the Bridle Path!).  It was your basic townhouse, but I really liked it.  Decent kitchen, one and a half bathrooms, and a nice little enclosed back patio that opens up to parking and the neighborhood (not an alley or another complex).  It is going for $55k, but may have some weird HOA issues, so my realtor is looking in to that. 

Looked at the house.  No.  Just no.

Hey Adam

Wachet Auf, Ruft Uns Die Stimme, Cantata 140 - Bach

Messages Through Fog

Sending her messages through the fog.  It's nearly morning, and I just want to talk.  I'm waiting for her to come back home.  I'm thinking clearly now, and I just want to let her know.  I'm not in love, but maybe I'm somewhere close by.

There's ether between us.  A silent medium through which my heart floats.  There's a million miles between us, but I'm standing right next to her.  I'm not in love, but maybe I'm somewhere close by.

All our matter is dispersed.  Giant things made small.  We rejoin the universe, and speed away into oblivion.

Realty

Which do you prefer?

Option 1
Townhouse at 22nd St, a few blocks south of Camelback.  Complex is kind of older, sort of shabby.
Beds/Baths: 2 / 2
SF: 1,504
Kitchen Features: Disposal; Microwave; Pantry
Master Bathroom: Full Bth Master Bdrm; Double Sinks
Additional Bedroom: Master Bdrm Upstairs

Laundry: Inside Laundry
Dining Area: Formal; Dining in LR/GR
Other Rooms: Great Room
$52,000 with a $361 listed HOA monthly fee. (For reference, the mortgage payment on this would be around $287.15, so with the HOA it would be $648.15)

Option 2
House at 20th St and a few blocks south of Indian School.  Has a decent sized front and back yard with grass and trees.  Not a super awesome looking neighborhood (really close to the 51), but this particular street is really nice.
Beds/Baths: 2 / 1
SF: 620 (I don't really buy this after walking around it.  It looked more like 850 or so)
Kitchen Features: Range/Oven; Microwave; Pantry
Master Bathroom: None


Laundry: Wshr/Dry HookUp Only
Dining Area: Eat-in Kitchen
Other Rooms: Family Room
$70,000 but with no HOA.  The mortgage for this is $386.54 per month, but then I would also be responsible for yard maintenance and the upkeep of the outside of the house.


So it's a townhouse for $52,000, which is easier to rent but harder to sell, versus a house for $70,000.  The townhouse has two full baths, while the house only has 1.5.  The townhouse would have a lower mortgage payment, but a high HOA fee.  This may not be such a big deal, as the HOA would presumably be responsible then for lawn maintenance and the exterior of the place (this sometimes even includes the A/C).  Also, most HOA fees cover water and sewer as well.  So it might work out. 

Choices?