Soon I'll be writting some posts about body language.

Please,come back to check out

In our work we call body language the Five Flags, because there are five major ways human beings react when they're not speaking the authentic truth. Twitches and jaw-clenches are examples of Flag #1, Body-Flags. To understand Sarah Palin, though, you need to understand Flags #2 and #3, Voice-Flags and Attitude-Flags. The English word 'personality' comes from two Latin words, per and sona, "through sound." The Romans knew that the personality comes through in the tone of voice and other vocal aspects.

From thirty-five years of clinical experience, we can tell you a lot about Sarah Palin's real personality and why it makes many people even more nervous that John McCain's.

Attitude-Flag #1: The Aggressive Confidence Of The Con-Person

Sarah Palin has mastered one fundamental requirement of a Republican president: she can smile and look you directly in the eye while telling an outrageous lie. At least when John McCain lies, his body screams his discomfort by putting on an eye-catching display of twitches, phony smiles and robot moves. McCain's body language is so strange that it's easily observable; he appears to be operated by a puppeteer who is a couple of triple-espressos over the line. That's a good thing, though. We'd much rather have a presidential candidate who reads like a comic book when he's lying than one who conceals those whoppers under a grin and a wink. Sarah Palin belts out her deceptions and distractions with a radiant confidence we usually only see in sociopaths and infomercial pitch-persons. The last public figure we saw who could grin and lie with that kind of sunny confidence was O. J. Simpson.

Voice-Flag #1: The Exaggerated Folksiness Of The Huckster

Our partisan colors may peek through subtly from time to time, but we do our best to be non-partisan lie-catchers. We cringed when Bill Clinton did his famous "I did not have sex..." line. We immediately looked at each other and said "uh-oh," because his body language let us know loud and clear that he did indeed have sex with "that woman." About ten minutes after Clinton's declaration, our phone started ringing from producers of talk shows wanting us to comment on Clinton's body language. They knew they'd seen something, but they couldn't figure out exactly what.

More recently, we cringed when we heard Sarah Palin start using more of those pseudo-folksy expressions such as "You betcha" and "doggone-it." She was droppin' so many g's on-stage at last week's debate that the janitorial staff may have had to work over-time pickin' 'em up, by gum. The last eight years have taught us all a sobering lesson: you don't have to be smart to be the President of the United States. However, we hope that America is smart enough to see Palin's exaggerated folksiness for what it is, a cheap trick to cozy up to us so they can sell us four more years of Bush Lite. We hope America will hear those "You betchas" and send Mc Cain/Palin a message right back: Just because you pretend to be dumb and folksy, you don't automatically get to live in the White House.

Voice-Flag #2: The Metallic Shriek Of The Fear-Monger

To emphasize certain points, Sarah Palin takes her voice up the tone scale to a metallic shriek. This tone will be familiar to many of us: it's the voice your mother employed as a last resort to get you out of bed when you were a teenager. It's designed to scare you, to rake fingernails across your inner chalkboard. She often uses this voice when she first takes the stage at a rally. It works quite well there, because it cuts like a knife and jolts any of the faithful who might be dozing to sit up in their seats. We hope Americans are not so sleepy as to vote in favor of hearing this tone of voice for four years.

Here's the bottom line: The McCain/Palin campaign strategy is based entirely on stirring up fear. It's a classic way to distract people from thinking about real issues and to cover up the lack of any real solutions. Their thinking goes like this:

•If we can get people scared that Obama might secretly be a Muslim or a terrorist, maybe we can get them not to think about the real issues.

•If we can get people scared that Rev. Wright might turn the inaugural benediction into an anti-American rant, maybe we can get them to believe America's economic problems are just something cooked up by the elite media as a way to play "Gotcha" on poor Sarah and John.

•If we can scare people into thinking Barack HUSSEIN Obama is going to put Louis Farrakhan in charge of the annual White House Easter egg hunt, maybe people won't notice that we have absolutely no solutions to the real problems they face.

Barack Obama has so far opted to run a positive campaign based on hope and thoughtful solutions. It's our fervent desire that he continue to do so, because it's about time we turned our national attention to positive possibilities. Over the past eight years we've had enough fear-mongering to last a lifetime.

(Stay tuned! In our next post we'll look at two more important bits of body language that we all need to be paying attention to during the campaign. We've noticed these flags at play in both Joe Biden and John McCain, and they spell trouble for all of us.)

Have you heard of Allan Pease, the Mr. Body Language himself? I have read one of his many books "People Skills For Life - Easy Peasy" which he wrote together with his wife. Anyway, he has also written many books on techniques for reading body language signals to give us confidence and control in any face-to-face encounter. I have watched his full length video on this and it was very insightful. This is the excerpt of the interview :

SKYQUESTCOM: Today we're privileged to have Allan Pease. Allan, you're famous for your series on body language. How did you get started in this area and why?

ALLAN: Well it started for me back in the late 1960's teaching salesmen how to work things out when you're face to face with someone - whether they're with you or against you. Whether they're likely to say "yes" or "no". And observing the gestures and movements they had made that were relative to a positive decision versus a negative one.

And back in the early 1970's, this became a training course on a brand new cassette medium called "audio cassette" - a little cassette tape that nobody had. We used to buy a 6-pack of that, with a cassette player because nobody had a cassette player. And that became a 16-mm set of training films in 1972, which is one of the first on 16-mm. And in 1976, it became a book called Body Language, which then went #1 worldwide and continued to be a best-seller for 31 years.

SKYQUESTCOM: What is the appeal of Body Language?

ALLAN: The appeal of Body Language in the book on the series and everything connected with it is simply that everybody likes to be able to work out what the other person is thinking - "How am I coming across with others?", "Do they like me?", "Are they with me?", "Are they against me?", "Are they going to say 'yes'?", "Are they going to say 'no'?"

Of course, in business, that is a critical skill to be able to have. If you can do this in business, you'll do very well! Which is why women are so successful at it because they're good at it. And the other aspect, of course, is your social life. If you can work out with someone who likes you in your social life, you'll save a lot of time.

SKYQUESTCOM: What is something about yourself in your background that surprises people when they find out?

ALLAN: Well, I think the most unusual thing about me and my background is - because I am one of the world's biggest-selling authors on Psychology. They expect that I'm a Psychologist. In fact, I'm not. My training is in Finance and teaching negotiators how to sell Finance. Which is where the body language came from.

I've always had a dramatically keen interest in human behavior, why we do things we do. I am just fascinated with everything about human beings. I am fascinated by that. And that's led me to nearly 40 years now to study everything about humans. I'm trying to work out where its history might be, where its origin is and importantly to develop strategies and techniques that you can use to win people over and do better with others in your personal and social life.

Basically, what the video covered were these areas:-

What you'll discover in "How to Read Anyone"

• Techniques for reading body language signals such as how handshakes are used to gain control
• How to tell without a doubt that somebody is lying to you
• Common male and female courtship gestures and signals
• How to break the masks of "professional actors"
• How to use non-verbal cues and signals to communicate more effectively and get the success you want
• And much more!

Let’s talk a little bit about body language and how it relates to your attitude and confidence. We all know that people communicate with each other on multiple levels. But did you know that spoken words are just 7% of what we communicate? The majority of communication is done with vocal tones, vocal pitch, movement, body language and gestures.

All of these things and more make up our composite body language expressions, such as: Facial expressions, voice intonation, speed of speech, how you walk, the way you carry yourself through the world, having eye contact, how fast you move, and even our breathing.

You may ask why body language is so important. It is how we sub-communicate with others. This sub-communication is even more important that ever before, because society has created a link between our actions and how people feel. For example, when you are in room and you feel really nervous, everyone in the room will pick up that you are nervous by your actions, tonality, and speed of your movements.

Such things are very obvious, especially to children who are not preoccupied with speech as much as many adults. You can see when somebody is sad, happy, excited, honest, or angry. Look at somebody who rapidly moves his foot up and down. This guy probably can"t look anybody in the eyes and is sub-communicating that he is insecure. Somebody who is hunched over, with her feet together, is subconsciously trying to not be noticed at all.

We can find wealth of information about other people by their body language. In terms of seduction, we learn to read what females are saying on a deeper level. An outgoing woman will do the exact same to you; she could tell you a zillion things that you are projecting, just by your image.

Let me quote my girlfriend here: “I can see if a guy is GOOD IN BED, just by the way he walks.” That is so true. They can tell everything about you, just by the way you look. It comes from all those years of experience of guys hitting on them.

If you go out dressed like you do not care about your image at all, you probably don"t care, and women will notice this. On the other hand, if you go out dressed as a socially cool guy, you probably are a pretty damn smooth dude. As for the woman, this process of screening by looks and body language is a self-defense mechanism.

She really doesn’t want to hook up with some low self-esteem loser, or some boring guy who doesn’t know how to give her some fun in her life. So they screen you and try to find out as many things about you as possible in a very short period of time.

Imagine, if you were a HOT GIRL, would you give 30 minutes of your time to each boring geek that hit on you?? No, you would give him 30 seconds and then the "F#*& off" line.

This is because she already knows that he is a boring, lame-ass guy. But what if some super-ultra confident guy, who is well dressed, comes into a room, walks slowly towards a hot girl with a smile on his face, and starts a conversation with a girl? Would she reject him??

Exactly.

She would not.

Now let me ask you who the really confident in our society are, the ones with an attitude larger then life. Who are they?? Rock stars, company directors, successful managers, doctors, politicians.... etc.

Take a look at how they walk, how they sit, how they speak, and you"ll notice something really interesting. They are totally calm, like they control TIME. They are not in hurry. The way they move and how they speak completely radiates with super-confidence.

Lets take a look at what the most common mistakes are when somebody tries to pick up a girl:

• Talking too fast (being nervous)
• Talking too much (trying to impress her)
• Not knowing what to say next (not enough practice)
• Drinking (to become comfortable)
• Asking too many questions (you create rapport too soon, but she doesn’t want your rapport unless you have attracted her first)
• Body language wrong (hands connected, feet too close, shoulders down, leaning in)
• Buying her drinks (trying to buy her over, or even worse, trying to get her drunk)
• Not being comfortable talking with strangers (social anxiety)

Does any of this radiate with any confidence??? Hell no!! Take a look and see that every action here projects INSECURITY!!

Ok, let’s correct this poor body language together. Here is list of things that you must FIX…

•Keep your hands out of your pockets.
• Stand with you feet wider apart
• Never look down when you walk, look above the horizon
• Stand with your chest pushed outwards
• Keep your shoulders relaxed and back
• Walk confidently and slowly with bigger steps
• Take up lots of space, no matter where you are
• Pay attention to how you dress • Always lean back.
• Touch people when you talk with them (non-sexual), because you must create conversation on all levels, not just verbal. (Later she is going to be used to your touch, and that is perfect for the pre-sex stage!)
• All your body language should be comparable in speed. For instance, moving with confidence is good, but it looks incongruent if you talk fast at the same time.

One more really important thing my friend would tell you, "Pick-Up doesn"t start when you approach her, it starts when you WAKE UP in morning!" and that"s so true!

Let"s move on to the subject of attraction:

In order to attract a woman, you must first understand why and how they think. Why the state of attraction exists, and how it happens.

The easiest way to understand and explain this is through something known as "Switches theory’. You know those on/off switches you have in your house for electricity? Now imagine you have 15 of them in one box. That"s an analogy for how our minds work. Women have switches such as "Is he attractive? Is he good at sex?" On or off.

Every girl out there has a different set of switches, because it really depends on their culture, their childhood, their beliefs and their age, plus a few other minor things. However, there are some common switches you must turn ON to all girls out there.

You must be:

--Challenging
--Alpha
--Interesting
--Unpredictable
--Stylish
--Not needy
--A good lover
Humorous
--Capable of building strong rapport
--Secure
--Trustworthy
--Conversational

Now, those switches can be either ON or OFF. There is no value in-between... for geeks, it’s all off.

What happens when you switch on most of those switches?? Wow... she starts to be interested in you... actually... she starts to show IOIs (indication of interest). This reaction is totally normal. When she meets a guy who is funny, good looking, interesting, romantic, and not needy, she becomes interested in getting to know him better (read: sleeping with him).

Switching on these switches is what demonstrates personality to a woman. You can tell stories where you were romantic. You can hook her with interesting snippets of your life and make her ask you questions which will get you to reveal your romantic side. It doesn’t matter, as long as you flip the romantic switch to the ON position. Every story or routine you have in your arsenal is saying something to her (flipping switches.) When designing routines and stories, you need to first take a look at what you want to convey to her.

The easiest way to switch ON lot of switches is through good body language, behavior, and a sense of style.

Let’s take a look at me for example. If you"ve never seen the way I look, take a look at my webpage photo here...

Okay, let"s analyze this together... what do you think about this guy just from this photo? Here is what others have said:

• He has a lot of confidence
• He looks like some badboy or a really adventurous guy
• Good looking (average)
• He is drinking expensive cocktails, so he probably has some money…
• Sex must be amazing with him
• He is alpha; he doesn’t worry what others think
• He doesn’t look like some predictable guy...
• Not so needy

Ok, guys, you get my point... I switched ON like 10 switches just by the way I look and behave. There are also switches I haven’t flipped yet:

I don’t have trust, rapport, I am not romantic, interesting... and that’s it fellas!!!!

That means 5 stories for 5 more switches. That’s like 5 X 5 minutes = 25 minutes to get a girl.

Of course you can convey all those things through conversation, and that"s fine. But it will take 10X longer! This is the way it works for me, and I am happy

Badboy
http://www.badboylifestyle.com

Furthermore, because I do rely on body language so much, it frustrates me to miss the context of something spoken because then I can't fully evaluate each candidate's platform accurately. I once read that the best way to listen to a debate is over the radio - so you can't be swayed by smiles and gestures - it's simple words. Unfortunately, I don't have that ability, nor can I listen for listening's sake and actually hope to catch everything said. It's come up time and time again during my research for my thesis - especially in relation to the orality of literature and how transformative it can be to hear something meant as literature to be spoken aloud by the right orator. (Which is slightly ironic when you consider my life's goal is to work with making literature vocal even though I can't personally take advantage of that.)

Getting back to the debates, I will say this. Sarah Palin enunciates extremely well - while she might drive me crazy with the number of times she uses colloquial down-home language, she speaks clearly and I can see why she will appeal to so many people. Her views are completely contrary to my own, but I do think that with more experience and time, she could someday be a qualified candidate for Vice President - for the extreme right Republican party, that is. I don't think she's ready for the position now. Joe Biden was more difficult to understand, possibly because he kept flashing his teeth so much, but he has a certain timbre to his voice that makes it easier to understand him.

Listening to John McCain on the other hand wanted me to tear my hair out, simply because his lips didn't move. I couldn't understand a single word that came out of his mouth, and that the camera kept moving around during this most recent debate had me grumbling more often than not. It was far easier to understand Barack Obama, but again, the camera moves were so shoddy and kept angling out to catch the "diverse" audience, I kept losing words in the midst of it. By the halfway point, I was only half-paying attention and half-waiting for the transcripts to appear online.

With that said, I'm frustrated. I'm frustrated that we talk about change, we talk about responsibility, but we don't take any of it. We put ourselves in this economic mess by spending beyond our means; I'm guilty of it too, and only now have I finally been able to pay off my debts. I haven't even touched my student loan debts, but I firmly believe we place too high of a cost on education. Two thousand dollars per credit is just ridiculous, no matter how high-ranking the school. Quite simply, the cost of living is too much at this point. Yet, nothing either candidate argues is going to effectively change the state of the economy. So why did we spend the majority of two debates now speaking about the economy?

I want to know more about the domestic issues. Personally (and this is totally just my opinion - everyone has the right to disagree), I feel that we spend too much of our time worrying about foreign relations and not enough time focusing on fixing the United States. I want to see policies changed - we talk about it in meager amounts - a little bit of healthcare. A little bit about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how it's supposedly helping our economy. What about our civil rights? What about immigration, energy, conservation, domestic security, and the quality of life for every American person? Sometimes, I feel we spend so much time trying to save the world that we forget that we built the United States to serve the United States. Correct me if I'm wrong, but where in our constitution does it say we need to protect the rights of other countries? The preamble notes that we need to insure domestic tranquility - and that's fine. But seeking out controversy simply for a cause is not what I believe to be constitutional.

For a country that spends so much time trying to make sure that everyone's beliefs are respected, we spend a lot of time trying to inflict our beliefs on other countries. It's hypocritical at best. I'd like to see a United States of America that accepts its role in the changing dynamics of the world - that while we may not necessarily be THE superpower, that's okay. We still hold a lot of sway throughout the world. But perhaps, it's time for us to stop trying to instill our values in countries we consider to be beneath us. Should we allow genocides like Darfur and Rwanda and Bosnia continue? Absolutely not. But that's not something the United States needs to eradicate alone. There's a reason we created NATO, why we created the United Nations. So we can't negotiate with terrorists. Other countries are surviving just fine by leaving them alone - it's almost by acknowledging their presence, we're giving them more power. Sort of like a bully, you know?

I don't envy either Barack Obama or John McCain. This is a tough and complicated world we live in, where it's easy to alienate people simply because we believe we deserve so much. I wouldn't want to be in either of their shoes right now. But I think we really...need to consider our own personal philosophies and see which candidate aligns more with our beliefs - because neither is going to be 100% on the money. Both of them are too ambiguous to make promises that will help everyone. Ultimately, politics hurt. But...sometimes, seeing as how we've come so far only to let things get so out of control hurts even more.

It's frustrating to know that no matter how far technology has come to making politics accessible to me, it's still not enough. My perception of the debates and speeches and rallies are entirely different than someone who can pick up the nuances and inflections of the speakers. But in some ways, perhaps it's better. Perhaps it's easier for me to focus strictly on the issues and less on the personalities because I have no other choice. But in a country where so much is talked about making things equal, it's only slightly ironic that the fight for equality remains divided by disability, race, gender, and more.

Now, as I have stated, and by no means a smooth guy at a club. I don't even write this blog as some sort of way for guys to pick up girls. I just like the silliness of bar and club culture and I experienced some stuff that was embarassing at the time, but I later laughed about. I just wanted to share it. I'm certainly not the "Pickup Artist" who looks like a mixture of Canada, a Dr Seuss book, and Tommy Lee.  Anyway, most of this comes from my little ventures onto the floor and by observing other people...mostly failing.

So I present to you: The Rules of the Dance Floor

1. Don't be afraid to approach a circle of girls on the dance floor. Girls (wisely) usually head to clubs with friends of theirs. They'll head to the dance floor and form a circle all facing one another. They dance half-heartedly, they sing full-heartedly, and they generally seem uninterested in the guys around them. Guys, although it's intimidating, can approach the girls. The trick here is eye contact. If the girl is interested, the eye contact might linger. This is good but...

2. Don't get too close to a circle of girls on the dance floor! Creepers never have much success. If you see that circle of girls on the dance floor, odds are they aren't going to like some random guy running up behind them grinding into them. Generally this leads to a mother hen pulling her friend the other way and giving the serial grinder the cold shoulder.

3. Approach the floor with a buddy. In my mind, nobody trusts the lone wolf on the dance floor. Most guys seem to have some luck meeting a girl on the floor if they out there with a loose plan of team work. Maybe just approach out there and enjoy (or pretend to) the music. Don't face the buddy straight up and both of you should gravitate towards the prospective group of girls. Your group of dudes really shouldn't get bigger than 3. When 4+ guys approach the dance floor, instinct takes control and the guys either go crazy stomping around and spilling drinks singing to one another or they create a stone henge formation and stare off into the distance with a forlorn look. Seriously.

4. Make note of the eye contact. So let's say your out there with your buddy or two and you are near your circle of girls. If one of the girls make eye contact with you a couple of times, then gravitate a little closer. That said, you know what a hate stare looks like. If a girl is giving a look that looks like you killed one of her family members or your run of the mill terrified look, just leave her be. But if she gives you those few glances, gravitate a little bit forward and...

5. Become the Tiger!! OK. So that's a little bit extreme. But this is by far the best part to watch at a club. This is the time where the guy slowly approaches the girl and moves behind her. At this point concerned glances are exchanged among her friends. Everyone is looking to see if you got what it takes. It's fuckin' Judgment Day. Match up your chest with her back and proceed slowly. Don't run into the back of her, just enough so she knows your there. If she is interested in dancing with you, she will look at you and back up into you. TADA! You are now dancing with the girl. Make sure you don't get all handsy though.

But wait, she didn't do that...

6. Know when to call it a game.

  So it didn't work. Her friends pulled her away, she gave you the ring face, it just didn't come together. What can you do at this point? Walk. Away. Live to fight another day! Chin up! Cliche inspirational phrase! But seriously, the worst thing you could do is keep going for her. Everybody watches everybody on at the club, don't be that guy who keeps getting rejected.

That about wraps it up. As I said, these rules are from my oberservations. This is not meant to be a scientific guide and I am by no means a ladies man. But shoot, I have to share what I have seen in the wild!

But I should probably start from the beginning.

Rosh Hashanah last week turned out to be the perfect time to break the news to my dad. Surrounded by 23 other family members and friends, he couldn't exactly express outrage or get upset, which is precisely what I was counting on. "You couldn't have told me in a more private place?" he said.

I looked at him. "Do you really think with four babies under the age of four there's going to be anyone listening to us?" He acknowledged my point.

To be perfectly honest, I don't know where the courage came from. It wasn't in my third bowl of delicious matzoh ball soup. Nor was it in any of the apples dipped in honey. Maybe it was a subconscious reaction to embrace the Jewish New Year, but I've never held much stock in new year's resolutions. I just wanted it out.

He wanted to talk. So talk we did. And somehow, I managed not to cry once. But then I felt numb on Tuesday. And again on Wednesday. And I felt relegated back to my bed, craving books as though they would somehow fix me. I've gone through approximately thirteen books in the last fourteen days - a considerable feat considering I was working thirteen to fifteen hour days for almost a week straight. I can't figure out how to explain it other than books take me out of my head and bring me somewhere else. It's not that I want to be someone else or that I feel as though I'm a different character when I read; they just let me be without any sort of explanation necessary.

So I shut down during dinner with my mom's family on Tuesday night. I shut down all day on Wednesday, minus a fitful splurge of energy to set up a new printer. I drove to class instead of taking the bus in, feeling the jitters begin when I thought about the two hour commute in someone else's hand. Depression makes it feel like there's no control; in anything.

It seems that every time I get better, I slip up. Something triggers it. This time, it was the realization that no matter how much I want to be with GDB, my brain simply says I cannot. That he gets to date casually while I try to put the pieces back together so I can tolerate even myself makes me feel like I'm light years behind where I want to be. He knows this. He knows my frustrations with timing, with my biochemistry, with my now introverted personality. He knows that I don't want to date him right now as much as I want to lay on a couch, read a book, and have him curled up next to me like my cat would. I don't want to talk. I just want to read and be surrounded by comfort. In some ways, he is comfort; best friend or not. But I can't rely on other people to be my comfort. I'm still so far from being able to be by myself, let alone with anyone else, it's hard to feel like there's any hope at all.

It doesn't help that now that my parents know, they're constantly on the watch for any sign of pending doom. "How do you feel today?" they ask. "You'll be off that medicine in no time!" "Be careful, ds, because you don't want to get addicted. Addiction to prescription drugs is a very real concern." My dad manages to stun me with winners every single time. My mom peers into my room, knocking carefully, as though if she knocks too hard, it will send me into a panic attack. Consequently, she is constantly suspicious of potential panic attacks - "Are you breathing okay? How are your emotions?" It makes a girl want to revert back to the zombie-fied state of the first bout with depression.

Whatever would I do without my old friend Tylenol PM? I'm almost out of pills and it may be time for something stronger, as five hours does not meet the suggested eight. I woke and felt restless, as though I needed to change (of course I need to change), but I couldn't figure out how to get it out of my skin and somewhere else. So I did what I do best. I read a book. I wrote. I took a bubble bath. I went hour by hour, because that's all I can do anymore. And then I decided there were too many people in my life who knew too much about me or could know too much about me and I didn't want to know anything about them. So I went on a defriending spree.

I'm tired of falseness. I'm tired of perceived relationships that faded out years ago and pretensions and status updates from people who can't type words properly. Let the past be the past. I know who my friends are and I know who will be there when the chips fall. I know who I want to keep friendly tabs on, and I know who I could care less about. I'm tired of trying to be something I'm not, and until I am, I'm not all that interested in being social. So Facebook takes a hit. My bed takes on more indents. My face smears with creased marks from my pillow. I still can't figure out how to cry, even though I probably should. My cat curls by my feet. The books stack up on my shelves. And I wait for each hour to blur into the next until I figure out what's me again.

I started October strong and then quickly failed the following days due to work and school restraints, but I'm still trying.

You know how people say to think positively or that how you think about something affects the way you see the world? Like if you're grumpy and you bemoan the fact that you're having a bad day, thing just seem to constantly get worse? These are things that everyone, through the experience of human life, generally know to be true whether you can quantify it or not, but researchers from the Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee have finally applied scientific laboratory research to see if this is true, and their results were fascinating.

"Letting your imagination run away with you may actually influence how you see the world. New research from Vanderbilt University has found that mental imagery—what we see with the "mind's eye"—directly impacts our visual perception.

"We found that imagery leads to a short-term memory trace that can bias future perception," says Joel Pearson, research associate in the Vanderbilt Department of Psychology. and lead author of the study. "This is the first research to definitively show that imagining something changes vision both while you are imagining it and later on."

"These findings are important because they suggest a potential mechanism by which top-down expectations or recollections of previous experiences might shape perception itself," Pearson and his co-authors write.

It is well known that a powerful perceptual experience can change the way a person sees things later. Just think of what can happen if you discover an unwanted pest in your kitchen, such as a mouse. Suddenly you see mice in every dust ball and dark corner—or think you do. Is it possible that imagining something, just once, might also change how you perceive things?

"You might think you need to imagine something 10 times or 100 times before it has an impact," says Frank Tong, associate professor of psychology and co-author of the study. "Our results show that even a single instance of imagery can tilt how you see the world one way or another, dramatically, if the conditions are right."

- Science Daily (July 4th, 2008)
- http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080703145849.htm
-The Functional Impact of Mental Imagery on Conscious Perception

I had come across this article when I had been struck with the desire to see if there was anything written out there on the topic of how we see things in the world, at least in respects to reality vs. mental interpretation. For a while I have tossed around the issue in my head about how I can remember what friends of mine physically looked like before I met them and then how differently they appear to me perceptually after I get to know them. I'm of course talking here about the "mind's eye" interpretation, not true physical traits like they were heavier or had purple hair before I knew them and once we were friends they changed, but more projected applied mental creations of who those people are.

When we encounter someone we don't know, especially if its at a distance (as in even without verbal communication), you immediately begin grouping and categorizing, deciding things about who this person is, how this is important in relation to you, analyzing body language, etc... and all of these things culminate in creating a picture of who this person is in your head. Once you have had time to gain history and experiences with someone, all that added information begins to affect your mental image of them.

I find it interesting at times to compare and contrast the past versions of my friends and loved ones with their current versions I carry with me in my head. It helps you to see the potential flaws in the way you might judge others before you get to know them, seeing your biases. And for me personally it has helped me become better at giving people a chance, because I have seen first hand, based on my own experiences (empirical data!), how often I can be wrong about people, and that makes me feel like quite the fool.

I'm not sure yet whats up next on my research list, but I have a lot of work to do before November prepping for all the writing I'll be doing. I'm sure I will find something neat to read about!

Until next time,
-Moniker Vise
"I'm the sage of absurd"

My daughter is offering the dogs a toy to get them to run around after her. This is a favorite game and they will play it for hours if you let them. The players in this particular group are Clue and Bronte (the corgis), Bramble, and Bastoche (also called Elvis and That Cursed Dog, but for simplicity's sake I'm going to use just "B"). Bramble and B are Jack Russell cross puppies, four months old. You can see Bramble's little black head over Bronte's back. You can see how strongly B is alerting on that toy. He is VERY toy-driven with a lot of prey behaviors; a good terrier.

Look at B's ears, head, and tail, and the foot coming off the ground as he prepares to attack. He's extremely fixated on the toy, which he's going to quickly find out is a mistake when you're a puppy in a pack situation.

In the amount of time it took the camera to take the next frame (it takes 2.5 a second, so about a third of a second) B is leaping up to get the toy. His HUGE mistake here is that he is leaping up and over Clue, who is the oldest and most dominant female in the pack. This is the rough equivalent of shoving your aunt out of the way to grab the scrambled eggs at breakfast. It's a major breach of etiquette. Bronte immediately moves to punch him with her nose or hit him with her teeth (the angle makes it hard to tell); her focus is completely off the toy but he's still ignoring her. Mid-abdomen is the place where dogs often touch to try to stop bad behavior--you'll see dogs do this when an impolite dog jumps on a person, too.

B is still totally focused on that toy, and he's up and away, leaping over Clue.

Oops.

Look how Clue has jerked her head around to stare at him. A stare is a warning; dogs do not make eye contact unless they are making a serious "watch it, punk" statement. B is totally oblivious.

He's landed on the other side of her and is coming up from the ground at a run.

And here you see why corgis have short legs. In a flat race, B can beat the corgis without even trying. He's a 12-lb dog on a 6-inch leg; they're 25 and 30 lb dogs on 3-inch legs. But the genius of this body structure, why they were bred as herders, is apparent in situations like this.

It's going to take him a stride or two to recover. And meanwhile, she's tucked those short legs under her and has cornered on one front and one back leg.

He's still recovering, and she's at full speed. He doesn't stand a chance. He's still thinking he's going after the toy, by the way. She has an entirely different motive.

In two strides, she's up on his front and swings her head down to bite him where his leg joins his body. This is a herding move; many breeds do not instinctively choose that position as the first one to bite. The Danes, for example, would usually go for the shoulder or the top of the neck; those are the places you grab a large animal to drag it down and kill it. Different jobs (herder versus hunting hound), different instinctive behaviors.

You can tell he really feels this one; his whole body is going "OWW!" and his head finally swings her way. The toy is forgotten.

The bite on his body slows his progress, and she leaps in front of him to follow through and drive him back. Again, this is a classic herding move.

He is literally trying to run backwards right now, but he's not going to make it. Look and see how again she can make those incredibly fast turns because her front legs form short solid pivots under her body.

Notice that Bramble is quite interested in what's going on.

I love this view of her face and mouth as she approaches him. He is going to get spanked pretty hard for being so rude.

Look also at how long it's taken Bramble to be able to turn around. He's a couple feet further than he was in the last frame, and he's finally gotten his body going the right direction. He has short legs, but they're much longer than the corgis' and they are set wide on his body, not under his body. He can't use them to turn within one stride like Clue can.

Smack! Clue hits B hard enough to knock him sideways. I can't see her face here, but I am almost sure that she's actually contacting him with a set and partly open mouth, so he gets a bit of a canine tooth against his neck. This will do him no harm; she will not bite down.

You can see that she's spun him almost completely around.

He apologizes. The tongue flick says a worried "please; I don't want to fight. Let's all relax." He shows white in the corner of his eye; he's anxious. He got the message.

Bramble finally arrives to check out the action.

Clue is done with her discipline. She's relaxed again, mouth long, tail up and relaxed, but very definitely dominant. If she were human, she'd be dusting off her hands with a satisfied smile on her face. B has tucked his head and is looking at the corner of her mouth. He probably either just touched it with his nose or is just about to. Puppies poke the corner of adults' mouths to say "I am just a tiny baby puppy; please tolerate and nourish me." He's saying, in effect, that he remembers his place in the pack and he hopes she will be tolerant of him and not punish him any more.

All is forgiven. Clue takes off in a play chase, B close behind. Because he behaved appropriately, she is willing to interact with him again and has invited him to a run.

]]> http://distractedspunk.wordpress.com/?p=435 Mon, 06 Oct 2008 02:09:29 +0000 distracted spunk http://distractedspunk.pt.wordpress.com/2008/10/05/biography-part-ii/ (Part I)

She was what one might call a dabbler. She dabbled in relationships, in cities, in sports and after-school activities. She dabbled in jobs; she worked at a bowling alley, bookstore, day camp, department store, babysitting, writing, teaching and more. She dabbled in pre-med, journalism, and communications, looking for the answers, ignoring the one right in front of her. One day, as she read 1984, the year of her birth, she thought of how much she missed literature. "Of course," she realized. Her life was laid out in books, from Twain to Cather. A fleeting love affair with Shakespeare ended with homo-eroticism and a bit of cross-dressing. The secrets of Scheherazade's power, the source of Snow White's tale; the origin of the word found itself time and time again in every story and she fell in love in each time.

Her version of love was different than the norm. It wasn't the all-consuming passionate love, nor was it the weak dependent love she saw in so many of her friends. She tried the relationship thing once, where she fell into trying to be the perfect girlfriend and not the perfect her. She lost herself, her body, her independence; in some ways, she lost the very things that made her her. Commitment was for the weak, she declared. For people who didn't know how to be happy with themselves. No, for her love was about learning something new and walking away a better person than she was before.

So she dabbled. She dabbled in boys, in kisses, in lengthy hugs and longer embraces. She dabbled in being the perfect version of her, busy and dancing fleetly through steps from high school to college and beyond. Never did she sit for to sit was to think and to think was to lose everything she had worked so hard to gain. She danced to lose thoughts, simply to focus on the invisible string holding her balance as she pirouetted from day to day.

But with each failed kiss, with each failed friendship, the string began to chip away. She remained defiant in the name of friendship cum love, ignorant, determined that keeping busy would keep her safe. She ignored the nights where she woke and laid still in bed, waiting for the white polar bear stained red with crushed strawberries to turn back into her dresser and television. She ignored the invasion of her ears, the attack on her lungs, the piracy of her eyes. She let people talk her into places she didn't want to be, exhilarated in her exhaustion, that she could do it all. She was invincible.

Never mind the fights where she would negotiate treaties between her parents, divorced since 1994 and still hostile with animosity. Never mind the nights where she would pass out exhausted from diplomacy that her final papers would get neglected until she had a free night to not sleep through. Never mind the friends who became more, who walked away when she wanted them to stay, turned her down in the most simple and cruel way. She hid it all behind supposed strength of rock walls, inhuman distractions, losing herself further and further. Her best friends could see right through it of course, though she pretended they were misguided in their thoughts.

It wasn't until she almost fell in love that the wall crumbled. It was the sort of love she thought she deserved; her best friend had become her lover. She thought she knew him, understood him to the point where his emotional exhaustion bled through her nights. They were linked with friends, family, history and future all at once. She forgot what it was like to live without him, despite how unhealthy he made her. She would cry "Why can't he accept how he feels for me?" to her best friends, while pretending to be the picture of perfection, hoping that he would see how perfect they were together.

She relied far too much on perfection.

Of course, as the story goes, he did see how it could be. But he walked away anyway. The string snapped. She watched the blue light of her television dance on her walls until she could finally fall into a restless sleep. She watched her knees move her through the streets, unaware of when 37th street met 7th avenue met Broadway met the NQRW plus the BDFV. There were no tears; instead it was just numbness, as though she had received a sympathy Novocaine-ing that would shield her from the days. She tripped over invisible wires in her apartment, fell into unforgiving walls, and still somehow stumbled into a sleepless bed. So she returned to what she knew best. She dabbled. Only this time, she dabbled in depression.

(to be continued...)

Siblings are one of those things I take for granted. They’re one of those things I can’t live with. And they’re one of those things I can’t live without. Without them, my hearing would be a whole lot better, and my voice a whole lot less hoarse all the time. But with them, I’ve got someone who shares the pain of getting owned by the same parents, and someone who’ll brutally tell me what I’m doing wrong without worrying about what I think. It’s true I hate my brothers. But, I guess it’s true I love them too. Don’t tell them. ~MY

First off, this is dumb. Secondly, body language and face expressions are as diverse as ethnicity. Let me explain the differences between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin so that all can understand that measurement of face expression can not be measured unless it is overt.

1. Joe Biden is male. Sarah Palin is female.

2. Joe Biden is old. Sarah Palin is younger.

3. Joe Biden is from the East. Sarah Palin is from the West.

4. Joe Biden has experience. Sarah Palin does not.

5. Joe Biden has experienced personal trajedies. Sarah Palin has not.

6. Joe Biden is a Democrat. Sarah Palin is a Republican. (Difference in degree of self-righteousness).

These differences mean something in terms of reading someone. Fact is, no one can read another person with any accuracy unless they know the person. Fact is, in order to read a persons body language accurately, you also have to factor in self prejudice. You don't think so? OK. Imagine if Hillary Clinton was in debate with John McCain and he behaved in the same manner as Sarah Palin did, winks and all. What would we be saying about John McCain the next day?

Imagine.

Winking is ok in certain interpersonal situations, but it's not the best way to connect with a television audience filled with millions of Americans. Especially when you're under the microscope.  There are better ways to connect with your audience.  Here are alternatives that Palin could have used:

• The "secret".  If she wanted to position one of her statements to a particular group, instead of winking Palin would have done well to say "I'll let you in on a secret."  That way, she would have put everyone on notice that the next statement is not a widely known fact.  This is a way to reel listeners in and give them valuable information just for keeping up with you. 
• Call and catch.  The idea is to catch the attention of a particular group by addressing them just before giving them exclusive information.  Say "small business owners" or "young people in the 20s".  By calling them out, you catch their attention and share valuable information with them. 
• Bad news/good news.  You've probably been in a situation where someone has really bad news but tries to soften it up by giving the good news first.  Professional speakers often reverse the order, giving the bad news first and then the good news. 

Given her down-to-earth and folksy speaking style, Palin could have really benefitted from this last technique.  Everyone likes good news.  So with the bad news, professional speakers address the real, everyday concerns of their listeners.  Good news directly follows the bad news in order to cast the vision of peace, hope or whatever feeling the audience needs at that time.  Then speakers will give steps to move from the immediate problem to the solution found in the good news. 

If you speak to small or large groups, please promise me that you will never wink at your audience.  Speaking is like driving - keep both eyes open at all times.  In fact, there are only two times a speaker should close his eyes:

1. While blinking
2. If a gnat flies in unexpectedly

Winking is a huge communication no-no.  Why? Because it sends a non-verbal message to your audience that you're giving away secret information to one group at the expense of another.  Or it may suggest what some would call being "double-sided or two-faced".  I applaud Sarah Palin for her desire to connect with the people of America.  She seems to be an unconventional leader who may be able to learn from leaders like FDR and his fireside chats.  Winks, however, will not win the hearts of Americans - especially in times like these.

All posts on "My Future In Focus" Weblog are the intellectual property of T.A. and are licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No derivative Works 3.0 United States License

Giving Credit:

"Palin Winks, Biden Chokes Up" courtesy of AOL

"Fireside Chats" courtesy of Wikipedia.com

Clothing
Adornments
Language
Music and dance

This exercise will be on Monday and in groups so when the finished version is here it wont have soley been done by me.

We picked out Urban Culture as a starting point and will go onto Hip Hop as a subculture.  Include all the things outlined above, including some story of Grandmaster Flash, pictures of clothes, graffiti and a demonstration of language.  I hope this goes well and despite my concerns about using propriety software I'm looking forward to the exercise.

I'm not that girl whose lock of hair he brushed out of her eyes a year and a half ago. He's not that boy who wore ripped blue converse sneakers as we walked around Washington Square Park. And yet, somehow, we are. We are still here. His voice wraps me up in hugs when he physically can't, though he'll wrap his arms around a camera as though pixels can transfer warmth. My teasing cadences make him rumble with laughter, traversing the 836 miles as though he were sitting right across from me.

I didn't know it was possible to fall out of love and back in again. To know that a friendship can mean so much more than a lover. Though we claim to not be in any position to date, me because of my biochemistry, him because of his biology teachings, I can't help but wonder how would it be if the distance weren't the obstacle.

And yet, we return, we fall back into the same positions, of love, of wonder, of wanting and care, as though he were still only a simple subway stop away.

The O'Reilly Factor is one of the funniest shows on TV. It features the brilliant comedian Bill O'Reilly, whose opinions and the way he delivers them are comedy gold. And in this particular show I watched, Bill called a "body language" specialist to identify the gestures Nancy Pelosi used in her speech about the economy crisis yesterday. The specialist, a definite expert in the area, pointed out the way Pelosi scratched parts of her body or moved her hands, and we all know the ONLY reason someone could be doing that is due to being nervous or lying, right?

Being a bit of a body language specialist myself, I decided to give Bill a hand with some other gestures and what they mean:

Arse scratching - this might at first seem like the person merely has an itch that's bothering her on her bottoms or even possibly around (or in) the rectum, but that would be a superficial, wrong analysis. There is no room for trivialities with Bill O'Reilly. It actually means the person had sex in the previous night. If they are scratching the buttocks, they were spanked there during coitus. If they're shoving their hands down their pants and sticking their thumbs up their arses (and making faces, too), it was anal sex. If it was anal sex, it was anti-God, so these people are evil (or left-wing).

Nut scratching - even though our nutsack is covered in hairs, men NEVER scratch it due to an itch. Whenever men scratch their sacks, it can be a series of meaningful things. It denotes insecurity - the man is afraid his sack will fall off if he doesn't scratch it every two seconds. It denotes arrogance - the man thinks he's got the biggest balls in the room. It denotes sexual desire - "hey ladies, just reminding you I have a penis!" (this is anti-god, so this person is evil (or left-wing)). It denotes bad skills at Math - "wait, do I have one or two balls?".

George W. Bush's smile - it means a baby has just been eaten in the world.

Dick Cheney's smile - it means a baby has just been eaten. By Dick Cheney.

Fingers on chin - it means the person is guilty of something and therefore is nervous, thinking of a way out. It never means the person has an itch on the chin, or misused superglue,  or is checking out a girl's ass or is wondering where the fuck he\she is.

Hope I've helped you, Bill. And here's another gesture, just for you:

Today was all about Communication. I don't want to delve into everything that we did but know that we were separated into groups and we made a 25 piece puzzle among other things.

A couple of things really resonated with me today as well. First was that our Facilitator (with a preceding disclaimer) made mention that if it was up to them, they would not take on any new ReTrainees after Session 01. I totally understand the position and I also understand the Ministry's position of filling the spaces created by those who drop out or abandon the ReTraining exercise.

Secondly while going through some Etiquette the issue of punctuality reared its head. It was stated that our group has the worst record in all the Cycles that our Facilitator has participated in; the Facilitator has been involved for some years. I expressed my agreement that the group needs to improve and readers would know that I actually posted on this item before because it is troubling to me that other ReTrainees don't seem to care.

We sang Mike & The Mechanics - The Living Years

Experts Analyze Body Language and Speech Patterns in the First Debate

In this episode, Caribou Barbie doesn't run off the reservation too far.  There are still danger signs that she's not ready to play with the big dogs but that's not the interesting bit.
In a truly lame attempt at explaining why his Pit Bull misbehaved on her last visit, McCain says that we all understand "Gotcha journalism...is that the name of a pizza place?  Henhhenhhh!"
It wasn't a case of Gotcha! journalism, John.  It was a question that Palin couldn't handle and buggered severely.  By casting it as something it was not, then dismissing it out of hand, McCain is merely trying to make out that it was not yet another example of Sarah Palin's utter vapidity and incompetence, but rather those nasty left-wing journos playing their nasty Obama-loving tricks; asking tricky questions with the intent of tripping up the candidate.   One might remark, in any case, how easily tripped, eh?  And having been tripped, she didn't merely stumble - she face planted into the sidewalk and took out a stack of cans on the way down.
The truly weak attempt at making a joke - Is that the name of a pizza place? Henhhenhhhh! - only makes the stench worse.
Firstly, it ain't funny.  Not even a little funny.  If I saw anyone slap their knees and chuckle, "Oh, that McCain!  Good one!  Pizza place!" I'd kill them on the spot for lacking a sense of humour and being too stupid to live.
Secondly, it's not a real attempt at humour and that shows all over McCain's face and body language.  It's condescending, dismissive, contemptuous and reveals nothing more than a frustrated and over-eager attempt at a bait-and-switch.
There's also something else patronizing and disgusting in his tone - the rising interrogative he employs when he says, "You don't tell them your plans."  It's the same tone he uses whenever he says, "That's not change you can believe in," or "That's not leadership you can believe in..." or any of the other canned lines that dismiss his opponent.  The tone speaks to that same smirking crap we've heard from Bush for the past eight years - that inner certainty that anyone who doesn't completely agree with him is not merely wrong but simply incapable of understanding.

There's one other thing I note from this clip:  Palin's eagerness to leap first without thinking and the flash across McCain's face the moment she starts yammering - a flash that looks to me like, "Jesus, she never shuts the fuck up!"  McCain is the Big Dog, yet the little yipping Pit Bull starts barking without so much as looking to her master for permission.  It looks to me like a man who wishes he had a rolled up newspaper and can barely restrain himself from shouting, "I TOLD YOU TO SIT!"

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1613968&w=425&h=350&fv=link%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww%252Ecbsnews%252Ecom%252Fvideo%252Fwatch%252F%253Fid%253D4487886n%26partner%3Dcbssports%26vert%3DNews%26autoPlayVid%3Dfalse%26releaseURL%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Frelease.theplatform.com%2Fcontent.select%3Fpid%3Dex6WQGpeAo6Q_W1JBB18px1mNcfPyCGo%26name%3DcbsPlayer%26allowScriptAccess%3Dalways%26wmode%3D]

I must note that this and most of my writing is intimately informed by watching MSNBC news coverage (6-8 hours per day.)  Thanks especially to Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Mika Brzezinski and Eugene Robinson (also of the Washington Post.) Also, I am increasingly impressed with someone I used to not like because of his political views - Pat Buchanan (oh that we all have could have his energy, enlightenment and enthusiasm in our later years.)  You may want to consult my first article on this BLOG:  MSNBC Makes Most Sense of the World (January 18, 2008).

In this article I will analyze McCain’s nonverbal language in the debate and show what to look for in the future.  This will build further support for the major underlying issues in this campaign – McCain’s advanced age and documented severe mental illness (PTSD).  For more on those vital topics see my earlier articles: “Old McCain Should Buy a Farm - Not Become President” (June 14, 2008); and “McCain is Too Crazy to Become President” (September 11, 2008).  This article is different from my others in that it will be my own ideas instead of an attempt to summarize opinions from others.  BTW, I have a Ph.D. in sociology, MS degree in journalism and have even taught courses on body language and other forms of communication.

What do we mean by body language? This term covers a wide range of non-verbal behaviors and the underlying attitudes such actions represent.  These include:  facial expressions and eye contact, movement and posture; voice tone and volume; and others. There are a number of different uses of non-verbal communication.  Most of these are unintentional, but the best communicators (like Obama, Bill Clinton and others) know how to consciously choose and use appropriate body language.   Books have been written on this subject so I will give you my own observations on last Friday’s debate; as well as the future debates.

BTW, it will help everyone to learn to read other’s body language and control our own.  The following contain valid and interesting information on this subject:

Now to Detect Lies

The Importance of Body Language

Every Body's Talking

NONVERBAL DICTIONARY of GESTURES, SIGNS & BODY LANGUAGE CUES

Body Language Conveys Volumes

Assessment of McCain’s Vibes:  After all his furious flaming BS about the economy during the days leading up to the debate, Old McCain came off as a drama queen who moaned and groaned way too much.  He looked self-righteous, rigid and raw – unable to unfreeze his shit-eating grin.  He was so disrespectful of Obama and arrogant toward the audience.  Often he would giggle like an old maid and raise his eyebrows in a very scary way.  Seemed desperate and diabolical.

Some of the terms used to describe John McCain’s body language and overall vibe after the debate were right on target.  What is most informative is the fact that McCain acknowledges his rotten personality by repeated claims that “I have never been selected as Miss Congeniality.”  Sure seems like exactly the WRONG kind of person to run our country and restore our reputation in the world.  Here are some of my own and other’s observations:

• Mean and manipulative
• Pompous and prideful
• Arrogant and antagonistic
• Bitter and brash
• Twitchy and out-of-touch

• Cranky and condescending
• Insecure and insincere
• Rash and impulsive
• Small and petty
• Hostile and hateful
• Snarling and sniping

One of the most obvious nonverbal flaws was McCain’s unwillingness to ever look at his debate opponent.  This caused him to look scare and shifty.  Avoiding eye contact is one of the strongest signals that a person is lying.  On the other hand, Obama talked and looked directly at McCain.  This enabled Obama to call him out on several occasions for lying.  At several points McCain was frozen and gazing into the spotlight like he was having a near-death experience (that makes sense since he is almost dead!!) He often tried to interrupt Obama and would keep right on talking even when his time was up.  This showed utter contempt for his opponent, the moderator and the audience.  Bottom line was that this codger looked disrespectful and decrepit.

Most of McCain’s answers were mainly tired and trite lines from his standard stump speeches.  When he had nothing to say for himself his claim was that “Obama does not understand.”  He never mentioned what he felt Barack did not understand.  On the other hand, Obama kept demonstrating his depth of knowledge and ease with difficult topics.  McCain resisted answering any questions directly.  His focus was almost exclusively on the past showing he has no interest in what the world will be like in the future (since he won’t be alive for it!!)

Another stark contrast was between McCain’s putrid and pasty skin and Obama’s rich and healthy tone.  McCain has old-looking yellow skin and an ugly turkey neck – High Definition is NOT his friend.  He was so stiff and frozen – with occasional nervous giggles and eye tics.  He always had that stupid grin on his face – and his dentures were making noise as he talked.  Like Cheney he reminds me of a penguin.  That is even more relevant when you watch him helplessly trying to raise his arms.  Wack-Wack-Wack this old loser on the head!!

Most of the pundits agreed that McCain looked even older than usual in the debate.  He showed the world it was true when he held up a dark permanent marker (probably only thing his ancient eyes can read.)  Like his other jokes that fell flat, his comment that “My pen is really old,” only served to remind the viewers what an old lunatic this guy is.  He also was furiously scribbling notes (e.g., lines he could remember) during the entire debate.  Then he would randomly insert some trite phrase when at a loss for something meaningful to say.

The overall impression one can draw from McCain’s performance is that he is stubbornly clinging to the past positions and policies – with no innovation or inspiration.  One of the most amazing sound bites would have to be McCain’s final statement.  I almost choked laughing when he led off with “When I got out of prison.”  Then watched Real Time with Bill Maher who hit the nail on the head when he exclaimed:  “Usually when a 72 year old acts this way the kids are calling nursing home.”  Seems like the only place that old coot should be sent – not to the White House.   Our country must not be forced to listen to this old troll under the bridge until he drops dead and Sarah takes over.  If that thought doesn’t scare you then you must be asleep.

A wise man once told me, "about 80% of all communication is body-language." My immediate thoughts on this (which I vocalized) were "If that really is the case, then I'm missing out big-time!" To be honest, when he first said it, I thought it was a hyperbole-- it was a bit disconcerting to realize that that might really be the case- after all, I am incapable of reading most body-language.

But thinking about it now, it makes sense. Most of communication between individuals is by means of culture. As I've  briefly gone over in the past, Culture is basically made up of two things: expectations, and those who live according to them. The group of people can be any size, depending on the common interests of the culture-- from global culture (the largest unit), to a clique (the smallest unit).

In any culture, expectations are an inevitable and crucial prerequisites to identifying with one- that is because expectations are the foundation of any culture, of a necessity of any civilization. One such expectation that is believe to be what enabled civilization to exist- is farming. At some point nomads settled down and took the risk of starvation, trusting in the expectation that the crop will grow. Although nomadic culture existed prior to that, and still exists (i.e. homeless people), civilization requires culture, and by extension expectations. For a person to be identified with a particular culture, they must meet those expectations- which are more specific in cliques, and more loosely-defined in a broader range of people.

Of the expectations of culture, most are not said directly, but instead communicated through body-language. This is because, among other reasons, those of a particular culture group are expected to already know-- Those who don't know already don't need to know, since they are not part of that culture (not meeting the expectations). If we are not part of a culture and want to be, we must either figure it out on our own, or directly request info on that culture from someone who is part of it. Although this does make communication more efficient, I think that the primary reason things work this way, is also unsaid- that is, because it's unnatural and overcomplicated to interpret everything to be understood universally.

This is where, for me, the problem lies: Although smaller cultures are optional and and specific, global culture is universally mandatory for anyone who identifies as human, and is collectively known as "common knowledge". I cannot read most body language, and so my common knowledge is limited to what I have taken the initiative to learn-- which in turn means that if I do not even know about the existence of something, I am not even capable of learning it unless someone tells me, or I find out about it by chance.

People that have similar problems are those with Asperger's Syndrome, which in turn is sometimes synonymous with the stereotypical geek. Although I do not know if my own issues fit well even in Aspie culture, the lack of ability to read body language has adversely affected me, in that because most expectations are communicated through body language, and other culture-specific methods, I am unable to appreciate, or even be aware of the vast majority of expectations that other people have of me.

In my previous thoughts concerning what other expected, and expect of me, and how that impacted my own expectations (our own expectations are the cumulation of others- we do not (usually) gain more complete independent expectations until adolescence), I decided that it was because my family had very little demonstrated expectations of me. This perception was also based on the fact that my dad avoids confrontation of any kind, and tends to communicate passively- that is he rarely spells out anything directly, implying his preference instead of asserting his will. Aside from the fact that I spent most of my adolescence (the most crucial period for developing expectations) with people that (from my perspective) had more demonstrated expectations of me, I've realized a much more pressing concern:

If, as it appears, about 80% of communication uses body-language and other culture-specific methods, that means that I am completely oblivious to 80% of what is expected of me, and thus cannot appreciate, acknowledge, or (most importantly) apply and benefit from the vast majority of what is expected of me. Considering that, prior to adult-hood, our thinking is more simplistic and we are more easily influenced, such a deficiency would have a drastic impact of the development of individual expectations.

In fact, in my entire life, the expectations that this wise man had of me, and communicated directly so that I would know in its entirety-- It seems to be the first time I felt that anyone expected anything of me. That is, prior to that, I was aware of many expectations that people (in particular institutions, like school and work), but expectations cannot be appreciated logically or even empirically, but must be known, (quoting The Matrix), "you just know it, through and through".

This is very unfortunate, because expectations are a crucial aspect of not only culture, but essentially every aspect of interpersonal relationships. A person without expectations cannot develop [reciprocal] friendships, and their ability to love is limited and imbalanced.

Expectations are also a necessity in mustering motivation for any task that does not immediately accomplish the goal(s) one might work toward. This can be understood by applying the Triangular Theory of Love, developed by Robert Sternberg:

Love can be split into three primary aspects: Passion, Intimacy, and Commitment. as I will explain in future posts, these correspond directly the Sigmund Freud's Id, Ego, and SuperEgo (in that order- the Id being our source of passion, Ego of intimacy, and SuperEgo of commitment.

The SuperEgo seeks to improve upon itself or others, which in turn requires change.

*note: as I will also explain in future posts, the SuperEgo may conversely seek to destroy itself or others-- this is because, just as "the means" (the shape and quality of what is accomplished) is determined by the Id (level of passion/ desire), Ego (level of security/control) and SuperEgo (level of expectations), "the ends" (the ultimate result) can either be creative or destructive. Although religions tend to assert that good and evil are objective, I think subjective would be more accurate- but regardless of whether of the nature of their existence, it would be more accurate to think of good and evil as "creative and destructive", because not only are there things that appear creative to some and destructive to others, but to some extent, creating anything requires destroying other things, and destroying anything requires creating something else- this is a natural consequence of change, which is why all change has risks.

In other words (The following describes the consequences first of the creative SuperEgo, then of the destructive SuperEgo BTW.):  To progress in the future requires digressing from the past, and to digress in the future requires progressing (emphasizing) the past (FTR progressing the past sounds a bit confusing, which is why we use "regress" to describe that).

If commitment is achieved through expectations, any long-term goals are impossible without oneself and/or others having the expectation that the goal will be accomplished, and of course the individual(s) the goal concerns must be aware of those expectations. I find it interesting (and very surprising) to realize that friendship does not require expectations- that is, a person doesn't need to be important to be a friend. In and of itself, the level of friendship is dependent on the level of intimacy (since friendship is the product of intimacy), and intimacy, in and of itself, is motivated by the Ego- that is, the need for security and control. When I previously defined friendship, I was too idealistic about it- "true friendship" as we know it is produced from reciprocal fulfillment of the need for security and control (intimacy), that is complimented by reciprocal fulfillment of the need for expectations. So interestingly enough, my previous thoughts regarding friendship (see my Love post) although harsh and oversimplified, were more accurate than I had thought. "True friendship", according to the Triangular Theory of Love, is the product of "Companionate Love".

But here's the crucial dilemma (and the original intended focus of this post): How should one (i.e. myself) go about living life if they expect very little of themself, and do not know (and thus cannot appreciate or benefit from) what others expect from them?

Well-- actually, come to think of it, there is a dilemma that is far more severe, and the worst part about it is that I know just how hopeless it is:

I believe that, in accordance with balance, to change any characteristic of oneself, it requires the same amount of effort (be it conscious or subconscious) that was put into developing those qualities to neutralize them, and twice the effort to develop qualities of the opposite nature. To put into context-- History demonstrates how, in spite of centuries of research and experimentation with various treatments, in most cases the success rate for correcting homosexual attraction is either 0%, or close to it. Since homosexuality is not genetic (if it was it would have died out over 4 millennia ago), it must be behavior. My explanation for why sexual behaviors are so (impossibly?) difficult to treat is because sexual desire is the first type of behavior to develop in life, beginning with the first love (normally the mother) *note when I say "sexual", I'm referring to libido. To clarify- Those who conform of Freud psychology believe babies are pure Id- they know they want, but know not what they want (Ego) or how to get it (SuperEgo).

Freud introduced the controversial notion that human development is ultimately motivated by sexual desire (and due to complications in justifying the theory, became a major enemy of feminists (see Penis Envy), so that leads me to believe that "libido" could also mean simply "desire"- but it makes more sense to me by putting it like this: Id is the part of our consciousness motivated to gain back what we lost. Thus, from a broader perspective, desire is born out of a need to regain something which, even if only in our own mind, we once had in some form. Considering the simplicity of a baby's mind (and their life in general), after weaning is completed, the primary thing to get back is obvious.

With gays this would not (normally) apply- so, from what I can tell, the desire (and thus the gay attraction) normally originates in an early childhood memory. That is because the earlier the attraction originates (memories), the more years of effort (in the form of desire) have accumulated in that direction, making change virtually impossible (not only would you have to have to desire to change, but the change cannot occur until present desire accumulates to match and exceed the total amount put in the past.

The dilemma I have now, is that in my entire life up till now, I was not aware other the vast majority of others expectations, and so I was not able to appreciate or benefit from them, and behaved as if very little was expected of me. It's very likely that I gave a bad impression of myself as a result, and my natural talents and love of acquiring and sharing knowledge did not impress people around me as it would have if I had met, or at the very least acknowledged all their other expectations. I did not realize this until relatively recently, and did not understand it until now-- but now that I know this of what good is it to me? It's not a simple feat, after all, to undo and redo 20 years worth of living, and even if I could accomplish it, would it really be worth it? Even if I am a misfit, I'm satisfied with myself, which really doesn't give me any motivation for such an aspiration the first place. Before I could begin such an endeavour, I would first have to know what is expected of me in the first place, and I wouldn't even know where to begin with that!

This is amazing!