|
xssve -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (12/31/2009 6:45:07 PM)
|
Oops new page:
quote:
ORIGINAL: AnimusRex
Again, was at work all day and missed out on the party- but again one caught my eye-
quote:
ORIGINAL: xssve
Studies indicate that kinksters, BDSMr's, etc., tend to be healthier psychologically than the general population, less depression etc. - depression rates among vanilla married women in particular, tend to be much higher.
I was happily following along your posts, but need to insert that this strikes me as Truthiness- the sort of thing that we tell ourselves because it seems like it should be true, but isn't.
My experience, as alluded to in an earlier post, is that there are more fucked up people here than in the general population.
Not that BDSM causes any of it, just that fucked up people are more likely to seek out the fringes of society. Or as the old country saying goes- "people live at the end of the road for a reason."
Also-
quote:
As an algorithmic information parsing technique, I tend to compare arguments, which are invariably based on some sort of paradigm model/construct, to the the most up to date objective consensus paradigm construct for symmetry, objective defined as the most robust consensus model yadda yadda yadda...
We get it- you work in computer programming. You have your insider jargon- I have mine, everyone has some they can sling around. Somewhere in that dense black hole of a sentence is a thought struggling to escape. In all honesty, I would love to hear it.
I really wouldn't want to torture everyone in here with my thoughts on the post-Contextualist subtended metaphors implicit in the dialogue between the architects of the Ticino region in the late 90's.
Because so help me God, if I have to I will.
Try this then.
W/regards to the objective consensus reality model, otherwise known as science, it's hard to describe the dynamic in any other way without it being mistaken as an appeal to authority - it is essentially a consensus, it just happens to be backed up by empirical evidence and replicable experimental data.
It being the information age, and a media dominated by society, parsing the constant stream of information is rapidly becoming a critical survival skill, considering how many people are lying to me from every conceivable direction - which, I'm not sure compares symmetrically with post modernist cocktail party chatter, however fascinating.
For instance: it is empirically demonstrable that home prices cannot rise indefinitely while incomes are declining, there is something askew with that model, i.e., limited downside, unlimited upside - it doesn't compute, the world doesn't work that way, in fact you can pretty much safely assume the exact opposite most of the time.
Roubini warned of it, Mark Pittman, hell even Eliot Spitzer was throwing flags, Li himself was aghast at the application of his formula but so many people believe in magic.
Meanwhile, Greenspan's paradigm model bade him do nothing, the republicans had their own agenda based on whatever irrational model they ascribe to - probably Machiavelli, which nobody told them was a satire, and so it goes - sure it's a bit clunky for a narrative, I'll hone it down eventually, call it a first draft, I've been busy tying up other loose ends.
Otherwise, go right ahead wit de arkee-tek-tchur - it's gotta be more interesting than exchanging vapid insults, or Gorean for that matter, no offense. I have no idea what was going on with architecture in Ticino in the late 90's, the only image I could google up on that information looked like a Gas and Grocery on steroids.
DO IT. I dare you.
|
|
|
|
