Unhapiness can be a bad messenger to someone who is trying to escape from all those negative thoughts about his quality of life and the constant criticism from anyone who begs him to be normal. While sadness plays a peculiar role in my life, where it's not always negative but in a strange way reviving (it fills me with anger and sorrow but that makes me feel stronger towards a cause to fight normality), sometimes when it's accompanied by doubt about some aspects of my life and those thoughts of people criticising me and the fear and disgust of them being right, it turns into real sadness where I loose the meaning of my focus yet I can't think of changing and be like them because this would be even more depressing.
Yet, hapiness can be a quite complicated thing (if not for you, then for some) and you can't just base on the idea that someone is not happy to point out that his life is wrong. It's not black and white. There is no single path of hapiness. It doesn't work the same way for anyone. Also, a feeling of being soberly sad comes after moments of hapiness. One can't be shinny happy for ever and not return back into a lower state. And maybe not always feeling content is a primary motive in our evolution.
It's also logical to seek for ideas that can make me feel better. Especially for those who can be established and wipe out the old irrational sadness of feeling guilty for not being normal like the rest or my fear that I am to blamed for finding excuses for my current kind of life. Right away someone who wanted to refute my attempt would jump and say that I am just trying to find excuses to cover my faults and hinder my view where it doesn't suit my arguments. It's logical that I am more focused by the ideas that make me feel better and thus I am more able to see the pleasing points and have a cognitive bias about anything that doesn't make me feel good. Someone would even say that it's not fair. Fair for whom? Whose life is it anyways?
But isn't this what everyone does? And I will tell you something that it's important here. I fit extremely much this state of mind. Many people can be much worse and feel much more confident. I have a more negative view about myself and it's hard to put me into the illusion that I am all great and I should ignore the rest (See also the Downing Effect, similar witht the Dunning-Kruger effect). A lot of people tell me that I underestimate myself and what I have achieved so far, someone even told me I am a strange phenomenon where everyone believes in me except myself :P. I should say here from my side that it's unfair with my kind of negative bias to claim that something is wrong with my life compared to a more "normal" life because I don't seem to be happy. Because I am too honest with myself and can't easilly let things go compared to others who live hapilly in ignorance. I may look like dividing people to sides, I may be misunderstood as someone who is too fanatic to support his own view on life but on the back there is someone who still encounters your arguments and instead of ignoring them he is puzzled and gives them a second thought. While people have already great confidence that they are right and I am wrong. This game is unfair.
I need to get more into that idea now (which has also to do with the title and main theme) which made me more confident about some things and gave me hope that oneday I won't be revolving around too oposing ideas but hold back into the one that fits me and be more confident about myself in specific subjects just like the rest. I will get fast into it because only with some introductory thoughts this post has become too big without yet getting into the main subject..
A specific evening and the very good feelings I had about it had lighten up something I couldn't see well before. What I have learned that night is that someone should try to observe what makes him happier in various occasions in everyday life instead of getting lost into more abstract ideas about hapiness. And someone could also see why these specific events makes him more happy and get a deeper insight of how to prefer living his life.
Ideas injected into your brain from childhood and common opinions of our times can confuse you especially if you are not confident like me. Even if I disagree, I can get stuck into ideas like "I am not very social so I must be sad", "I have no life so I must be sad" ,"I am too focused on computer programming so I must be sad". And now I would like to tell you what I have observed that day, combined also with various thoughts and conclusions on specific things. I will start with the second one.
I like programming. I like the geeky activity of computer programming. It's one of the things where I have grown a very good ability. As you improve your abilities in a subject neurons in the brain fire up more frequently and a larger part of your brain is dedicated into these activities. Everytime you do this you get some feedback of how well you perform in your activities and that makes you happier. I am not talking about an external feedback from other people but an inner understanding that you are very talented in something and each time you exercise more into firing these neurons the more happy you become and the more evolved your abilities become. It follow a possitive vicious circle where you are good at A, you exercise A more and the more you do this thing the more you like to be involved in A which makes you better at it and returns more positive feedback about it which makes you involved more. Also, to reach that point where it has become a talent, it takes years and usually starts in a very early age.
Based on this idea I can now explain what happened on that night. I simply met with people with whom I could exchange thoughts having to do with the programming hobby. First of all I could discuss my ideas and let these neurons fire excessively for hours. Then the other guy could totally relate with my hobby and I supposed fired hapilly his own good neurons by responding back and getting us into a happy conversation. Then we discussed about our studies in UCL and I felt very happy I will be studying together with these people with whom we can greatly relate. I was happy I would be studying a subject that is actually very close to the same hobby and as more I am involved into it the more happy I can get. One part of hapiness was the endless engagement into our things that makes our brain happy, the other ones was that we could relate as people very well based on our common interests. It sounds like a trivial thing coming right from the clue shoppe (but of course if you do things you like and you talk about things you like then it makes you happy, no news) but it gets more interesting from the firing neuron theory.
Another interesting example. I am deadly bored in common social situations. And they make me unhappy. For various reasons. When I sit three hours in a cafeteria with people I can't relate or find boring then it seems to much to me. But one day an interesting observation came in my mind: I find three hours in a cafeteria with boring uninteresting people too much but how the hell can I survive three days at a demoparty event with no sleep and bad noise and even enjoy the hell out of it? Wouldn't they look at my affection for the demoscene event with pitty the same way I see their kind of entertainment dull and I can't stand even an hour of it?.
What happens here? It's all about how your life came into a point where specific events lighten up positively specific neurons of your brain and so you enjoy repeating these activities to fire up the same neurons. An interesting thing is that if your brain really gets the possitive kicks from these activities then you can stand doing them even in the most awful conditions that may accompany them (dark and noisy demoparties, crowdy and noizy clubs, smelly disgusting cigarettes, drinking bitter and tasteless coffee (that's how I see especially the last ones :)). Another questions is how it become to be so? To like programming I had to initially get into it without those motivating neurons to be already there. If it evolved in an early age then why my brain didn't got into the more common things first? Like getting good at playing the social game? If this one happened then I assure you I would now truly enjoy casual social situations and this like an endless cycle would make me ask for more of those situations which would then make my neurons on this activity evolve and thus make me more happy as I constantly repeat the practice of doing this. But how did I not get into this endless circle and choose(?) the programming one instead. A matter of brain difference or psychology?
But even if I still can't answer the last question with certainity the fact remains that either way my life came forward to a point where I evolved enjoying my kind of activities and never getting the kicks (or getting the negative vicious circles, yes there are those bad firing neurons too) for other ones. Someone would say that if I insisted repeating the casual social activity then it would make a good set of neurons grow up and finally get a possitive feeling from this. But in my opinion that would take ages (it should even start on an early age when the mind evolved easier) and I think it isn't worth the try. From another perspective also, the idea that I am not social is not really true. The fact is that I am not 'casually' social. I can be very social with the right kind of people. So, I should find more of those people with whom I can really and have a really interesting conversation.
Why bothering with those dead cells? Why not bet on those well doing talented ones? Of course occasionally I am really touching the dead ones too because I am not 100% asocial (in very rare cases, even with the boring group I can have that inspiration of humour which makes me feel good for a while (and the rest of the group too)). People would just beg me to be more social? But aren't things evolving alone? Preaching that something is not normal or criticising someone is like pushing him into a direction that hits a wall. One cannot evolve like this. Does it mean that we should just stop discussing it and try to live our lifes the best way that fits? Why do we even have this arguments? (I can assure you though that thinking about these things and arguing sometimes fires a bunch of positive neurons among with negatives or else I wouldn't be here writting this blog :P)
With these things in mind I find all the notion of normality wrong. Condemning strange talents and activities is also something that makes no sense to me now. With the same neuron theory in my mind and how I feel that it might be working in my case, I can also speculate on why some people like things that I hate or cannot understand and why it comes the same from their side, and conclude that there is no point pushing each other towards activities that our cells have not evolved to enjoy.
The trip to London will be very possitive for me. I will be studying with people who will possible relate to things my brain like. I will be even working on a job involving those people (it hasn't happened yet). I should seek for the things that make me happy. I should observe what I was evolved to like.
p.s. Someone would say that I have many negative feelings from my hobby. Especially the part that has to do with the demoscene. But it's not the demoscene blame. Also I can purely carry on programming graphics without having anything to do with the demoscene or the things I learned to hate inside. The primary hobby remains to have the possitive effect. The aftereffects have to do with other connections that had to do with my personality. It's like when you had several faulty experiences with girls and you start hating girls. But there is something else behind. This thing is something I am searching. In UCL I will be studying and doing fun stuff with computer graphics, so it will be like my hobby but detatched from the demoscene (still not the demoscene's fault but some of my personality traits that somehow got mixed badly with some ideas and misconceptions). So, programming and computer graphics alone remain a very possitive feedback loop in my brain.
Thursday, 3 September 2009
Friday, 7 August 2009
The roots of normality.
Ever wondered how and when has the concept of normality arisen? How things came to be the way they are?
Although the concepts of normal and weird, that of the average joe and the eccentric might have existed even in ancient years (I imagine some ancient greek philosopher looking too weird to the common person of his times, I think there are examples of strangeness and reactions to this in history), maybe the first time that it was applied in a political basis in our history is described in the 2nd episode of the documentary "the century of the self".
Anna Freud believed that if children strictly followed the rules of accepted social contract then as they grow up, the conscious mind will be greatly strengthen in the struggle to control the unconscious.
I leave you to discover more in the documentary video.
Although the concepts of normal and weird, that of the average joe and the eccentric might have existed even in ancient years (I imagine some ancient greek philosopher looking too weird to the common person of his times, I think there are examples of strangeness and reactions to this in history), maybe the first time that it was applied in a political basis in our history is described in the 2nd episode of the documentary "the century of the self".
Anna Freud believed that if children strictly followed the rules of accepted social contract then as they grow up, the conscious mind will be greatly strengthen in the struggle to control the unconscious.
I leave you to discover more in the documentary video.
Monday, 3 August 2009
The nature of socialization
I went with some friends to a beach bar. My mood was looking quite serious and somebody noticed it. He thought I was sad. Then fact was, my thoughts were racing through my head. They weren't thoughts about personal problems. They were thoughts about subjects I sometimes analyze with great passion and interest, yet not necessarily affecting me. I mean, there wasn't any burden with real life at that time, only positive things ahead. It was just that my brain decided to overload me with various ideas for me to analyze. And I was actually in the moods to do so. I just was in the wrong place and time.
I couldn't have fun. I couldn't take part in the social situations, I couldn't enjoy looking at girls, I couldn't relax. It just wasn't my time. Because trying to do so required at first to defocus, switch off my brain and join another state of mind. I couldn't enjoy the time but I knew it wasn't wrong. I knew that my brain wanted me to grab a subject and analyze it, stay in solidarity and talk to myself, sit in front of my computer and write a programm, sit in a chair and read a book or anything else that didn't fit the particular moment and time.
Later I went into the sea. I like the sea. Most people get into the sea for fifteen minutes and then stay out in the beach for hours. I like to be in the sea and go deeper where there are is a distance from people. I like to relax there for hours (of course I know the after effects) and stare at the horizon, floating over the waves, being alone and thinking. Actually talking to myself..
I don't exactly know why I am doing it. Maybe because it's more passionate and gets you focused when you are speaking it loud than thinking it. I always do the same thing in my lonely walks or at home. I try to be careful to do it when people are not around because I feel a bit weird. Some people have asked me why am I doing it? One has speculated that I am doing this because I feel lonely and I don't have anyone to talk and so I should find more friends. I recently found a very interesting explanation that defy this logic and is also based on my insights on the nature of regular socialization.
The big difference is:
Where "object" means hobby, science, philosophy, actual knowledge, understanding and will to get involved into the discussion upon the subject, not short reference of common opinions and ideas that are necessary pleasing to people or just used to present yourself or open a random discussion.
When I am talking to myself, it is because I am of the second kind. Speaking loudly and with passion has to do with my strong focus and interest on the subject. It's not about my need to speak to other people because then I wouldn't need to do this alone since people are everywhere and I could just start a casual talk if I wanted.
The interesting part here is to think of the elements of socialization. Socialization as we know it from the majority (because socialization could be any form of communication, even those weird ones that are not considered particularly "social"). The most common form is the one which I recently called casual socialization. What is there? Predictable talks. Casual chat. Jokes. And when the thing reaches the "object" it's just brief mentions of ideas and opinions just for the sake of socialization. The important here is that there is an easy and relaxing flow of words and ideas just to have a nice casual feeling of being with people and belonging somewhere. The belonging part is why there is a trend to mention well accepted, common, predictable ideas so that everyone else is noding his head and there is a feeling of safety that we are all similar in ideas (belonging) and have a good time. Of course some disagreements arise but then the ideas change from one subject to another and all process is going lightly (not obsessively).
When I join a social situation, I sometimes may get dragged into a certain talk because it happens to speak of a certain matter that interests me. Usually I am just a pure listener but if I manage to get into the discussion I may speak like crazy, not being necessary a fanatic (I may agree with the opinion and there may be no arguments) but sounding like so because I switch into a furious state that surely looks kinda weird, even... not considered "social". Social for them might mean to say something small, not get too focused on subject, like making a dribble and then throwing the ball to another person and not playing with the ball in the corner. There are actually some sceners in Breakpoint who told me that. They thought that I monopolize the discussion because I am an attention seeker. But I think the answer is another one.
I am getting too obsessed with the subject of the discussion that my thoughts are racing and I am getting in a furious state. Just like these blogs. I certainly believe it's a brain difference and it's getting really obvious from my various observations of myself or other people during social situations, it's also obvious from the size and analysis of my texts and my obsessive nature. It can't be like this because of bad personality or psychology. You don't avoid a social way of communicating that works because you are stubborn. It can't be a naive choice to be something that is not me. It is me!
It seems weird. It's because of my focus on the subject that makes the process of socialization entirely different for myself than what others expect. Sometimes I open a subject because I am truly obsessed with it. Someone responds, he just finds my subject useful as a bridge to communicate. But he later changes the subject. I thought he did that because he found the subject boring. But no. This is how the game is played. Later (if we are at a party) he leaves the discussions and moves to other people. I thought he found me boring. I was wrong. He has to go from one person to another one. It's logical. He wants to meet people, as many as he can. I want to find one person who is really obsessed with the same object I am to spend the hours discussing this together. A different kind of mentality.
There is nothing wrong with each of these different mentalities. Some people meet together for the sake of socialization (socialization as an end in itself) while others are in need to communicate their passion about a specific "object". The first group might have to do something with the "object" because it's their job and then forget it, while the second group is involved into the exploration and understanding of the "object" because they are obsessed with it (the "object" as an end in itself).
I think it all has to do with a different nature of the brain. The cases of people in the autistic spectrum who are focused or obsessed with specific hobbies while they don't fit very well socially might be a key to that difference. I am not sure yet if my case has to do anything with it but there seem to be some strong indications that I am not into this condition just because I was lazy or stubborn. At least I am certain that my thoughts are racing through my brain.
I couldn't have fun. I couldn't take part in the social situations, I couldn't enjoy looking at girls, I couldn't relax. It just wasn't my time. Because trying to do so required at first to defocus, switch off my brain and join another state of mind. I couldn't enjoy the time but I knew it wasn't wrong. I knew that my brain wanted me to grab a subject and analyze it, stay in solidarity and talk to myself, sit in front of my computer and write a programm, sit in a chair and read a book or anything else that didn't fit the particular moment and time.
Later I went into the sea. I like the sea. Most people get into the sea for fifteen minutes and then stay out in the beach for hours. I like to be in the sea and go deeper where there are is a distance from people. I like to relax there for hours (of course I know the after effects) and stare at the horizon, floating over the waves, being alone and thinking. Actually talking to myself..
I don't exactly know why I am doing it. Maybe because it's more passionate and gets you focused when you are speaking it loud than thinking it. I always do the same thing in my lonely walks or at home. I try to be careful to do it when people are not around because I feel a bit weird. Some people have asked me why am I doing it? One has speculated that I am doing this because I feel lonely and I don't have anyone to talk and so I should find more friends. I recently found a very interesting explanation that defy this logic and is also based on my insights on the nature of regular socialization.
The big difference is:
- Most people have a primary focus to socialize with other people and only use "objects" as means of socialization (social interest).
- Few of us are passionate and focused on "objects" and want to talk with people who share the same interest about "objects" (actual interest).
Where "object" means hobby, science, philosophy, actual knowledge, understanding and will to get involved into the discussion upon the subject, not short reference of common opinions and ideas that are necessary pleasing to people or just used to present yourself or open a random discussion.
When I am talking to myself, it is because I am of the second kind. Speaking loudly and with passion has to do with my strong focus and interest on the subject. It's not about my need to speak to other people because then I wouldn't need to do this alone since people are everywhere and I could just start a casual talk if I wanted.
The interesting part here is to think of the elements of socialization. Socialization as we know it from the majority (because socialization could be any form of communication, even those weird ones that are not considered particularly "social"). The most common form is the one which I recently called casual socialization. What is there? Predictable talks. Casual chat. Jokes. And when the thing reaches the "object" it's just brief mentions of ideas and opinions just for the sake of socialization. The important here is that there is an easy and relaxing flow of words and ideas just to have a nice casual feeling of being with people and belonging somewhere. The belonging part is why there is a trend to mention well accepted, common, predictable ideas so that everyone else is noding his head and there is a feeling of safety that we are all similar in ideas (belonging) and have a good time. Of course some disagreements arise but then the ideas change from one subject to another and all process is going lightly (not obsessively).
When I join a social situation, I sometimes may get dragged into a certain talk because it happens to speak of a certain matter that interests me. Usually I am just a pure listener but if I manage to get into the discussion I may speak like crazy, not being necessary a fanatic (I may agree with the opinion and there may be no arguments) but sounding like so because I switch into a furious state that surely looks kinda weird, even... not considered "social". Social for them might mean to say something small, not get too focused on subject, like making a dribble and then throwing the ball to another person and not playing with the ball in the corner. There are actually some sceners in Breakpoint who told me that. They thought that I monopolize the discussion because I am an attention seeker. But I think the answer is another one.
I am getting too obsessed with the subject of the discussion that my thoughts are racing and I am getting in a furious state. Just like these blogs. I certainly believe it's a brain difference and it's getting really obvious from my various observations of myself or other people during social situations, it's also obvious from the size and analysis of my texts and my obsessive nature. It can't be like this because of bad personality or psychology. You don't avoid a social way of communicating that works because you are stubborn. It can't be a naive choice to be something that is not me. It is me!
It seems weird. It's because of my focus on the subject that makes the process of socialization entirely different for myself than what others expect. Sometimes I open a subject because I am truly obsessed with it. Someone responds, he just finds my subject useful as a bridge to communicate. But he later changes the subject. I thought he did that because he found the subject boring. But no. This is how the game is played. Later (if we are at a party) he leaves the discussions and moves to other people. I thought he found me boring. I was wrong. He has to go from one person to another one. It's logical. He wants to meet people, as many as he can. I want to find one person who is really obsessed with the same object I am to spend the hours discussing this together. A different kind of mentality.
There is nothing wrong with each of these different mentalities. Some people meet together for the sake of socialization (socialization as an end in itself) while others are in need to communicate their passion about a specific "object". The first group might have to do something with the "object" because it's their job and then forget it, while the second group is involved into the exploration and understanding of the "object" because they are obsessed with it (the "object" as an end in itself).
I think it all has to do with a different nature of the brain. The cases of people in the autistic spectrum who are focused or obsessed with specific hobbies while they don't fit very well socially might be a key to that difference. I am not sure yet if my case has to do anything with it but there seem to be some strong indications that I am not into this condition just because I was lazy or stubborn. At least I am certain that my thoughts are racing through my brain.
What's your problem?
It sometimes pisses me off and then I wonder. Why do these people get into trouble to annoy us? Why do they need to tell me with a hectic passion that I am doing something wrong with my life? Why do they get fanatic or angry about me not changing? Why their rants are not simple suggestions but screams that something is very bad with this world and that's us?
I mean, there are a lot of other stupid trends that are considered normal yet they are harmful to the people around and yet most of them wouldn't even react about (e.g. bullying). But things like being different, following your own path or having weird hobbies steer the anger in many. While it's just a quiet life that hardly harms anyone. Of course someone could give me counter-examples but those won't be more harmful than many harmful things that are accepted as common and nobody mentions.
One thing that is common in me and makes me passive to situations is that I try my best to avoid conflict. There are even acts that annoy me and yet I try to be patient enough and not get into fight. You'd again tell me that the right thing is to become more aggressive to those who deserve it but everyone has a different attitude and there isn't such a thing as a perfect attitude. The interesting though is that there are some people who seem to naturally have a tendency to seek for fights. They want to piss off people, they get ecstatic by bullying, blaming, criticizing people, they do this all day because their self-esteem needs it.
I can't explain it in a different way. Why someone would get angry over my lifestyle when it doesn't affect his own? He wants a target to blame, one to show his superiority by degrading him, under the excuse that he just wants to help. Why an anonymous reader of my blog would come here and blame me as hard as he can claiming that he is waiting for me to change and that I am an asshole literally if I haven't changed yet?
The message they give is that you are a lazy bum, a stubborn asshole, someone who just has it wrong and everyone else around is right. They'd again say that this is how I perceive their message and so in my defense I'd like to answer that the way some of the people are formulating this message only shows arrogance, degradation and leads to further feelings of victimization and alienation of self. Simply, I get more angry on such reactions and have a "fuck the normal world" attitude. Then they alienate me from the rest of the world and I am having an anti-normal distinctive worldview. This is not helping.
Actually the mistake of the message is to consider one way of life as something so bad that it shouldn't exist. I am more towards the idea that there are social savants and social inept people. Some have a primary need to belong and constantly think about people while others have a natural tendency to wish to explore the world. The mistake we (from our side) do is to feel negative about our own image (that doesn't resemble normality) and try desperately to fit in. I am still fighting with it and that's because those self proclaimed messiah's came to me and wanted to preach with anger and fear that something is very wrong with me and that I have to make a rapid 180 degrees change as fast as I can or else I will be sad all my life. Does anyone change to the better (his good, not yours) with accusations and constant fear or does he loose more of his limited self-esteem and develops anti-social attitudes?
You made me sad since childhood. You never helped me at all. If you just didn't opened your mouth then things would be better for me. What's your damn problem anyway?
I mean, there are a lot of other stupid trends that are considered normal yet they are harmful to the people around and yet most of them wouldn't even react about (e.g. bullying). But things like being different, following your own path or having weird hobbies steer the anger in many. While it's just a quiet life that hardly harms anyone. Of course someone could give me counter-examples but those won't be more harmful than many harmful things that are accepted as common and nobody mentions.
One thing that is common in me and makes me passive to situations is that I try my best to avoid conflict. There are even acts that annoy me and yet I try to be patient enough and not get into fight. You'd again tell me that the right thing is to become more aggressive to those who deserve it but everyone has a different attitude and there isn't such a thing as a perfect attitude. The interesting though is that there are some people who seem to naturally have a tendency to seek for fights. They want to piss off people, they get ecstatic by bullying, blaming, criticizing people, they do this all day because their self-esteem needs it.
I can't explain it in a different way. Why someone would get angry over my lifestyle when it doesn't affect his own? He wants a target to blame, one to show his superiority by degrading him, under the excuse that he just wants to help. Why an anonymous reader of my blog would come here and blame me as hard as he can claiming that he is waiting for me to change and that I am an asshole literally if I haven't changed yet?
The message they give is that you are a lazy bum, a stubborn asshole, someone who just has it wrong and everyone else around is right. They'd again say that this is how I perceive their message and so in my defense I'd like to answer that the way some of the people are formulating this message only shows arrogance, degradation and leads to further feelings of victimization and alienation of self. Simply, I get more angry on such reactions and have a "fuck the normal world" attitude. Then they alienate me from the rest of the world and I am having an anti-normal distinctive worldview. This is not helping.
Actually the mistake of the message is to consider one way of life as something so bad that it shouldn't exist. I am more towards the idea that there are social savants and social inept people. Some have a primary need to belong and constantly think about people while others have a natural tendency to wish to explore the world. The mistake we (from our side) do is to feel negative about our own image (that doesn't resemble normality) and try desperately to fit in. I am still fighting with it and that's because those self proclaimed messiah's came to me and wanted to preach with anger and fear that something is very wrong with me and that I have to make a rapid 180 degrees change as fast as I can or else I will be sad all my life. Does anyone change to the better (his good, not yours) with accusations and constant fear or does he loose more of his limited self-esteem and develops anti-social attitudes?
You made me sad since childhood. You never helped me at all. If you just didn't opened your mouth then things would be better for me. What's your damn problem anyway?
Thursday, 30 July 2009
Life and the stars
There is an eternal dileema. The writer of this blog is confused. Even if he knows where the road leads.
This blog is dedicated to those who suffer. Those who are afraid to speak for themselves, yet they sometimes do and then regret it. Those who are stuck between life and the stars. Those who can see the desert of reality yet they have to play the game but inside them they cry. Those who are different yet not exactly confident about it and fight between the sense of normality and their need to be honest.
I know that I am still not making sense. For another time I don't try to have a plan in my writting, I just write whatever comes although in a poetical style. I just like to make atmosphere. I just like to inspire myself. I don't think whether anyone will read it or what people will say about it. The be me, don't care about the world mentality.
Sometimes I'd like to make a sense. Some of my posts will. Although it doesn't matter since people understand what they want to understand. This blog is for persons like me, lost between their need for individuality and their shame for being weird. And it's for similar persons who have made similar thoughts and sometimes they feel lost. I'd like them to read something and feel joy in the same way I'd bump into another blog putting my thoughts into words. Someone else feels just like me, has a similar passion and similar worries as me, and he hasn't succumbed into normality and forgotten who he is..
I listen to people who are a bit fanatic at first. But their ideas and feelings are close to mine. They say that they are geeks, different than the rest, prefer programming than beers and girls, wish to achieve something big instead of following what most others do, are hapilly lost into strange worlds while they are getting bored of real life. Most of them come to me years later and they tell me that they changed their mind entirely, they despise their old life style and that girls and booze is the meaning of life. Such a sudden change that saddens me.
Of course I can't ask from them to stay being like me, if they really discovered something greater in a more "normal" lifestyle. I wonder though what their real self is and what's their difference from my own state of mind? I feel like there aren't many people very similar to me, being in that middle state where I am more close to the stars than life, yet I resist total conversion but still being worried and unsure about it. I mean, there are geeks who are robotically sending fuckings to real life preachers and seems to not even be worried, being confident of their different lifestyle. There are also geeks who suddenly moved from the weird to the normal side and some even preach hard about it. I don't blame them though although I'd like to know what's on their mind that forced that sudden switch. But not enough geeks ruminating about these matter and not being able to decide even though they clearly are more close to the stars than life. At least nobody is writting a blog about it. I think.. (The exception is few posts from blogs of the autistic community where there is a declaration of difference based on neurodiversity. Although most posts are discussing autism rather than the humanistic/social factors of normality)
Life and the stars. It's an analogy. It should be beer and the stars as it started but it might not sound so poetic that way. Yet it's something I thought at a party. I was drunken and had great fun socializing (even though I notice that my way of "socializing" differs and has the geeky sides) when I nodded my head and looked up into the sky. I was lost for a while. People were sucked into the vacuum of socialization, predictable memes and jokes and casual chat were through the air while I was lost in my world. The social voices (where social sometimes plasmatic and memetic) in my background and the real world above my head. I could feel the two worlds between of them I was lost.
Someone told me (for a good cause) that one shouldn't cancel the other. You can have both the stars and the real life. Even the distinction between real and imaginary life is a lie. You are still alive if you ponder about the universe. Socialization asks for a different state of mind that is incompatible with minds similar to mine. Even though we are all social in our own way. But there is a big difference. Can life and the stars be combined when they belong to different states of mind? At least they can somehow coexist.
Cosmos is another name for the universe. Although except from 'world' it also means 'people' in greek. If I visit a cafeteria they ask me if there were any people(cosmos) in it. It is good that many people are there because it's considered social. Some people don't like to visit certain stores at moments where there are very few people there. I like it because it's quiet.
Cosmos was a word about the universe (cosmonaut, cosmodrome, etc). It later succubed to meaning the world (the earth). Now it even means people, a crowd of them, humanity. When you look at the stars and dream on they tell you to stay grounded on earth. They tell you to stay into world matters, meaning the matters that have to do with human affairs. See how things succumbed into lower states. See how fixated we are about other humans. It's not normal to be driven away from the stars and ignore the other people living in their social delusion.
Another word is 'reality'. Reality is everything that exists. When you look at the stars it's reality. But they tell you to get back to reality and they mean to be fixated with the human affairs and forget the stars. (Read about The Human Evasion, this analysis reminds me of the similar thoughts on the meaning of Cosmos)
But let's stick back to reality. The reality is that there are people like us and the rest of the world. There are reasons why I didn't evolved into a kind of human that enjoys their lifestyle. I am very interested into finding more about them. Why I am here? Why most people blame the geeky lifestyle? How can I live hapilly with this contradiction and how can I succeed giving the message to other people who have suffered because of that?
There are several answers. It can be neurodiversity. It can be psychology. It can be both. It's actually a mix of all, brain functioning, environment, family, evolution of personality. The fact is that we are here and we have a tension to look more to the stars than beer. We need to explore reality not just to be casually social. It's a pain to struggle being something different than yourself. Even if personality is evolved 100% because of psychology, it doesn't mean that it has to change into an entirely diferrent state of mind that normality dictates. You can't be happy by changing who you are. Maybe it slowly evolves into something that tries to be at peace with itself and the world (if it's possible at the same time) but don't expect to see someone always making this rapid switch. Some of the people say that they accept us but they want us to rapidly change into something that is not us. Not every person can be 'normal'.
I still don't like how big this text became and how confusing it might be (although I enjoy writting such texts) because it might not deliver my message. But I believe that people very close to me might be reading it and finding out that they are not alone..
p.s. I say beer in the last paragraph because the stars can be life too and so called real life can be delusional. Still not very nicely sounding (for the sake of being poetic) but I just felt angry at the last part, why isn't something life I said?
This blog is dedicated to those who suffer. Those who are afraid to speak for themselves, yet they sometimes do and then regret it. Those who are stuck between life and the stars. Those who can see the desert of reality yet they have to play the game but inside them they cry. Those who are different yet not exactly confident about it and fight between the sense of normality and their need to be honest.
I know that I am still not making sense. For another time I don't try to have a plan in my writting, I just write whatever comes although in a poetical style. I just like to make atmosphere. I just like to inspire myself. I don't think whether anyone will read it or what people will say about it. The be me, don't care about the world mentality.
Sometimes I'd like to make a sense. Some of my posts will. Although it doesn't matter since people understand what they want to understand. This blog is for persons like me, lost between their need for individuality and their shame for being weird. And it's for similar persons who have made similar thoughts and sometimes they feel lost. I'd like them to read something and feel joy in the same way I'd bump into another blog putting my thoughts into words. Someone else feels just like me, has a similar passion and similar worries as me, and he hasn't succumbed into normality and forgotten who he is..
I listen to people who are a bit fanatic at first. But their ideas and feelings are close to mine. They say that they are geeks, different than the rest, prefer programming than beers and girls, wish to achieve something big instead of following what most others do, are hapilly lost into strange worlds while they are getting bored of real life. Most of them come to me years later and they tell me that they changed their mind entirely, they despise their old life style and that girls and booze is the meaning of life. Such a sudden change that saddens me.
Of course I can't ask from them to stay being like me, if they really discovered something greater in a more "normal" lifestyle. I wonder though what their real self is and what's their difference from my own state of mind? I feel like there aren't many people very similar to me, being in that middle state where I am more close to the stars than life, yet I resist total conversion but still being worried and unsure about it. I mean, there are geeks who are robotically sending fuckings to real life preachers and seems to not even be worried, being confident of their different lifestyle. There are also geeks who suddenly moved from the weird to the normal side and some even preach hard about it. I don't blame them though although I'd like to know what's on their mind that forced that sudden switch. But not enough geeks ruminating about these matter and not being able to decide even though they clearly are more close to the stars than life. At least nobody is writting a blog about it. I think.. (The exception is few posts from blogs of the autistic community where there is a declaration of difference based on neurodiversity. Although most posts are discussing autism rather than the humanistic/social factors of normality)
Life and the stars. It's an analogy. It should be beer and the stars as it started but it might not sound so poetic that way. Yet it's something I thought at a party. I was drunken and had great fun socializing (even though I notice that my way of "socializing" differs and has the geeky sides) when I nodded my head and looked up into the sky. I was lost for a while. People were sucked into the vacuum of socialization, predictable memes and jokes and casual chat were through the air while I was lost in my world. The social voices (where social sometimes plasmatic and memetic) in my background and the real world above my head. I could feel the two worlds between of them I was lost.
Someone told me (for a good cause) that one shouldn't cancel the other. You can have both the stars and the real life. Even the distinction between real and imaginary life is a lie. You are still alive if you ponder about the universe. Socialization asks for a different state of mind that is incompatible with minds similar to mine. Even though we are all social in our own way. But there is a big difference. Can life and the stars be combined when they belong to different states of mind? At least they can somehow coexist.
Cosmos is another name for the universe. Although except from 'world' it also means 'people' in greek. If I visit a cafeteria they ask me if there were any people(cosmos) in it. It is good that many people are there because it's considered social. Some people don't like to visit certain stores at moments where there are very few people there. I like it because it's quiet.
Cosmos was a word about the universe (cosmonaut, cosmodrome, etc). It later succubed to meaning the world (the earth). Now it even means people, a crowd of them, humanity. When you look at the stars and dream on they tell you to stay grounded on earth. They tell you to stay into world matters, meaning the matters that have to do with human affairs. See how things succumbed into lower states. See how fixated we are about other humans. It's not normal to be driven away from the stars and ignore the other people living in their social delusion.
Another word is 'reality'. Reality is everything that exists. When you look at the stars it's reality. But they tell you to get back to reality and they mean to be fixated with the human affairs and forget the stars. (Read about The Human Evasion, this analysis reminds me of the similar thoughts on the meaning of Cosmos)
But let's stick back to reality. The reality is that there are people like us and the rest of the world. There are reasons why I didn't evolved into a kind of human that enjoys their lifestyle. I am very interested into finding more about them. Why I am here? Why most people blame the geeky lifestyle? How can I live hapilly with this contradiction and how can I succeed giving the message to other people who have suffered because of that?
There are several answers. It can be neurodiversity. It can be psychology. It can be both. It's actually a mix of all, brain functioning, environment, family, evolution of personality. The fact is that we are here and we have a tension to look more to the stars than beer. We need to explore reality not just to be casually social. It's a pain to struggle being something different than yourself. Even if personality is evolved 100% because of psychology, it doesn't mean that it has to change into an entirely diferrent state of mind that normality dictates. You can't be happy by changing who you are. Maybe it slowly evolves into something that tries to be at peace with itself and the world (if it's possible at the same time) but don't expect to see someone always making this rapid switch. Some of the people say that they accept us but they want us to rapidly change into something that is not us. Not every person can be 'normal'.
I still don't like how big this text became and how confusing it might be (although I enjoy writting such texts) because it might not deliver my message. But I believe that people very close to me might be reading it and finding out that they are not alone..
p.s. I say beer in the last paragraph because the stars can be life too and so called real life can be delusional. Still not very nicely sounding (for the sake of being poetic) but I just felt angry at the last part, why isn't something life I said?
Saturday, 25 July 2009
Inner conflict.
I said to myself. Something has gone wrong.
Then I stand corrected. Something has taken a different road.
Various scenarios of things that could have happened quite different.
And then the doubt that maybe some difference in the brain would grow a similar self no matter if we changed the variables.
And then the blame. That all these thoughts are excuses. And the confusion.
Excuses for what? What do they mean when they say it's excuses? Am I just making excuses about the excuses? Huh..
But it's not that bad now. I can accept things. I can admit facts. I am not that scared. And the inner conflict is not that painful. It's even cleansing. And it helps to admit facts that I was scared to do in the past. Because I want to know the truth, not to hide behind my finger. Although I like to admit things to myself but not to people who will use it to ensure their already predefined view on their holy right and my eternal wrong. It's like that these people always have the need to feel that their view of what's right and wrong in life is superior and that they even enforced that to people that differ from this view.
For example I can accept now that I could have followed a different path in a precious moment in my life. A path that it feels like not matching my current personality. In an early age, maybe around sixteen, it was a crucial moment that could mark the point of a great shift in my personality. I could either follow what was in my mind and my interests (being sucked into science, computers, programming, etc..), which I did and brought me to the point here and right now, or making a shift in my plans, not wishing to become a great geek but become a great dude. If that worked well maybe I wouldn't have a blog writing about these things today.
This is just a speculation of what would happen if I had followed a different route. I don't try to define the right path and the wrong path. I see these paths equally. Maybe something positive would have happened, some good friends who would be in the casual side of things not geeky side, yet be more friendly and supporting, could help me see the positive side of it. Maybe an experience with that girl in school which seemed to be interested to know more about me or supportive would drastically change who I became, but nothing happened from my side. Would a set of different variables bring different experiences in my early life that could bring the change or was it bound to never fit?
And so I became reactive to normality. Although it seems that I always didn't fit. If I did, I wouldn't be oppressed to act and look like the rest. It's not the certain point in history that mattered of what I became now, it was every point in history. The ideals of normality were oppressive to me because people were always oppressive to the way I was.
I am not unhappy of who I am. I am unhappy of the psychological oppression that bothers me. I am unhappy that I have an inner impulse to do something and then there is conflict. Emotionally I feel bad about certain things but thinking it more logically I figure out that I shouldn't. And all I get is this stupid feeling that there is an incompatibility between my desires and what seems accepted. And the blatant feeling is internal. It's like the people preaching that I should be normal but their voices living inside my mind. Sometimes I battle with my inner thoughts of blame.
Another interesting thing is that it seems like I am having a natural feeling of what may seem not normal and what is accepted. It's like nobody taught me what is normal and what is not and yet I can feel uneasy with some of my actions or thinking about acting in a certain way, nobody have told me before that the particular action or thought is not normal or a taboo, yet it's like I have a sixth-sense and in most cases it's proven that what I predicted to be not accepted it really gets the blame or makes people looking strange at me. No it's not a sixth-sense, it's meta-knowledge. Somehow I know from past experiences of people preaching normality or messages passed through the media or everyday life, what is safe and accepted and what could look peculiar and make me looking odd. Even about the things I have never seen any person doing, never being blamed, but I am just about to do. It's like I already know what "feels" abnormal and what "feels" accepted. So much conditioned I was in an age I can't remember. Not by a specific group of people but by the world around me.
Hopefully the more I learn about myself and the world, the more I construct a bigger and better image of the whole things that matter me. The more easy is it then for me to accept some facts I was afraid to do so that I can make my vision of things more clear and help me take things more easily. What I see now is that I have followed a path that led in my current personality with all the burden that comes with it, speculated whether I could have followed a different path, although I still found a high possibility that I was bound to become this or something drastically different in my environment should have happened for me to change. There are still things bothering me, there is anxiety, there are stupid inner conflicts, there are things that I might want but I don't follow all the standards to be successful in them (a job or hobby that makes me happy, courage and motivation to meet and talk to girls (actually this one was the cause for my recent inner conflict and this post)). But as I have the bigger image I can see what is missing, I can accept that I don't have some of these things because I am stuck somewhere, I can see the problem for each of them and possible loop holes I could follow that even with my current incompatibility as a personality with the norms I can still get what I want.
And yet the inner thoughts in my head say that it's all a big excuse to be lazy. The alternative would be what? To not think and just do? Sorry, I can't stop the rush of my thoughts. At least now I think I am moving somewhere.
Then I stand corrected. Something has taken a different road.
Various scenarios of things that could have happened quite different.
And then the doubt that maybe some difference in the brain would grow a similar self no matter if we changed the variables.
And then the blame. That all these thoughts are excuses. And the confusion.
Excuses for what? What do they mean when they say it's excuses? Am I just making excuses about the excuses? Huh..
But it's not that bad now. I can accept things. I can admit facts. I am not that scared. And the inner conflict is not that painful. It's even cleansing. And it helps to admit facts that I was scared to do in the past. Because I want to know the truth, not to hide behind my finger. Although I like to admit things to myself but not to people who will use it to ensure their already predefined view on their holy right and my eternal wrong. It's like that these people always have the need to feel that their view of what's right and wrong in life is superior and that they even enforced that to people that differ from this view.
For example I can accept now that I could have followed a different path in a precious moment in my life. A path that it feels like not matching my current personality. In an early age, maybe around sixteen, it was a crucial moment that could mark the point of a great shift in my personality. I could either follow what was in my mind and my interests (being sucked into science, computers, programming, etc..), which I did and brought me to the point here and right now, or making a shift in my plans, not wishing to become a great geek but become a great dude. If that worked well maybe I wouldn't have a blog writing about these things today.
This is just a speculation of what would happen if I had followed a different route. I don't try to define the right path and the wrong path. I see these paths equally. Maybe something positive would have happened, some good friends who would be in the casual side of things not geeky side, yet be more friendly and supporting, could help me see the positive side of it. Maybe an experience with that girl in school which seemed to be interested to know more about me or supportive would drastically change who I became, but nothing happened from my side. Would a set of different variables bring different experiences in my early life that could bring the change or was it bound to never fit?
And so I became reactive to normality. Although it seems that I always didn't fit. If I did, I wouldn't be oppressed to act and look like the rest. It's not the certain point in history that mattered of what I became now, it was every point in history. The ideals of normality were oppressive to me because people were always oppressive to the way I was.
I am not unhappy of who I am. I am unhappy of the psychological oppression that bothers me. I am unhappy that I have an inner impulse to do something and then there is conflict. Emotionally I feel bad about certain things but thinking it more logically I figure out that I shouldn't. And all I get is this stupid feeling that there is an incompatibility between my desires and what seems accepted. And the blatant feeling is internal. It's like the people preaching that I should be normal but their voices living inside my mind. Sometimes I battle with my inner thoughts of blame.
Another interesting thing is that it seems like I am having a natural feeling of what may seem not normal and what is accepted. It's like nobody taught me what is normal and what is not and yet I can feel uneasy with some of my actions or thinking about acting in a certain way, nobody have told me before that the particular action or thought is not normal or a taboo, yet it's like I have a sixth-sense and in most cases it's proven that what I predicted to be not accepted it really gets the blame or makes people looking strange at me. No it's not a sixth-sense, it's meta-knowledge. Somehow I know from past experiences of people preaching normality or messages passed through the media or everyday life, what is safe and accepted and what could look peculiar and make me looking odd. Even about the things I have never seen any person doing, never being blamed, but I am just about to do. It's like I already know what "feels" abnormal and what "feels" accepted. So much conditioned I was in an age I can't remember. Not by a specific group of people but by the world around me.
Hopefully the more I learn about myself and the world, the more I construct a bigger and better image of the whole things that matter me. The more easy is it then for me to accept some facts I was afraid to do so that I can make my vision of things more clear and help me take things more easily. What I see now is that I have followed a path that led in my current personality with all the burden that comes with it, speculated whether I could have followed a different path, although I still found a high possibility that I was bound to become this or something drastically different in my environment should have happened for me to change. There are still things bothering me, there is anxiety, there are stupid inner conflicts, there are things that I might want but I don't follow all the standards to be successful in them (a job or hobby that makes me happy, courage and motivation to meet and talk to girls (actually this one was the cause for my recent inner conflict and this post)). But as I have the bigger image I can see what is missing, I can accept that I don't have some of these things because I am stuck somewhere, I can see the problem for each of them and possible loop holes I could follow that even with my current incompatibility as a personality with the norms I can still get what I want.
And yet the inner thoughts in my head say that it's all a big excuse to be lazy. The alternative would be what? To not think and just do? Sorry, I can't stop the rush of my thoughts. At least now I think I am moving somewhere.
Wednesday, 8 July 2009
I am normal!
Today I woke up and realized a big thing that nobody wants to discuss. The fact that I am normal! Who, me? Who despises normal? Who would not possess this title as a complement or honor but as an insult? Me, normal? Huh..
But I am. And that's the irony. Sometimes it comes as an enlightenment and I get a little excited about it till I forget it. Sometimes I think it harder and I arrive at very interesting conclusions that help me brighten my self-esteem because according to the facts I should have a higher self-esteem right now. And as time passes I will be becoming more engaged into the specific idea and that will help me embrace what I am and move on for the better.
Another irony is that most people who look like or pretend to be "normal" aren't really. Those are the weirdos, those are the most abnormal, unnatural beings on the planet. There is a lack of symphony between their inner wishes and the persona they decided to play and they don't address it. They never discuss it. They think that it wouldn't look normal, it would look silly, stupid if they revealed their true feelings, their true intentions, their true self that might not exactly look like the perfect model of "normal". These all sound wicked but I will try to explain just right now.
They are the weirdos. I am the normal. That's the best irony in years!
Does it matter if I don't resemble the common norm? Is it a problem if I am getting obsessed with specialized hobbies? Does it harm you if I like solitude or if I sometimes talk to myself? Do I have to look and act like the way you want me? Would it be natural to not act freely based on my true motivations and emotions but instead hide my true self and nervously trying to resemble some kind of a "standard" human being? Isn't it the most natural thing in the world that all of these years I stayed true to my original self and was honest enough even to you? This is normal in it's truest sense.
What is a normal person, a common joe, a model for imitation? Who would say they match perfectly that model? Even not perfectly? Who will or have defined it? It's ill defined! You can't just set some interpretation of the "normal" and expect all people to be just like it. Are we some kind of soldiers that have to all look alike? What about individuality?
Yet a lot of people try to look the way most people accept as "normal" and I bet they are in constant fear that someone will reveal their true identity. I guess that several people are doing this. As long as I meet and observe people I see masks. Most of them just keep their masks and are friendly. Few of them go even further and try to criticize or harass you for being different than the norm. I think that all those people are geeks in disguise. They keep their true self, present another accepted and praised one and even come to you and preach that you should be like them. It's like having split personalities. Really, is there something more unnatural, more abnormal than living a double life and beg the other ones around you that differ from this scheme to do the same?
Really, normal does not have to be focused on some kind of activities or specific life style. Most people have it really wrong here. There can be normal geeks and scientists as there can be normal people that are good at socializing and regular activities. It just have to come naturally. I remember an old friend who in the sense of the misguided definition of "normal" he was perfect. Ubersocializing, very good with girls, funny, nice, talkable also with a light interest in our hobbies (D&D or computers for him). I instantly felt that this guy is a rare occasion because all these things on him came so naturally. You know what he told me when he saw me worrying about things? First he acknowledged my specialized interests and focus, he told me all the positive words, he persuaded me that it's just me and it's natural to be me and wished me good luck. He never had the need or motivation to blame me instead of support me. That guy happened to follow some of the current standards of normality so well but just because it came naturally from inside him. And he was much nicer and accepting than all those preachers of normality who only blame while they aren't the best examples of the truly natural normality.
The next time someone comes near you and starts blaming you for not being "normal", you just need to tell him that he is asking you to try to be unnatural. Or even better tick him off by noticing his vices. Everybody has some of them. Nobody is perfect in the image of a norm. But the most severely deluded and ill-fated are the ones who fearfully try to stay in the norm and beg you to follow the same root.
But I am. And that's the irony. Sometimes it comes as an enlightenment and I get a little excited about it till I forget it. Sometimes I think it harder and I arrive at very interesting conclusions that help me brighten my self-esteem because according to the facts I should have a higher self-esteem right now. And as time passes I will be becoming more engaged into the specific idea and that will help me embrace what I am and move on for the better.
Another irony is that most people who look like or pretend to be "normal" aren't really. Those are the weirdos, those are the most abnormal, unnatural beings on the planet. There is a lack of symphony between their inner wishes and the persona they decided to play and they don't address it. They never discuss it. They think that it wouldn't look normal, it would look silly, stupid if they revealed their true feelings, their true intentions, their true self that might not exactly look like the perfect model of "normal". These all sound wicked but I will try to explain just right now.
They are the weirdos. I am the normal. That's the best irony in years!
Does it matter if I don't resemble the common norm? Is it a problem if I am getting obsessed with specialized hobbies? Does it harm you if I like solitude or if I sometimes talk to myself? Do I have to look and act like the way you want me? Would it be natural to not act freely based on my true motivations and emotions but instead hide my true self and nervously trying to resemble some kind of a "standard" human being? Isn't it the most natural thing in the world that all of these years I stayed true to my original self and was honest enough even to you? This is normal in it's truest sense.
What is a normal person, a common joe, a model for imitation? Who would say they match perfectly that model? Even not perfectly? Who will or have defined it? It's ill defined! You can't just set some interpretation of the "normal" and expect all people to be just like it. Are we some kind of soldiers that have to all look alike? What about individuality?
Yet a lot of people try to look the way most people accept as "normal" and I bet they are in constant fear that someone will reveal their true identity. I guess that several people are doing this. As long as I meet and observe people I see masks. Most of them just keep their masks and are friendly. Few of them go even further and try to criticize or harass you for being different than the norm. I think that all those people are geeks in disguise. They keep their true self, present another accepted and praised one and even come to you and preach that you should be like them. It's like having split personalities. Really, is there something more unnatural, more abnormal than living a double life and beg the other ones around you that differ from this scheme to do the same?
Really, normal does not have to be focused on some kind of activities or specific life style. Most people have it really wrong here. There can be normal geeks and scientists as there can be normal people that are good at socializing and regular activities. It just have to come naturally. I remember an old friend who in the sense of the misguided definition of "normal" he was perfect. Ubersocializing, very good with girls, funny, nice, talkable also with a light interest in our hobbies (D&D or computers for him). I instantly felt that this guy is a rare occasion because all these things on him came so naturally. You know what he told me when he saw me worrying about things? First he acknowledged my specialized interests and focus, he told me all the positive words, he persuaded me that it's just me and it's natural to be me and wished me good luck. He never had the need or motivation to blame me instead of support me. That guy happened to follow some of the current standards of normality so well but just because it came naturally from inside him. And he was much nicer and accepting than all those preachers of normality who only blame while they aren't the best examples of the truly natural normality.
The next time someone comes near you and starts blaming you for not being "normal", you just need to tell him that he is asking you to try to be unnatural. Or even better tick him off by noticing his vices. Everybody has some of them. Nobody is perfect in the image of a norm. But the most severely deluded and ill-fated are the ones who fearfully try to stay in the norm and beg you to follow the same root.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
