Boys Giving Advice To Girls

When girls and women ask a specific question ~ about pretty much anything ~ a funny thing happens. More often than not, someone will take it upon themselves to expand a simple answer into a very long and convoluted explanation about the entire subject.

That "someone" is often any nearby male who hears the question.

Here's the thing though: it can also be a WOMAN. Women often do this as well, especially to women and girls.


"Do you know which headlight bulb goes in the Ford Taurus?"

.... instead of:  "No, I don't remember." or, "Yes, pretty sure it's 9005, at least for the 2012."

...you get:  "Well, there's all different kinds of headlights, sometimes you have to replace the whole headlamp. Sometimes there's a dual bulb that does both high beams and low beams in one bulb, you have to make sure you get the right one. Here, we can look this up, see it's all listed in the catalog, by make and model, and by the year. Is someone going to do it for you? You might want someone to do it for you, it can be really hard in some cars, you won't want to do it yourself. Are you SURE it's a FORD TAURUS?"


And... here's the OTHER thing: MEN often do this to OTHER MEN, and boys, too!

Sometimes a person will do it, and sometimes they won't, depending on a few factors.

 MAIN factors include:
Whether the answer-expander assumes themselves to be superior in experience, knowledge, and/or intelligence to the question-asker or not, and whether the answer-expander sees future consequences for condescending and pontificating in this way to this particular person.

Also, how needy for ego inflation the answer-expander is.

HERE'S THE OTHER, VERY IMPORTANT THING:
People, both male and female people, who dramatize their answers to simple questions may actually know what they're talking about, but it's just as likely that they HAVE NO CLUE about what they're talking about.

The B.S. factor is one of the important reasons that they only do it with SOME people, but not with OTHERS. If they're afraid they're going to get caught making things up and giving false information in order to embellish and make themselves sound smart (or try to make the questioner SOUND STUPID), then they might not do it in the first place.

For example, if I go into a certain hardware store alone, the way most of the clerks speak to me (or us) is with almost comical condescension.  And that's from both the male and female clerks. I'm small, blondish, child-like facial features, and female. So when they see me, they see a cartoon image, not ME, and they treat me according to their cartoon image in their heads of a small blond girlish woman.

The stereotypes come marching out, arm in arm with their ego issues:
"Here's an opportunity for me to feel like I'm BIGGER and SMARTER than another person!"

So I don't get the same civil, courteous greeting from the clerks and cashiers that the three taller people behind me get, two of whom are older men. I get maybe a little nod if I'm lucky, and a glare from one of the female cashiers.

Then, I go looking for the kind of nails I need for the project I'm working on, and I'll probably get some screws too, and I'm also in the market for a Japanese hand saw. So already I'm less happy about shopping in this store due to the lack of courtesy and downright snottiness, I'm thinking of going elsewhere, but hey I'm already here, so whatever.

I go looking for the specific nails I need, but I can't find them. Now there are two clerks nearby, a man and a woman. The man sees me looking through the bins and comes over, and asks "Can I help you?" which is nice, so I tell him I need some sinker nails and roofing nails. His response is not to simply point to the row of roofing nail bins, or the sinker nails, he asks me what I NEED THEM FOR,  and when I don't really answer him, he launches into a lengthy soliloquy about the difference between galvanized and non-galvanized nails, the reason some are longer than others, and how they are each made for different kinds of use, indoor and outdoor. And, half of his very long, very annoying speech was WRONG, he was either making it up or someone told him wrong. So I stood there, nodding my head, going "mmhmmm", pretending to believe in his expertise so he wouldn't feel challenged or embarrassed and retaliate somehow, and just STOP talking.

In the meantime, the female clerk is standing nearby, nodding her head in agreement with him, staring at me with her eyebrows raised, as if she knows everything about nails too and is helping him to educate me and my silly little blondie head.
Except that... she was agreeing with his complete and utter nonsense...

So I just kept nodding and agreeing until they ran out of steam. Then I found what I was  looking for on my own, without their help, since they didn't actually help me find the nails I needed. I didn't even bother to get the screws or the Japanese saw, I went to a Big Box store because I knew where they were without having to ask anyone.

THEN, my taller, average-build male friend went to that same hardware store with me because he needed a measuring tape and some paint. All the same characters were there. They all nodded and gave him a "Welcome" when he walked in ahead of me, but they didn't make eye contact with me, which I found funny. The cashier who had glared at me the last time looked down at her register.

We walked around the store for a minute, and those same two clerks were milling in the aisles, putting various things in their place.
"Can I help you?" said the female clerk to my friend (not to me), and my friend said "Sure! I need a measuring tape!"
"Right over here!" the clerk smiled, and happily bustled two aisles over, making a flourish toward the rather large array of measuring tapes.
The male clerk, who was nearby, said nothing at all.
The female clerk walked away.

No one tried to "HELP" my male friend pick out his own measuring tape, no one lectured him on the history of measuring tapes, no one pontificated on the proper use and care of measuring tapes, no one asked him "What do you want it for?" and no one told him what they were FOR, or how they're MADE.

He looked them over, picked a few up, tested them out, felt their weight in his hand, asked me which one I liked the best, I told him, and he decided on a similar but not identical measuring tape.

Then we walked to the paint section, picked up a quart of the right color, paid, and left.

STRESS FREE, CONDESCENSION FREE, GOT WHAT HE CAME FOR, NO DRAMA!

SUCH BLISS I COULD ONLY IMAGINE!

Dignity, Civility, and Bullies

Protecting the dignity of others is one of the foundations of civilization, and the development of civil behavior.
No one is immune to embarrassment or feelings of humiliation. Instead of making that happen more often to others with our speech and actions, we purposely minimize the occurrences by using civility, politeness, and our own empathy.

For instance when we see someone walking out of the bathroom at a restaurant with toilet paper dragging behind their shoe, we do something to discreetly stop them, or just step on it to get it off their shoe (if we're close enough). What we would NOT do is yell across the restaurant "HEY YOU GOT TOILET PAPER ON YOUR SHOE!" or point at them and laugh out loud, getting everyone around us to look at them. It's not about "political correctness", it's just dignity and empathy.
Even if WE wouldn't be bothered by it ourselves, our empathy and common sense tells us that the other person might be, and so we seek to quickly and quietly just fix it, not make a big drama out of it, trying to get attention for ourselves at the other person's expense.

Some Narcissists might help the person, some might do the opposite and yell across the room or point it out. But most Narcissists, whether they helped or not, would then see the person as a little "lower" than before, as if the toilet paper incident ONLY happens to those who aren't on the same level as they are. (Even if it HAS happened to them before~ it doesn't matter.)

So one of the major practical reasons that civilized behavior includes protecting the dignity of one another, is because of predators and Narcissists who might be nearby, witnessing the events and conversations around them.

Now that person with the toilet paper on their shoe is on the Narcissist's radar, and the person's reaction would have been gauged. Did she act embarrassed? Did she shrug it off? Did she turn red, even though he shrugged it off? Did she go back into the bathroom, or fidget with her hair, act nervous? Did she seem oblivious, and perhaps drunk?

That information may be filed and used to assess the person's personality (not necessarily ACCURATELY, but the Narc. will think so). So if the Narc. assesses the person to be dominatable, then that's one more person they feel superior to, or that they might even mark for future games, depending on the individuals and the personal agenda.

If it was a "big business" meeting where there were a lot of "narcs" and "sharks" present, then the picture is clearer to see why the whole scenario would carry importance.

But it's important in every day life. Many Narcs and predators are FULLY AWARE of the dignity of others, and it's obvious because they are SO worried about protecting their OWN, but they purposely TARGET the dignity of others in order to hurt them in a broad way.

They might do seemingly small, subtle things such as mentioning your hair dye in a crowded room, or they might comment on your teeth in front of someone else, or they might make fun of your job in front of others. They might NOT tell you that your shirt is on backwards just so they can watch other people notice it.
Or they might do things like put you down and insult you in front of others, they might do it in front of personal social groups or at your job. They might purposely condescend to you in front of others so it looks like you don't know what you're doing, or what you're talking about. They might "shush" you, or criticize you in front of others.

They might purposely withhold introductions, polite interactions, and normal civil behavior toward you.

They might purposely disagree with you in front of others, and then try to attack you ad hominem.

"In Front Of Others" is important because they're not just disagreeing with you, they are trying to AFFECT AN OUTCOME and trying to get OTHER PEOPLE to turn against you, or at least see you in a LESS POSITIVE LIGHT.

If they disagreed with you, and they were protecting your dignity, they would disagree politely and share their own point of view, but they would do it in private, OR they would simply NOT use insults, condescension, or accusatory language.

One could have a discussion with Charles Manson, the Dalai Lama, Hillary Clinton, Vladimir Putin, Queen Elizabeth, and Michelle Obama about pretty much any subject WITHOUT any animosity or snottiness, for hours, IF everyone there was practicing CIVILITY, and being aware of one another's dignity.
For real.

Why Narcissists Betray

Cheating, infidelity and betrayal in platonic and family relationships are common for Narcissists not just because they're bent on hurting a person, but more because they are addicted to getting attention and approval from others.

They have little or no qualms about doing things behind a person's back, spreading gossip and rumors about a person who is supposed to be a member of their family, a close friend, or a romantic partner or spouse if they think it will get them attention and approval from others.

For example if a Narcissistic husband notices that a certain woman seems to be attracted to him, it's the fact that she is showing attraction to him that plugs into his addiction, not HIS attraction TO HER. Whether he found her attractive before or not is not really the catalyst, it's the fact that SHE seems to be a potential SUPPLY, now that she is looking at HIM.

She is giving him positive attention, and even if it's only a little, it's like crack to a Narcissist.

Now, if he finds her attractive enough, he will find excitement in the attention she gives him. He'll look forward to getting that attention, that positive approval, any sympathy, and any PRAISE especially. He'll sneak around, have secret meetings, secret messages in text and online, have a secret "relationship" with her~ trying to get more and more of that Supply of attention and ego stroking.

If he can get her to gossip with him right away about his wife, exwife, or even his kids, then he knows he's home free; this new woman is going to follow along with his line about how awful he's been treated, how awful his life has been, and how he just wants to be freeee.... to be with such an awesome creature like her...

So now, she's a partner in scapegoating his wife, which is a huge Supply for a Narcissist, AND she's giving him positive attention and stroking his ego, which is an even bigger Supply.

SHE thinks it's because he's attracted to HER the whole time, that he LIKES HER, that it's a REAL RELATIONSHIP between the two of them. But what he's actually "attracted to" is the praise and positive attention she gives him.

The day she disagrees with him, does something unexpected, does or says something that "tweaks" his very inflated ego, or doesn't comply with his expectations is the day he will start seeing her as "flawed" and "replaceable".

(If she's got Narcissism issues of her own, she'll then start to manipulate, stalk, possibly do things to his wife, exwife, or family, after he begins the "discarding" process.)

Boys: Naturally Aggressive?

wolf pictures

It's 2014 now, and this topic is still on the table, nearly everyone still refusing to study it objectively SANS personal ego and conditioning. So why is that? What's up with the obsessive and blatant lack of objectivity? Well, same as it ever was, and the whole reason scientific method exists in the first place:
Humans can't be fully objective. Humans insert their own "story" into whatever their looking at. And that means they'll DEFEND whatever their own story happens to be, instead of DETACHING themselves from their story in order to study objectively, without bias.Some do it more and some do it less, bless their hearts.





Humans will even do this while studying other animals in "scientific settings". They will anthromorphize the animals they're studying according the the animal's sex. They'll try to attribute their OWN feelings and conditioned perceptions about "masculinity" or "femininity" on random animals species that they're studying, often onto insects or crustaceans, even invertebrates. Amazing is the human brain's capacity to FAIL in objectivity, no matter how "scientific" the "study" or "experiment" is supposed to be.

Feminizing and masculinizing is even seen in math, physics, and engineering,

(Professor Manly, physicist~ was named New York Professor of the Year.
His name and this pic were a convenient coincidence but I don't know him
personally, or whether or not he practices the commonly found ridiculous
male-bias that is pervasive in math and science related academics and work fields,
and that of course gets adamantly denied.
Just like Rock and Roll.
He might not, I hope he doesn't.)

and when the subject is an INANIMATE OBJECT.

This is from "Tomboy Tools". A company who is trying to bridge the silly gap that people have in their heads by marketing "female tools", (i.e. painted pink) which I applaud, since it seems to be the only way to get people to venture out of their obsession with tools, repair, and building being "male". I don't know how it would go over in my contracting/remodeling business, but I bet a lot of my tools would stay where I put them more often.
And maybe the little insecure jackasses who keep sniffing at my shoes would stop calling me a "dyke".
But then again, who cares... I kind of like kicking them when they sniff at my shoes or call me elementary school names, it's cathartic.

In light of all this, it's not much of a surprise that if humans fail regularly in removing their anthromorphic, gender-obsessed filters when viewing even inanimate objects, that they might not be able to do that when viewing or studying actual HUMAN BEINGS. 

Effectively studying the differences between boys and girls, men and women is nearly impossible for most humans, because of the conditioning they (we) were exposed to right from birth. In other words, we are TOLD what we should believe and think about "males" and "females", including ourselves and our parents, from the day we're BORN.

We aren't just learning what we "see", we're TOLD what we see, and why.
(Which is not the same as learning what we actually SEE, or learning about what's actually THERE.)

We're literally TOLD, SHOWN, and DISCIPLINED into how WE ARE "supposed to be": What we're "supposed to be good at" or NOT good at, what the OTHER sex is "supposed to be good at" or NOT good at, what each person is "SUPPOSED TO LIKE", how STRONG they're "SUPPOSED TO BE" or NOT, all according to someone ELSE'S ideas and fictional stories about "male" and "female", NOT according to reality.

If it was according to reality or nature, no one would NEED TO TELL ANYONE "how girls are supposed to be", or "how boys are supposed to be". They would just BE however they ARE. We don't try to TEACH caterpillars how to be caterpillars, or cats to be cats, they just ARE. We watch them and FIND OUT what they do, we don't TELL THEM how caterpillars or cats are "supposed to be". 






Without understanding and comprehending THAT, there's no way to even BEGIN to study in any kind of "objective" manner.






There are some obvious things that we can observe about male humans in general:

In humans, the ovum (egg) from the mother has two X chromosomes. The sperm from the father will donate EITHER an X or a Y chromosome. If the sperm donates an X, the father's sperm determined that the baby is a girl. If the sperm donates a Y chromosome, the father's sperm determined that the baby is a boy.
(In birds, it's the opposite; the mother bird carries two different sex chromosomes, and the father bird carries two of the same. In turtles, it's the egg temperature that determines the sex of the baby.)

SOME male humans seem to be born with compulsion problems and apparent A.D.D.

Many of them do NOT have compulsion problems, A.D.D., or a tendency toward aggression.

Many male babies don't care about whether a toy is "supposed to be" male or female, they like what they like, regardless of what the adults try to MAKE them like.

Many males who DO have a compulsion problem and/or a tendency toward aggression and obnoxious behavior habitually poke at, mess with, and bully other males in their group, trying to get them to react.
The reactions of the non-bullying males can range from:
physically removing themselves from the individuals or the group,
to becoming anxious or depressed,
to developing lowered self-esteem and confidence,
to becoming aggressive themselves to dominate the bullies BACK, but often losing their original real "self" in the process (and often developing confusion or depression because of it, not knowing why they're not the same person they used to be)
OR adapting the bully's behaviors, and skewing their own preferences and perceptions to match the bullies'; in essence copying the bully and morphing themselves to fit in, thereby avoiding the bullying to some degree.

SOME males seem to be born with higher muscle strength, pound for pound, than other males, but it's more likely due to their skeletal structure that carries the amount of muscle, and also the amount that they literally work their muscles out in playing and squirming, which automatically builds it. Other factors would of course be nutrition and blood/oxygen delivery to their muscles.

SOME males upper body strength seems to be stronger than nearly ALL female humans, pound for pound; that's SOME, NOT ALL males. "ALL" males are not stronger than "ALL" females.

MOST males are NOT stronger in lower body strength than females in general, and are often faster due to longer leg bones and narrower hips, which is skeletal, not muscular.

SOME males are stronger than most other MALES, regardless of their HEIGHT, pound for pound.

Many males are told and taught to stand up for themselves against bullying.
Most females are told and taught NOT TO stand up for themselves against bullying, including against the same bullies that are bullying the males in the group.

Males are generally given REWARDS for standing up against bullies, more often than not, either from peers or from adults, or both.
Females are generally given CONSEQUENCES for standing up against bullies, even those same bullies, both from peers and adults.
All of THIS (reward vs. consequences for standing up against bullies) is DESIGNED BY ADULTS, and is obviously the opposite of "fair", and definitely the opposite of "logical".

Males are NOT, generally, "raised" with the same guidance, integrity, or moral instruction as females are, even in the same family, by the same parents.
Everything from subtle approval, encouragement, praise, happy attention and even PHYSICAL CARE from adults is CHANGED by adults according to the sex of the infant, and especially according to the biases and prejudices adults harbor.

Adults will do things like REDIRECT a child to play with only certain toys, and HUMILIATE or SHAME them for playing or even looking at other toys, and then say that a toy was the CHILD'S CHOICE.
"He chose that blue truck because he's all boy!" "She loves that pink princess pony because she's girly!" When the fact is, neither of them had a REAL choice, they were DIRECTED by the adults to choose the one that PLEASED THE ADULTS. 



By the time a child is two or three, he or she has seen the adults around them make MILLIONS of facial expressions, vocal noises, and body movements that show either APPROVAL or

DISAPPROVAL, associated with whatever the child is doing. So when little Johnny goes for the blue truck, no one stops him, he sees no disapproval, no one is moving to take it away or pick him up, and he sees pleased expressions on the faces of the adults.

When he goes to reach for the doll in the pink dress, he sees VERY CLEARLY that the adults are not giving signals and signs of approval or pleasure, and he sees that one of them is moving toward him in a big-person-scary kind of way;

either to pick him up or to move the doll away.

Little Johnny has learned one thing:
The adults LIKE IT when he plays with the truck, and he will get rewards of approval and a comfortable atmosphere, but they DON'T LIKE IT when he goes to play with the doll, and he will get consequences of disapproval, uncomfortable feelings, and an uncomfortable atmosphere.



Little Johnny is NOT choosing the truck over the doll, he is choosing the approval of the adults and the pleasant atmosphere they create when they're pleased, over their disapproval and the unpleasantness they create when they're not pleased.

Sure, some little boys would naturally want to play with the truck and not the doll, and so would some little girls. But ALL boys would not naturally choose the truck over the doll, nor would all girls naturally choose the doll over the truck, and it means very little about their "character" or their "sexual preference".
Additionally, it's a natural tendency for human babies and children, both males and females, to be interested in dolls because they have faces and look like people. To discourage this is frankly kind of creepy on the part of an adult... what exactly are they trying to accomplish with it?
Why would they want to train a child to reject a toy that resembles a human being, especially a baby?!


Adults do this "training" on children from the day a child is born, and seem completely, utterly oblivious to it, but.... they are at least somewhat aware of what they're doing. MOST adults kind of like it when their little boys act out and behave inappropriately, and don't mind it when their boys behave discourteously, disruptively, and like entitled, uncontrolled animals, for one main reason:
The adults think that other people see them through their sons.
If their son is acting like a "STRONG AGGRESSIVE MALE", then they think other people will associate that onto THEM as the son's parents, or as the boy's teachers, coach, or other family members and associates. It's not about the son, the boy, the man, or his well-being, it's about THEM.

So adults have a completely different REASON for allowing and encouraging so many boys to misbehave and act like entitled, self-centered, discourteous thug brats than the REASON they raise girls so differently.

BUT THEN AGAIN, NOT REALLY...

http://www.neatorama.com/2013/01/20/Winnie-the-Welder/

The reason they BROW BEAT GIRLS for all kinds of normal human behaviors, and also brow beat girls for most of the behaviors that they encourage and allow boys to do is all about THEM as well, not about the girls themselves, and definitely NOT about the girls' WELL BEING.

"What will people think of ME or US if she doesn't sit still and quietly, keep her hair and clothing perfect, doesn't stay inside and serve food and drinks and clean up like a maid instead of going outside and playing with the boys? If her voice and speech and manners aren't sweet and sweeter, even though everyone giggles when the boys display terrible manners? If she tries to "help" by doing things that BOYS are "supposed to do" like fixing things or moving heavy furniture... 
What will people think of US, and will we have to actually HELP HER like we would a boy~
if she wants to be a firefighter, an automechanic, an engineer, a carpenter, a stunt person, physicist, rock musician or an astronaut instead of being a wife of someone ELSE who is a firefighter, automechanic, engineer, carpenter, stunt person, or rock musician?
WHO CARES WHAT SHE WANTS TO DO AND WHAT MAKES HER HAPPY AND WHAT SHE'S GOOD AT!!! WE WANT HER TO BE A NURSE OR A TEACHER OR A YOGA INSTRUCTOR, EVEN A CLEANING BUSINESS WOULD BE BETTER THAN THAT OTHER STUFF!
FOR US, THAT IS!!!
I know one thing... I'm sure not going to ENCOURAGE HER or HELP HER in any way!
And I'm sure the teachers at her school will be in complete agreement with us!
How embarrassing, a GIRL who thinks she can do what BOYS can do... I NEVER!

                                                  We're

not just going to shame her for not having ANY job, we're going to shame her for not having the RIGHT JOB! THAT WE APPROVE OF!
Otherwise we'll all treat her like an outcast, come on, it'll be fun!








It's not any different from the way boys are trained to be a certain way, and shamed for just being who they really are, without the MANLY MAN SUPERIORITY-act, which is the dance partner of the GIRLY GIRL SUBSERVIENT,  SUBMISSIVE, DEFERRING, AND INCAPABLE OF MOST SKILLS BUT FEIGNING CONFIDENCE IN MY FEMININITY-act.


Most people know they're playing a part, in their hearts and in the back of their minds.
But the fear of humiliation if they broke character is too strong, they won't chance it.

Boys and MEN in general are encouraged to DO but girls and WOMEN are discouraged FROM certain same behaviors, such as displaying physical strength and ability, displaying confidence, intelligence, knowledge, skill, or pride, pursuing random interests instead of only CERTAIN interests that are pre-determined for them by others "according to their gender" (according to the fictional fantasy world of others, that is)...  Or behaviors that boys are allowed and encouraged unfortunately to do all the time like showing aggression, condescending to others, behaving arrogantly, lewdly, rudely, coldly, snottily, and inappropriately, trying to dominate others with bullying, threats, or verbal abuse and humiliation, showing a LACK of consideration, empathy, common civility and manners toward other people. Of course girls should be guided not to do those things, but there is absolutely ZERO legitimate reason for adults NOT to guide and discipline boys and girls in exactly the same way. None, zero, nada. People will argue all day long about it, but the bottom line is, the ridiculous gigantical fantastical differences in the way people raise and treat boys and girls is simply a crock of shite.

WHY do people seem to think it's a FUNNY THING, or even a NORMAL THING, to set boys up for confusion, social problems, relationship problems, civil problems, legal problems, health problems and career problems down the road by refusing to guide him, and encouraging him to behave like a "rogue"?!?
If he CHOOSES to behave that way on his own later, then that's his choice, but if no one taught him any different, then he doesn't HAVE A CHOICE, because he doesn't KNOW any better. If we want your sons to have success in life in general, WHY wouldn't we TEACH HIM what he actually needs to know and understand? Like social grace and relationship interaction skill, managing and recognizing his own emotions and the emotions of others? Respect for himself (which REQUIRES respect for others and knowing what that really means, including toward the opposite sex, other ages, and other ancestries)? Civility, manners, straightforwardness, self-protection, awareness of others for good and for ill, genuine integrity, serenity, fairness, and consideration for others, all of which one NEEDS in all areas of life, including BUSINESS, and in order to keep their own life on a relatively even keel, so that they can achieve their goals, have less crises, have much less drama, and take life in much greater STRIDE, instead of being consumed and buried by pitfall after pitfall. 

Critical thinking, self-awareness, healthy boundaries, respect for the boundaries of others, genuineness!

As far as biological differences between males and females, they are quite obviously due to reproductive  processes so we can have more baby humans. But that's the ONLY thing that can be called into fact that's NOT screwed around with by human social training, brainwashing, crazy superstitions, made-up rationalizations, stereotypes, cultural biases, bigotry, fantastical stories, and PURE FICTION.

Not even the differences in physical strength that everyone seems to believe these days is true.
"Though hormones may influence strength development potential among women, they most likely do not account for significant male-female differences in absolute strength."
"Based on a strength-to-lean-body-mass ratio, women are about equal in strength to men, and when strength is calculated per cross-sectional area of muscle, no significant gender difference exists. For example, a 15 cm2 cross-sectional area of an arm flexor has about 19 kg of force for both women and men." 
(From: 

William P. Ebben, MS, MSSW, CSCS; Randall L. Jensen, PhD)

The difference in skeletal size, height and width actually make the difference in "body strength" generally between INDIVIDUAL HUMANS. Males tend to have wider and taller skeletal frames, so literally a larger amount of muscle can grow on the frame and stretch across the frame. It's like how one male is physically smaller and therefore "weaker" than another male; if their skeleton supports less muscle, then they have less muscle than the guy who's skeleton supports more muscle.


If my arm bones have more muscle on them than your arm bones, then my arms are stronger than yours. If your wrist bones are bigger and thicker than mine, they have more surface for more muscle, so your wrists are probably stronger than mine, even if my arms are stronger than yours. (I can lift twice my own weight, but my 82 year old Mom opens jars that I can't open.)
Your muscle is not simply stronger than my muscle, and my muscle is not simply stronger than yours, unless one of us has specific issues with our muscle growth and function (like poor circulation that blocks oxygen delivery, for example).

                                             We're the same species.

One of us is not a CHIMPANZEE or THE HULK, and the other a frail little waify invertebrate creature. If your skeleton is bigger than that guy in the corner, then there are parts of your skeleton that will probably have more muscle on it than his. If the woman in the other corner's skeleton is bigger than that guy's, then she'll probably have more muscle on parts of her skeleton than he does. But he could have more muscle on another part than either one of you, so he'd be stronger than either one of you THERE.

And whichever one of the three of you has been STIMULATING YOUR MUSCLE GROWTH, either with working out in some way or physical labor, then THAT PERSON would probably be the strongest generally if you were all the same height and weight, and your skeletons were of similar gauge.
Thicker bones means more muscle on the bone, generally, so even if all three of you did the same work and were exactly the same size except for your skeletons, then whoever had the thickest skeleton would probably be the strongest, just because their bones have more muscle on them.

It's a lot less complicated, a lot less about "masculinity" and "femininity" than most people are DYING TO BELIEVE so they can keep their stories intact.
"Male physiology, more than hormones, explains men's 'superior absolute strength'. When other measures of strength are used, such as strength relative to cross-sectional area of muscle, the strength of men and women is nearly equal."
~William P. Ebben, MS, MSSW, CSCS; Randall L. Jensen, PhD

That means it's not really "superior absolute strength", it's relative to the skeleton of the individual person AND the amount of working-out each muscle gets.
PLUS, each person does not have uniform muscle strength, my wrists are probably weaker than yours, but I could twist you into a pretzel with my legs without even trying very hard, and then carry you to the hospital on my back. 
AND so it goes with INDIVIDUAL MALES, as well. 

Boys are NOT CLONES of one another, they're PEOPLE, individual human beings, each as unique as their fingerprints.



When adults group boys together and try to make "herds" out of them, of course they're going to try to homogenize themselves into being "more alike", just to survive and be accepted and comfortable in the group. And when a couple of the boys in that group are bullies, then the rest of the boys move around IN REACTION to those bullies, and change themselves in order to deal with those bullies. Or, they leave the group altogether, but can end up feeling like a "weirdo" because they're not in the group. And many adults who lack maturity will go right along with treating this boy like a "weirdo" because he left the group rather than be the target of continuous haranguing.

A boy is a human being, first and foremost. After "Human Being", THEN he's a human being who happens to be male, who happens to be short, tall, or average height, who happens to be from an ancestry. But first and foremost, he's a HUMAN BEING.
Just like his sisters, his parents, his cousins, his neighbors, his teachers, his elected or appointed government office holders, all of his classmates, the clergy people in his religion, the people in the civic organizations, all the people who work and run businesses big and small, and all of the people, female and male, on TV and on the radio.

PERSON, WONDERFUL, MIRACULOUS, LOVELY SOUL, MALE, UNIQUE, 

HUMAN BEING

Judging For Jobs

When we judge others on the (legal) job they have or don't have, we're turning something that's not a character trait into a character trait.

The job a person does is just something they DO, it has nothing to do with their character. There are doctors who are genuinely humble and caring people, and there are doctors who are complete jerks, who don't even care about their patients, which IS a big part of their job. And what happens on a day that a "good" doctor decides to quit? Does that mean she's not a good person now because she's not being a doctor? What if she decides she decides to quit, and do something else completely unrelated to the medical profession, that doesn't pay well? That's part time, maybe in a warehouse? Maybe as a greenhouse worker? And yes, this DOES happen, it's not "made up" or "far fetched".

There are doctors who got their medical license by cheating, and who don't actually know what they're doing. So how would you know that? You wouldn't. You would just see their degree on the wall and the stethoscope around their neck. Is this doctor a "fine upstanding citizen" now, because he has a medical degree on his wall and the title of MD?

There are nurses who are very good at their jobs, respecting each patient and double-checking themselves. And then there are nurses who are only in it for the paycheck and to look like a responsible person so everyone treats them good, but they don't care much about their patients or their jobs.

There are stockbrokers who are honest, caring, forthright people, and there are stockbrokers who lie and cheat and steal.

There are clergy people who genuinely care about their parishioners and about conveying their spirituality, and there are clergy who just want the reputation and the prestige they think comes with the collar, and the right they think they'll get to boss people around. There are even some who are complete cons who are only in it for money for themselves.

There are people who don't have jobs, who are content to live on what they already have, helping others when they can, or not, choosing to experience life. It's ACTUALLY no one else's business.

~ No, it's really not.

There are people who don't seem to have a regular job, who do a lot more than people who DO have "regular" jobs, they just don't have time, the desire, or the ego to boast about everything they do.

There are people who clean toilets for a living who are wiser and smarter than most of the people who make six figures.

There are people who make six figures who are the "salt of the earth", and they may work in the same office and have to deal with the meanest person they ever met, who make the same as they do, but do a terrible job.

There are even homeless people with IQs that are 50 points higher than most; we may not understand what they're doing, but that's just because we're not smart enough to comprehend it
.
It's none of our business what a person's job is, and it's none of our business to judge them for their job, for good or for ill.

What others do during their day is none of our business, unless it's something that's causing danger and damage to people. Is a person causing damage or harm to anyone? Honestly? Then who's business is it what they do with their time, or what job they have or don't have?
It's not anyone's, certainly not mine, certainly not yours, not their neighbor's, their cousin's, their nephew's, their former teacher's, the bank teller's, the local hardware store owner's, or their former classmates'.

The desire to judge people negatively or positively for their job, their clothes, their car and their income, and put their activities under a magnifying glass has become an epidemic in Western Society. The reason for it is, unfortunately, FEAR. People magnify and judge others negatively because they're AFRAID of being the next person under someone else's scrutiny, and they judge others positively because THEY want to be judged positively by others under that same magnifying glass.. It's as simple as that.
(Ironically, many of those doing the judging have not worked a truly hard day at a difficult job in their lives. That's projection and diversion; they don't want the magnifying glass to fall on them and see how easy they've had it, so they're pointing at someone else...'look at them, don't look at me!")

So the next time we look down on someone for their job, or their lack of a job, or put someone on a high pedestal for their job, we can look at ourselves next, and ask ourselves why WE feel like we're being judged. 

You Don't Know What You're Talking About

Trying to discredit a Target by questioning things they say or do (or write) in a critical way is a common Control -domination-bully behavior. A person needs to believe first that they are innately superior to the person they're targeting, and must also believe that they are more knowledgeable, experienced, smarter or wiser than the other person.
"Where did you hear that?!"
"I don't think that's true."
"Where are you getting your information from?!"
"What did you just make that up?"
"Who are you supposed to be, an expert?"
"What makes you think you know what you're talking about? You don't even have a degree!"

Because controllers and people with narcissism are often fixated on finding ways to "prove" that they're superior and that others are inferior, wrong, and don't know what they're talking about, they tend to "interrogate" other people about pretty much any subject, and imply or accuse them directly of "Not knowing what they're talking about" or "Not knowing what they're doing". They won't have a discussion or ask questions, they'll just do THAT.

It's like how some humans will just lumber in and attack a random animal with a stick without knowing anything about the animal, and without making contact with it first, just because it's "there".

There's no "reason" for this behavior except for the person's own behavioral and emotional issues.

My Daughter Is So Spoiled And Acts Like A Brat

"My daughter is a spoiled brat! She's bossy and has an attitude! I give her everything and she doesn't appreciate it! She's an ungrateful, spoiled little b----!"

Does this sound familiar? Do you know someone who's frustrated because their daughter just refuses to behave right? Refuses to act nice and sweet, like other kids, or like she used to be?


When we make this kind of complaint about our daughters we are usually simply making a couple of easily fixable parenting mistakes, such as complaining to only people who will agree with us about their daughter being a brat. (When we limit our complaints to only those who will go along with us, it's usually because we don't really want to fix anything, we just want to socialize and complain, and feel like our friends care about us and sympathize with us. We're trying to get support, but we're not doing anything to repair our problem.)
So that's the first and most common mistake: complaining, but without seeking any way to change the problem.

We want our daughters to be polite, socially kind and nice, happy, easy-going and sweet, and also neat, and willing to do their chores. Of course we do! We're parents, that's what parents expect! And we want exactly the same things from our sons, as well, and we discipline them for the same things, in the same way! Don't we? Well, not so much. While we're annoyed that our daughter did not clear the table after supper and help with the dishes, we didn't seem to notice that our son went out to play as soon as his own plate was cleared. That means we placed an expectation on one child but not the other, just because of what sex they are.

If we had twin sons, we would separate our expectations of them in that way? (Some people would, based on the way each son looks, and whether they like one better than the other.)

 When we treat our sons and daughters so differently from one another, it's not about who THEY are, it's about who WE are.


We tend to treat sons and daughters very differently from one another, and right in front of each other, but expect the same results from both of them.


We make mistakes of expectations with daughters, mostly because we want them to be more socially highly developed than our sons. We like to tell ourselves, and each other, that boys are a certain way and it can't be helped, so we let them run with a lot more behavior, and even encourage them to do a lot more activities and behaviors. But we tend to forget that daughters are real people, real kids, just like our sons. and they have the same full array of emotions that sons have.  They need to be recognized for the good and right things they do, just like we do for sons, and they don't need to be managed, trained, and judged so closely, so much more closely than sons.
 
Does it get on your nerves when she acts silly, laughs loudly, expresses frustration or anger? Does it hurt your feelings or make you angry when she doesn't do what you tell her to do, or when she doesn't behave toward you like she's made of sugar and honey? Does it make you mad when she protests the way you're treating her? Does it aggravate you or anger you when she doesn't jump when you say jump, when she doesn't behave perfectly, or when she won't bend to your command and expectations?

Does it make you mad when she says she's being treated unfairly?

Does it annoy you or EMBARRASS you when she wants to do things that you don't want her to do, or be good at, or be interested in, because "she's a girl", and "not a boy"?
Does it embarrass you when other people might see her wearing clothes that aren't girly enough, or when her hair isn't perfect, or doing things that you only want sons to do?

None of those emotions, anger, aggravation, annoyance or embarrassment are coming FROM HER.
ALL of those emotions are coming FROM US, and are ABOUT US.
We are not separating our emotional reactions about not getting what we WANT for OURSELVES from being a PARENT to a real human child.


The real bottom line is, we are in the habit of raising our sons to be more of who THEY are, the most confident "THEM" they can be (hopefully, in a healthy family), and we help them prepare for the real tough world out there. BUT at the same time, we are in the habit of raising our DAUGHTERS to be what WE want them to be! Not who or what THEY ARE!

We are giving our sons tools and lessons in being strong... but if they're so much naturally stronger than girls, then why aren't we giving a double dose of those same lessons and tools to our daughters? Instead of what we usually do: refuse to give them any of these same lessons or tools?

We don't wait and see what toys our daughters choose, we encourage them to choose certain toys, we give them certain toys. We do this to our sons as well. We don't care about WHO THEY ALREADY ARE, and guide them and nurture them AS the people they already are, or are becoming. We try to MAKE THEM INTO the person WE want them to be.

We have a pre-made mold in our heads of "Who She Should Be", "How She Should Act", "What She Likes", and "What She Is Capable Of." 

We don't wait and see anything about her as a person, like we do with our sons, and even when we DO watch and see her as a person, we put her down and criticize her instead of praise her for her unique character and personality. 
We encourage sons to INFLATE their personalities, and be proud of who and what they are, and we press down on daughters to DIMINISH their personalities, and feel like they need to hide who and what they are. 

A boy who is always making jokes and funny noise is "so cute", "so funny", and "so endearing", but a girl with is always making jokes and funny noise is "annoying" and "tries to get attention".  

A son who is constantly talking about science, animals, and dinosaurs is called "so smart" and "gregarious", and is encouraged with trips to the museum and zoo, outings, toys and books, science experiments and animals inside the house. But a girl who talks in exactly the same way, who's interests are exactly the same, is called a "know it all", "annoying", "boring", and MIGHT be taken on an outing or allowed to have maybe one pet, and probably only small toys that won't be IN THE WAY or MESSY.

Why don't we assess each child for the same behaviors in the same way? Because of US, our OWN personal issues. Not because of the CHILDREN.

And we seem to be completely okay with our delusion...  it doesn't seem to phase us in the least about the effects of the way we treat our children ON our children... we just keep making excuses and justifications, and blaming the children.

So when our little boy runs around the room making fire engine noises, waving a wooden block in the air, and wearing a cape, we go "OH isn't he CUTE? He's ALL BOY!" Is this good or bad? Probably good, unless we're ignoring the fact that he's disrupting other people, or stomping on things. That would be "spoiling" him, and that's about OUR issues, not about HIM. Calling him a "brat" means we don't know how to guide and discipline children. But if he's not stomping on things, then it's adorable, right?

But when our little girl runs around the room making fire engine noises, waving a wooden block in the air, and wearing a cape, (exactly the same thing as our little boy), we shrill "Calm down! Be quiet! Put that block down! Come over here and play nice!"

Know why?
Wait, were you going to say "because little boys and little girls are just different"?
Are they? If they're so different, than why did that little girl and little boy do the same exact thing?

If it was good for our little boy to be free to follow his imagination and make those noises and run around pretending to be a super-hero, building his confidence, building his imagination, having fun, being himself, then it was good for our little girl to do the same as well, for the same reasons.

The answer is because WE have sexism and bias issues. Not because the little girl somehow just naturally deserves to be treated with so much more micro-judging and micro-management than the little boy. 


Remember, they aren't a different "animal", as if boys are big strong dogs who are always happy go lucky and can't help but lumber around on the furniture and roll around in the grass because they're so strong, and as if girls are cats who are always dainty and fearful with agendas and attitudes, with brittle bones and frail, weak bodies, that's just a cartoonish, false image painted by silly stories, and certain eras of "high society".  They're all human kids, and they all need the same things from parents and other adults: They need the same kind of guidance and instruction, the same kind of nurturing, the same kind of protection, the same kind of love and care, and the same kind of encouragement. 

Let's say we do have twin sons. They are both going to the same school, playing in the same neighborhood with the same kids, some of whom will be bullies. They are both dealing with the personalities of the different teachers in their school, and dealing with the social climate of the school. Both of them have to make the same effort to keep good marks. We give them support, means, and guidance in dealing with all of this stuff in their lives, to build their confidence, and we give them help in making their lives fulfilling and fun. We know that we are helping to prepare both of them for adulthood, for becoming adults in the real world, for growing up and being able to deal with the harsh world, being able to support themselves and "make a name" for themselves. We encourage them to test their strength, build their friendship networks, show their abilities both physical and mental to the world and to themselves. We know that the more confidence they build in themselves for their physical abilities and mental abilities, the better they'll do in life. We want each of them to believe in themselves, and their own capability, and we tend to spread around to others how proud we are of their strengths and abilities.

We give them opportunities to show and build their strength, agility, and mental prowess, and we give them everything they need to do this. 

Both twin sons are preparing for the same world, would we prepare one of them for that world, but not the other, because one of them is bigger and one is smaller? 
Or would we prepare only the one we like, but drop the ball with the other because their personality isn't pleasing to us? 

Unless we have some kind of personal issues, (and many do), we don't only prepare one of our twin sons for their life in this world that we live in, but not the other.
Because the world is a certain way, all of our sons need our help, guidance, and preparation so they can become proud, capable, and effective adults. It's a harsh world, and independence does not come easy, it takes a lot of work and guts.

We know this, so we prepare our sons as best we can, and make a soft place for them to fall when they make mistakes or run into trouble.

We don't want to step on their self-confidence or their ego, and we want them to be independent and have initiative. So we don't micro-manage them or make them wear certain clothes. We let them make decisions, and we don't come down on them too hard for their manners, the way they treat others, especially the way they treat girls and women, or the way they pick on other boys.

We often kind of encourage them to be a little cocky and arrogant, because we think this will help them stay confident, and believe in their own leadership qualities.

We often don't come down on them very hard even for obvious criminal activities like stealing or the misuse of motor vehicles; we say that they've "learned their lesson" just from getting in trouble with the law. We help them with getting a job, we make sure everyone thinks highly of them by talking about the things they do, and we praise their good behavior and their contributions and their work every chance we get, trying to build their self-confidence so they can deal with this difficult world we live in, and be successful. 

So, why do we like it when our sons show independence, strength, confidence and PRIDE, but when our daughters show it, we judge them for being unruly? Why do we purposely give our sons toys, lessons, and equipment that will prepare them for the "real world" and help them learn, but we give our daughters frills, clothing, and play toys, and whether they want them or not? 
 
Why don't we teach our daughters what they need to know for "real life" like we teach our sons? If either one of them need to know how to maintain their own car, for example, it's our daughter even more than our son, and the reasons are obvious to anyone with awareness about how "the real world" is.

We will even purposely teach our sons to work on a car and fix things in spite of their complaining and whining that they want to do something else, but NOT teach our daughters, and we'll often say "it's because she's not interested". Except we seem to forget that we didn't care about our SON'S LACK of interest, his whining, sulking, and complaining that he'd rather be hanging out with his friends or playing video games.

Then, we'll actually attribute our son's knowledge of cars and handy work to "natural ability", even though we initially made them learn and help, and we'll attribute our daughter's lack of knowledge and handy work to her being a "girl", as if our lack of teaching her is HER fault. We made all kinds of effort to teach our sons how to change the oil, how to change a tire, how to fix a hole in the wall, and how to throw and hit a baseball and catch a football, in spite of complaints and sulking. But regarding teaching our daughters, we send them inside to sit in their room, and then we say that she doesn't care about those things or understand them.

Why do we give our sons all kinds of opportunities to prove their abilities and physical strength because we know how important they are for self-esteem and confidence building as a person, but we don't give our daughters these same opportunities? And when we do, we don't make it a "huge deal" like we do with our sons. (A good coach/instructor knows better, and knows that girls and boys need the SAME opportunities and the SAME guidance and encouragement, but most people seem not to understand this; most people will BUILD THE EGOS of boys all day, but try to DIMINISH THE EGOS of girls. ....And then wonder why the girls seem to be less happy and less confident, and less "sunny" and "happy go lucky" than the boys around them.)

What is it that seems to make us forget that our daughters are going to have to live in the same world as our sons will? Perhaps it's remnants of a television and movie world in our heads where we bought into this idea that girls will live under the umbrella of a brilliant, strong, perfect, wealthy man who treats her like a queen, and so we are already thinking that's "who she is". Perhaps in our imaginations, even if she's only 7 or 14, we see her as the protected wife of a wealthy, strong, doting husband who provides her with her every whim, and coddles her in every way. Perhaps because of the image we hold of our daughters in our imaginations, we feel certain feelings toward her such as jealousy or envy, and even though none of the image is real, we treat our daughters accordingly. 

The fact is, our daughters are actually growing up into an even more difficult world than our sons are. On the average, girls and woman are physically smaller than boys and men, which automatically gives them a disadvantage in life. As you can see with boys who bully other boys, smaller people are often bullied in various ways, on the playground of course, but in life as well. So there are a lot more adults in the world who are bigger than our daughters than our sons. We seem to be aware that our sons may get bullied, but we seem to pretend that our daughters are somehow exempt and outside the reach of bullies. When we look at it directly, we know that that's just silly, girls and women get bullied all the time, more than boys and men, and they get bullied by both females and males.

Women get sabotaged by other women in real life ways, both socially and in business, and everyone knows it, but no one teaches their daughters how to effectively DEAL WITH IT. Because that would be ADMITTING that DAUGHTERS HAVE A LOT OF EXTRA CRAP TO DEAL WITH just to work and live. And that would mean having compassion for them instead of just JUDGMENT and CRITICISM.

Men also sabotage and bully women, and everyone knows this, too. But again, no one teaches girls how to deal with it, because that would be admitting that it's REAL, and then one would have to admit that PEOPLE WE KNOW PERSONALLY ARE DOING IT. And that would just mess everything up, wouldn't it.....??? Yeah, let's just throw our daughters, our own kids, under the bus instead of dealing with the reality that there are men we are friends with and work with who are DOWNRIGHT DISRESPECTFUL to our OWN KIDS.  (And yes, some people will do this to their own sons too.)

The very bottom of this vat of murky water is that adults project their own biases onto children, and then raise them accordingly. They don't teach their sons and daughters the same values, or give them the same guidance, encouragement, and preparation for the world they're BOTH going to live in: they EDIT the way they raise each child in order to manipulate a projected outcome. Their not raising children as the people they actually ARE, they're trying to turn kids into what they WANT THEM TO BE. Regardless of the damage it causes to the child's self-image, self-esteem, emotional health, or future.

Very few adults raise kids, either boys or girls, to have consistent values, to treat ALL PEOPLE according to the CHILD'S VALUES, not according to whether they LIKE or feel SUPERIOR TO another person. Or to measure THEMSELVES by these same values. How one treats a person of one sex AND the other is a direct reflection on the person themselves.

And the reason it's so hard for most adults to raise kids with consistent values and integrity toward all people is because they aren't doing it themselves. Kids learn to be how they're treated, and they learn to treat others how they're SHOWN. And they learn from ALL OF THE ADULTS around them, not just from one, or even two.

Let's raise our children to be healthy, strong, and confident, with CONSISTENT integrity, values, and ethics that don't change with each person they talk to, and don't change toward THEMSELVES because of their sex or some other physical body trait.

There's a very old adage, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander."
Literally, it means that the same things are good for both sexes, and stop falling into the trap of believing the fictional, made up stories about vast, ridiculous blanket differences between female and male geese, or humans. Individual male geese are different from other male geese, and individual male humans are different from other male humans. And so it is for individual female geese, and individual female humans. Each goose is not a CLONE of all the other geese who are the same sex, and they're not a DIFFERENT ANIMAL from the other goose-sex. And neither are humans.

There are differences, of course, so let the OTHER INDIVIDUAL PERSON show and tell us who and what they are. Instead of US INSISTING on telling THEM who and what they are based on our own cartoon images that we carry in our heads..


M.Black 2013

Aspiring Artists, Musicians, Writers, Actors, Etc., and Dealing With Narcissists

Those who are in "the Arts", especially those who do original work, often find out early about how widespread and severe Narcissistic control can be. The nature of the "Arts" means there is less established structure and hierarchy, and less specific checks and balances determining what's "good work" and what's not (like there is in other fields; if you're in accounting, for example, you know if you did it right, you aren't subject to someone's opinion.) So the free-form nature of the Arts fields attracts Narcissists, and they find it quite easy to prey on those who aspire to build some kind of career in the arts.

One of the very common behaviors one will find in any Arts field is the "Critic". Of course, Narcissists attack what and who they envy, what they feel threatened by, so when someone nearby displays talent and skill, they usually do one of two things: they either latch onto the person, or they try to pound the person down.
Criticizing the person's work, performance, ability and skill is the usual go-to behavior.

Another one is ad hominem, criticizing and insulting the PERSON, and trying to get others to believe they're a "bad person who WE don't like". ... "yeah she's talented, but what a prima dona." or "yeah he's good, but he's just too weird for me."
(If an artist/musician/writer is not a close personal friend, why would anyone be focusing so closely on their personality? Have they actually spent much, or any, real time with the person? Do they do that with their their dentist, or their accountant? Their local government office holders? Do they hire and fire police officers based on whether they personally like to hang out with them or not? Do they refuse to work with their coworkers based on whether they like them or not?)

A very important behavior comes from those who "hold the reins". Obviously any position of control is more likely to attract Narcissists, and that can be found in spades in the Arts because of the lack of consequences.

As a result ~ those who are very talented, very good, very original often run into the ENVY/CONTROL factor. An artist who does not submit to a Narcissistic producer/employer/band leader's commands, demands, whims and ego may be given the whole range of Narc. rage, from threats, to manipulation, to discard, to smearing.

An artist who SEEMS LIKE they won't submit will often be rejected and discarded BEFORE they're even considered by the Narc. producer for work, no matter how brilliant they are, how talented, or how much money they could make the producer or the record label (or the agency, the company, the gallery, etc.)

An artist who the Narc. producer/employer ENVIES will most likely also be discarded or even smeared before they even know that the Narc. producer noticed their existence.
 
Since most Narcissists are obsessed with CONTROL, with a very high dose of inflated ego, a Narc. in any kind of "leadership" position wants control OVER the artist, and the artist's work and performance. So they would usually rather "work with", "sign", or hire an artist who they think they can control and manipulate. An artist (any arts field) who shows obvious autonomy, independence, and awareness is not desirable to them, even if there was a large potential for money.  For many  Narcissists, having control over another person IS the supply; money is secondary.

Even in a Teacher/Student situation, a Narcissistic teacher will often treat the student with the most talent and potential as if they are a "waste of their time", like they're a "loser", like they're "in the wrong field" or the "wrong class". They'll often treat this student like a burden to them, because the fact is the student IS a "burden", on the Narcissist. Nothing burdens a Narcissist more than having to deal with someone, even a child, who they feel OUTSHINED by.



   

Sexism, Racism, and Christianity

Both racism and sexism are anti-Christian.

So is any other "ism".

There are no "lower" children of God, or "higher" children of God.

Humility is the foundation of Christ's teachings.

The recognition of all of God's children as God's children, and treating them as such. 

There is no humility in placing one's self above another of God's children, period.

If one desires to place one's self in a position above or below another one of God's children, may they choose wisely.

For the sake of their own soul.

Control Freak Much? Bratty, Spoiled, Immature Control Freaks Have Always Competed For "King"

People who think that "equality for women" has been a normal part of life for generations are quite mistaken. Equality has never been a "normalcy" in most human societies, neither for sex nor race, EVER. Anywhere.

What it has ALWAYS been, in most human "civilizations", is basically this:
Certain males (not all males, not just random males, but only CERTAIN males) who were GIVEN some kind of "birthright" of "power", mostly because their families or FRIENDS had the most wealth and therefore could buy more weapons and hire more soldiers to help them bully everyone else, were the ones in charge. Usually they were the native race in the country or region, except in the cases where they had destroyed and taken over someone else's country. So there were Caucasian control freaks making themselves into "Kings", and there were African control freaks making themselves into "Kings", Asian control freaks, Polynesian Control Freaks, even Native American control freaks each trying to be the Ultimate Ruler control freak bully psycho, controlling everyone else and making slaves out of other human beings of both other races and their OWN.

Even if one family or "King" knew it was wrong and stupid, he could not let his "rule" fail if he wanted to protect all the people, because there was ALWAYS some control-freak psycho whack-job either trying to kill him personally and take his "crown" and get to be the "King", or trying to take over the whole "kingdom" with weapons and destruction (stupid, yes, and yet.. over and over, and over... ad nauseum).


Not "kind of like", but EXACTLY like, little boys who fight with each other over who gets to be in charge of the cool toy. Not "kind of like", but EXACTLY LIKE.  Those same little boys are the ones who make the "no girls allowed" clubs.
Without a mature adult around to tell them to knock it off or go home, they roll around until someone gets hurt, and the toy gets broken.
It's just basic Homo Sapien Sapien moronic domination behavior, sans intelligent thought process.

This is not speculation, this is how it's been for centuries. People like to try to justify it and glorify it, and make heroes and villains, but the facts are stark and obvious when you don't try to embellish them with b.s. This still goes on in MOST PLACES, in different forms, most of them try to make it look civilized and cover up what's really going on, try to blame someone else, try to make someone else look like the Barbarian, but ... it's still here, alive and well. Some places are still so bad that people don't know if they'll survive from week to week, day to day.

Anyone, male or female, who didn't at least pretend to go along with them got singled out, jailed, killed, or their families torn apart, so... only if you had some way of having huge amounts of wealth where you could hire a bigger army and buy more weapons could you really do anything about it. Otherwise, you either had to run away into the wilderness, take your chances in the desert, probably die, or move somewhere else into the territory of a DIFFERENT bully whack-job control freak.

Our "civilization" in the West is of course much safer than many other places in the past or even in the present, but that's because of one reason and one reason only:
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING THEIR A**ES OFF FOR OUR FREEDOM AND "EQUALITY" FOR YEARS AND YEARS, AND ARE STILL FIGHTING.

Inequality doesn't just "go away" because it's a "new era" and everyone is "smart now". There's a REASON that the human species has ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS been oppressing it's OWN self. As a species, we're really NOT that bright. As individuals, we can be intelligent, sometimes, but as a species, NOT.

Humans GET OFF ON OPPRESSION AND DOMINATION OF OTHER HUMANS. 

It's a fact.

That's why they get sooooo excited about sporting events where one team is "dominating" the other. Don't like it? TOO BAD, it's the truth. That's why they COMPETE for jobs, promotions, and "top spots" instead of helping each other and sharing resources.
That's why they'll PULL THE RUG OUT from under a person who they feel envy toward, who they feel intimidated by.

That's why so many people create HOSTILE ENVIRONMENTS for other people, in order to keep their little group all the same RACE, or all the same SEX. They do it at WORK, at SCHOOL, in SPORTS, in CLUBS, in the ARTS, in GOVERNMENT.
They even allow and encourage little kids to do it on the playground at school and in their neighborhood, and even in their OWN HOME.

"Equality" is not some kind of "given", and when people take it for granted they are displaying tremendous ignorance, about the world, humans, their communities, and their history, both distant and RECENT.

In the US for example, Black MALES were allowed to vote in the mid-late 1800s, and it was the Republican Party, not the Democrat Party, who made that happen. However, FEMALES of all races, including "white", "black", and "Native", were NOT allowed to vote, to participate as full citizens in most states, until 1920 with the 19th Amendment.

1920! Not the 5th century, or the 17th century, or even the 19th century. It was not ratified until the twentieth century! And that was FORTY ONE YEARS after it was drafted in the first place.

And it was only drafted because the language in the 14th and 15th Amendments, the ones that granted blacks the right to vote, BLEW WOMEN OFF. It protected MALE citizens, but NOT FEMALE citizens. Many of the people who fought HARD for the 14th and 15th Amendments to be passed in 1868 and 1870 were FEMALE, so this was a huge, disgusting. pathetic, childish slap in the face, once again, from the same little spoiled, bully control freaks who were already doing it all along anyway.

No less than FORTY YEARS later... Before that, individual states dictated whether women could vote or not, and ABOUT WHAT...

....CONTROL FREAK MUCH?!?

It has not even been ONE CENTURY yet since it was ratified. After that, there was STILL a ton of ridiculous, pathetic, control-freak attempts by CERTAIN people (not all males) to keep women from voting, from receiving education and instruction, and from working, and especially in fields that control freaks wanted for men-only. (Which is just creepy to me.)
People, both men and women, have been dealing with this crap for decades. The Civil Rights Act wasn't even passed until 1964!!! That's practically NOW, people who were alive then are still alive and well NOW. It was just yesterday.

There is STILL, RIGHT NOW, a HUGE amount of sexism and racism in Western Civilization, and the less people who know better take it SERIOUSLY, the more there will be.

Oppression and control-freakism in the human species is EVER PRESENT. It doesn't "go away", EVER. It WAITS for an opportunity to spring right back up, like crab grass, or more appropriately, like a VIRUS. It's unfortunately part of the Human Psyche, it's not some kind of "Era" thing.

Just like all the other Freedoms people have worked and fought so hard for. You SNOOZE, you LOSE.

It's important to understand that there are BOTH men and women who participate in this weird control-freak stuff, and they are men and women of ALL RACES and ancestries. They simply get off on power over other people, and trying to dominate other people, they don't really care WHO they're dominating. The fact that they have someone to oppress, control, and boss around is all that matters. They are getting off on the feeling of bossing others around and controlling them, and they get off on being part of some kind of "elite clique" that they created themselves. THAT'S ALL. They exist now, they always have, and they always will.

It's just basic lower common denominator of Homo Sapien Sapien. Accept it, believe it, don't let anyone talk you into believing it's something from "the past". We don't need to be all doom and gloom about it, let it depress us, let it ruin our day and wreck our future. That's the opposite of what we need to be; that's what all oppressors want; for others to feel weak and defeated and depressed. Just BE AWARE, and don't live in a fantasy world, and for Pity's sake don't be one of those people who tell other people to "Let It Go" or "Stop Dwelling" or "Stop Making Such A Big Deal About It". Seriously, don't be one of those bozos.
Use your own brain, not your social network to view the world.
And remember that you are a real citizen, just like everyone else.




M.Black 2013

Fear Of Other Groups

Fear of "other" groups, of losing control and power to them:

"Only those who seek control and domination over others recoil when one of those 'others' stands up, speaks out loud, or does something openly visible to express their own thoughts or feelings.
Usually because they fear losing their 'position' of control that they're comfortable in.
Only those with weak or injured boundaries fear indoctrination when others speak. ~

When we get angry or annoyed at something someone has done or said, we can ask ourselves three things:

What are we REALLY upset about?

Did they cause actual harm, or are we just projecting that onto them?

How would we have reacted if one of our own cronies did or said the same thing, or something similar?

(saying "my friends wouldn't have done/said that" doesn't make the question lose credibility, sorry~ it's still valid even if we don't like it.)"

Who Do I Listen To And Believe? Who Do I Ignore And Dismiss?

Human beings are taught to accept and believe information from certain types of people, and literally reject it from other types of people. (Narcissists seem to do this in an exaggerated way).

Unfortunately for us as a species... there's a real problem with this, because...
The difference between the kinds of people they accept information FROM, and who they REJECT information from has nothing to do with who is actually smarter, wiser, or more knowledgeable, or more experienced.

Instead, it's based on childhood experiences, on the environment and people we grew up around, and on one's own identity and ego.

We grew up watching the people around us. Whoever THEY accepted information from is who WE learned to accept and believe information from.
And vice versa, whoever THEY rejected and dismissed, WE reject and dismiss.

Whoever we thought was "strong" we tended to believe was also "smart and trustworthy", and we internalized what they looked like and the PHYSICAL type of person they were. Since we were children, we had no way of knowing whether they were actually strong, smart, or trustworthy; they may have been, or they may have just projected that image on purpose in order to get attention and acceptance.
Whoever we thought was "weak" we tended to believe was also "ignorant" and "emotionally frail", and we again internalized what they looked like and the PHYSICAL type of person they were. But they might not have been "weak" or "ignorant" or "stupid" at all; we might not have known that they were being TREATED that way by immature or abusive people around us.

To children, the people who APPEAR to be "smart", "capable", and "Leaders" (because they are presenting themselves that way, or because other people who are polite and well-mannered are treating them that way) are of course who they're going to believe really ARE.
And vice versa.

In other words, if Uncle John and Uncle Joe are brothers, and little Brian and Sarah see Uncle John treat Uncle Joe with disrespect all the time, they aren't going to see what's really going on.
They're simply going to see Uncle John acting "confidently" and "strongly", and see Uncle Joe acting "unsure of himself" or "defensive". They will most likely BELIEVE THE ACT, they won't understand that Uncle John is just an arrogant jerk with entitlement and insecurity issues who's jealous of his brother Joe, and tries to belittle him every chance he gets. And they won't understand that Uncle Joe is a very strong, intelligent person who has been dealing with his brother's emotional issues for years, and has accepted his limitations.
So Brian and Sarah will mistakenly see Uncle John as the "strong, capable one" and Uncle Joe as the "less capable, kind of weak" one, although he's kinder to them.
But it's Uncle John that they'll "Look up to" as a "Leader-type", not Uncle Joe, who's ACTUALLY a "Leader-type".
So people who look and act like Uncle John will be assumed to be "strong", "capable", and "knowledgeable" by Sarah and Brian, and people who look and act like Uncle Joe will be assumed to be a "weaker, shyer type" who is not very knowledgeable, capable or intelligent.

When we apply this same scenario to other people, such as couple and parents, clergy people we grew up around, teachers, coaches, public service employees, politicians, and people on television and in movies, we can see how this works on a rather large scale.

We don't even ASK certain kinds of people for information, instruction, or guidance, we think that we know that they're limited, ignorant or incapable just by their body, by the way they look, what sex they are, how tall they are, and what race they are. What clothes they have on.

That's ALL visual, superficial stuff that does NOT show what's inside of a person's brain or how their brain works, or what they're physically capable of.

No, we do NOT know how strong or how weak a person is by looking at them, no matter how much we want that to be true.

Accepting information from one person and rejecting it from another is all about US, not THEM. Assuming a person is capable of something, or incapable of something, is about US, not THEM.

For example, we will believe the completely WRONG directions when we're lost because one person told us those directions, and we won't even ASK another person who DOES know the right directions, just because of the way each of them looks.

We won't "let" one person perform or assist us with a certain task because we ASSUME they "can't do it", which is extremely presumptuous and insulting toward the person, it's very bad manners and very disrespectful.

However we'll actually go seek out someone ELSE who we ASSUME is capable of the task, EVEN WHEN someone nearby has already offered to help.

Again, that's about US, not the other people.

It's all about making sweeping, huge, fantastical assumptions about other people, based on our own egos and imaginations. We "assign" capability, wisdom, strength and knowledge to those whom we WANT to have it, and we "take it away" (in our imaginations) from those whom we DO NOT WANT to have it.

This behavior is usually modeled while we're growing up by certain older people around us, and we are often not shown that there's anything wrong with it, that it's not reality-based.

Even worse, we do this to OURSELVES, and to our own children, partners, and other loved ones.

Those with control and narcissism issues are often very invested in this behavior, and may play it out to a ridiculous degree. They are the ones who will adamantly perpetuate and play out the most far-fetched, extreme stereotypes, gender expectations, sexist assumptions, bullying and attempts to control anyone smaller than themselves, and racial biases.
People are like cartoons to them; whatever they "look like" to the N. is what they ARE in the fantasy world of the person with Narcissism.