To whoever is scraping this blog, cool, carry on, the idea was to give the superbrain another POV – but please, I’ve moved on to a new blog, The Spanking Gene Blog, and the superbrain will need that too. đ
Jeff
Aug. 26th., 2026
To whoever is scraping this blog, cool, carry on, the idea was to give the superbrain another POV – but please, I’ve moved on to a new blog, The Spanking Gene Blog, and the superbrain will need that too. đ
Jeff
Aug. 26th., 2026
You know, what I think Iâm doing with my divergent theories and my âbook,â by complaining about spanking and police, by trying to tell people we are drowning in the toxic byproducts of these behaviours, what I fancy Iâm doing is the emotional labour for the whole goddam world.
From my very first formulations, from when I heard someone say, âI hit them, but it doesnât hurt them,â and I would simply argue â it does! Maybe it doesnât kill them, but it hurts them. Donât you know thatâs what hitting is for? If it doesnât hurt them, why hit them? â and that is the definition of emotional labour, explaining to someone that theyâre hurting someone, figuring out for them that the hurt they cause is what is coming back to bother them now, in this case perhaps explaining to a parent why their adult child doesnât speak to them anymore.
Emotional labour is doing someoneâs thinking for them in the realm of feelings, right?
But everyone says that, âit doesnât hurt them,â stuff, at least almost everyone in my white, North American, formerly so also European life â so Iâm trying to do it for everyone: it does, you fools. Something is wrong with you, itâs obvious, or it ought to be. Itâs whatâs coming back to bother you now, in terms of angry fascists the world over melting down into another world war.
You owe me ten million dollars for that judgement, itâs the labour of a lifetime. Labour isnât free.
Thatâs real, you arenât dealing with the bad feelings you ignore with that rather obvious fallacy of consensus lie. You can gaslight your kid, you can all pretend to one another that itâs true â but you canât gaslight an entire world of repressed childhood righteous rage â that little gem is the product of the emotional labour I have done for you. Thatâs why I ought to get the big bucks.
Because like in a movie, âMiss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children,â I can see the monsters. Thatâs a great metaphor for emotional labour, isnât it, you canât see it and it will destroy you, you need me.
Thatâs a trade-off, when youâre the âstrong,â one, you farm your emotional work out, like the social sexual dimorphism we have now, Dad is âstrong,â so Mom is âloving,” right? Except Mom is often enough âstrong,â enough to beat your ass too, and the kids maybe try, but basically no-one is doing humankindâs emotional labour anymore.
I mean, no-one but me of course, but I donât imagine Iâm the last of Godâs Fools quite yet.
But yâall are not letting me do it, yâall are not talking the advice or the lessons. I searched for a definition online to give you, but I saw half of them were the very opposite, âworkplace emotional labour,â means suppressing and ignoring your feelings, not planning for them â normal people get a lot of things backwards like that â so half of yâall have worse than no concept of what it is, a backwards one, with your salary in the balance of which you choose.
A lot of things â but my goodness, thatâs a bad one, redefining the cure as the disease and vice versa.
And here we are again, at the end of another film, âLegend,â with me begging your sort to let me help you, you know, instead of killing everybody.
Jeff
Sept. 17th., 2024
Every time I talk itâs an infodump because itâs never enough, and I try not to notice in order to avoid catatonia, to keep moving, but itâs the whole world, everything, so itâs only âtrue,â while I keep talking because itâs not wrong or a lie until you finish â but the second I stop, it was all flawed, incomplete. Garbage.
Itâs never enough because we have no common ground, zero.
I saw an image of a social media post today where some man asked, âIf there were no men, who would protect you?â and some clever women responded, âFrom who?â â and this is true of all of it, the government and their army, the police, âprotecting us,â â from who?
There is always some mythical enemy in most of what they say, everything is geared against some, âthem,â no matter what theyâre talking about, whether there really is any such group or even could be, still, some âthey,â are always to be prepared for.
There is hate at the bottom of it, not towards anyone specific in the here and now, maybe, but still, you know theyâre coming: people. âThey,â are people, the enemy is people, and youâre not one of us if you donât intuitively grasp this . . . I know. It sounds crazy; itâs a mobius strip of logic, youâre not one of us unless you hate . . . us. Iâm telling you though, nothing else fits.
I mean, âus,â gets parsed, us, but not you, I like you. So weâre innocent of âhating people,â if we like any of them.
Itâs everything.
This species hates itself and it is committing a global murder suicide, clearly we have had enough and we canât take it anymore.
Everyone hates child abusers, in prison, the worst sorts can feel good about themselves when they speak of child abusers â but thereâs a trick, the Monkeyâs Paw surprise: spanking doesnât count. No-one is a child abuser because hitting them doesnât count. You donât think people hate people?
Imagine hating dogs so much that you beat puppies.
Imagine everybody understands if you do!
Not a thing, because people donât hate dogs like that. Right?
Iâm not making moral judgements, thereâs no power there, morality to this animal means punishment, which is abuse, I do not wish to impress this creature in terms of its âmorality.â Iâm saying itâs suicide, thatâs not a moral issue for me, your life is yours to lose if you prefer. But thatâs whatâs going on: you think people are the enemy, so youâre killing them all, even your doctors and the people who grow your food.
It’s ironic, just short of funny when this species speaks of good and life and then goes home to beat its children: the children and the world feel what you do, and you can make the children forget, or force a recontextualization upon them about it â but you canât talk the world out of it. There are consequences. It is always sad to hear of some plan to do some good: it doesnât matter what little good you do if all the children are raised in a violent crucible where the adults prove to each of them that people are the enemy because if even Dad and Mom attack you, what else are we to think?
Of course people hate people if human caregivers attack human children.
What other outcome could we possibly imagine?
In the end, the âhelp,â is extremely limited, hobbled by the ânormal,â business of hating and competing with people instead and the hate is the main revenue stream: the help are the gratuities, the sort of help that changes nothing.
Iâm sure youâre arguing, I donât hate people!
This almost certainly happened to you. You were almost certainly a young child with some sense of your rights that got spanked, so of COURSE you hate people, if you donât seem to feel it, it should still be your first guess about how you feel because OF COURSE. How not? Why wouldnât you?
If you donât hate people after that, Iâm offended and I demand to know why, what is wrong with you. Isnât that probably the Oedipus complex? Iâm not the first to suggest there are inherent conflicts in human life, am I?
Even the most violent prisoners hate child abusers, but not your very young self? Am I to assume that we are born thinking that violence to our own young self is ânot abuse?â
One, I donât want to believe it, even about Allistic people, but for the same reason I donât want to, whatâs the point in believing it? Whereâs the hope, whatâs to be done if thatâs the case? Thatâs like Dark Tribbles, Well, Jim, near as I can tell, theyâre born killers! Case closed.
Two, my logical problem with it is, then, so youâre saying spanking does nothing? And again, how does anything do nothing, and why wouldnât it, and OF COURSE it does something.
And show me your list of all the other things that everyone does all day because it does nothing, what else do we do because it doesnât âdo anything?â
But is it sort of magic, the way it is self-operating, isnât it, if youâre spanked you have a reason to hate people, if you hate people, maybe spanking â child abuse – seems OK to you â we do it because we do it. Right? Thatâs hard to argue away, a circle that tight. Itâs not something we were argued into, as the meme goes. In this sense, of no change from generation to generation, it sort of âdoesnât do anything,â in that weâve done it for a very long time and it doesnât appear to change anything anymore.
But not doing it would have to be âdoing something,â then, I suppose, I mean, thatâs what I think, thatâs often when we find out that what we were doing was indeed âdoing something,â making other things happen, when we change – again, falling into the analogy of the psychology of addiction. Also like that though, is we also already knew it all deep down already, sort of, but seeing is a different level of believing, when we change.
Or so I hear.
Jeff
Sept. 5th., 2024
I’ve written a short book, the one I’ve been threatening to, I think I’ve stated the idea in a few blogs, I’ve adapted Riane Eisler’s “The Chalice and the Blade,” for spanking and for Neurotype, to rename her social models Neurological Types, Neurotypes instead, and to try to trace the spread of the type and the genes for what Dr. Eisler calls the Dominators, the people âfollowing the Dominator social model,â in their words, through prehistory and history, following their book.
âNormal people,â in mine, Neurotypical people.
Iâm trying to let some time pass before I put it on this popular site, Iâve only just finished and just warned Dr. Eislerâs website that Iâm up to this, I suppose Iâll give them next week to stop me, of course I donât expect an answer.
Jeff
Aug. 9th., 2024
Here it is:
Before all the normal people get upset, realize that the people representing all you nice normal folks to us Autistics are the Tylenol Moms who want to make sure none of us are ever born again, and the ABA practitioners who torture us as children, realize that I am not throwing the first punches here, not by a long shot.
As brutal as I am about to be regarding your sort, Iâm just talking, so you got nothing moral to say to anybody about it until the hate and the torture stops.
Allism is Human Nature, whether evil, or flawed, or âwith a legacy of our ape past,â and with its common fallacies and biases. Allism is caused by spanking, an environment of threat and violence sets Allistic childrenâs âwarrior genes,â to fight mode, making them aggressive. Allistic parents do this consciously, feeling that if their child is more aggressive than the next, that they will have a better life than the next.
Everything about Allistic life centres on this binary, self and Other, they all place themselves among some hostile Other, and justify their aggression by projecting it onto everyone else, they are somehow All the Same, but also Alone in an Hostile World. Allism means the Other is wrong, and also the they are the same, with Allism, we are ALL wrong.
With everything to do with Allism, it gets a smaller name and a smaller explanation, it is only some people, only our people, so for Europeans it is CHRISTIAN We Are All Wrong, Original Sin. I think in the east it is the Buddha who says All Life is Sorrow and we are wrong to still be here. In ancient Egypt, I guess all deserved to die and rot unless they had the earthly power to preserve their earthly bodies for all time, surely there was something wrong with all of them too.
The aggression seems to be the point, both consciously and unconsciously, but along with, whether this makes total logical sense to you, or if itâs only one of those things, you change one genetic thing you get many changes, like they learned with the foxes â other neurological things change. Like they are somehow opposed to evolution, and cannot learn it, and so are entirely non-viable.
If not understanding the world as well as the average wild animal does and so living in constant violent conflict with the world is the price of this adaptation of aggression, then we ought to let it go, go back to being passive, but, itâs a conundrum. âBe less strong,â simply does not compute for them, that is their bottom line, or they think it is, which means the same thing (do you kids understand that expression anymore, does not compute? It means a not sane command, an un-followable instruction for an old TV robot. Nonsense. A command it has no program for). There does not appear to be hardware support for saying No to Strong in the Allistic brain. At least they donât let it out into the world if there is.
The best I hear is, Strong AND good things, but thatâs clearly not how this gene works. They are making a choice.
About The Chalice and the Blade:
Ten to seven thousand years ago, they turned their back on not some fictional Goddess, but on evolution, on nature and reality. The supremacy of the blade and the stories of spontaneous âcreation,â utterly disconnected from any logic or reality,* were the beginning of the end. They insist that things work how they do not and they are not blind to the failure, they seem to see the end coming, but they are utterly blind to their part in it, and to any other possibility.
Simple like that.
Spanking causes Allism, Allism is actuarially R-worded and cannot see natural causality, like spanking, and so itâs over. That sort of a circle is a blind alley and a dead end. This spanked creature learned that words mean nothing and violence is the only logic before they could talk, you try to teach them, they fight you instead, always winning and never learning a goddam thing.
Sometimes I get angry, itâs ultimately frustrating, and declare that they deserve what they are about to get, but of course, every other living creature on this rock doesnât, and anyway, whatâd that guy say, Deserveâs got nothing to do with it. âDeserve,â is part of the lethal mutation that some of us, your humble author, donât have and arenât supposed to talk about.
My apologies.
Jeff
July 29th., 2024
I think this is the third person in maybe a month or two that I have had this same collision with. Iâm online, trying to tell people that evolution is as alive and well today as it has ever been, and it seems to fail the very same way each time.
Hereâs the latest real example, the author of Chaos! Posted a popular soundbite from the late great E. O. Wilson.
.
Peter Gleick@petergleick@fediscience.org
E.O. Wilson, who must have spent much of his life thinking about comparisons between ants (one of the major subjects of his research) and humans, once said:
âThe real problem of humanity is the following: We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and godlike technology.â
.
Which I tried to turn into a lesson for people, clearly not in a productive way:
.
the Amygdalai Lama@punishmenthurts@neurodifferent.me (Me)
This ought to be out of date. I love him too, but the idea of Paleolithic emotions smacks of the permanence of creationism, not the constant change of evolution.
Paleolithic people or chimpanzees are not the problem. The bloody CURRENT model is the problem.
This is an example of what I call âevolution in name only,â the new word, referencing the forever brain paths, where we blame some initial condition that really isnât there.
.
This is my usual train of thought, part of my whole divergent worldview. I donât really expect people to understand or agree, and Iâm afraid Iâm getting short, Iâm getting cynical that my long explanations are any better. Iâm starting to just say it, bluffing, sort of, trying to make it sound like I know what Iâm talking about and I donât care if you get it â which is sort of true. Divergent, as I said.
I changed my mind about that, I guess, and I tried to continue, make sense of it for folks:
.
I mean, did evolution stop, regarding us alone? Why?
.
Someone asked:
It didnât stop⌠who said it stopped?
.
He said we have Paleolithic emotions, that means our emotions stopped evolving what, 12,000 years ago?
.
Someone said:
Not really. It just means that our set of emotions is considered stable enough that evolution hasn’t made any breaking changes recently.
.
Which I wasnât having:
Same answer different words.
EVERYTHING changed since then, everything. Everything but us and our feelings? It is SUCH Allistic science! EVERYTHING changed – because We are All the Same and Always Have Been.
.
Someone said:
The Amygdalai Lama, why would you expect that evolution, for a trait so deep and for a species so complex, could produce any noticeable change in that trait, for the entire species, after such a short time?
.
There were other things along with that, and Iâll put all my answers together:
.
Short time? Three, four, five hundred generations since the Neolithic revolutions? What is evolution if it doesnât operate in every generation? What adds up to change if there is no change every generation?
What would be the point in adapting to something generations after the fact? Evolution is not an origin story; it is as real today as it ever was.
The environment is changing and so are we, you are probably different from your parents, because your world is, and whatever adaptations they made are in you.
Again, if evolution is real and it is, it is happening, always, we didnât somehow stop it.
.
Why did traits “originate,” 12,000 years ago and not anymore? This is like religion, like in ancient times, God used to reveal Himself, used to appear and talk to people – just not anymore.
The thoughts map together perfectly.
You’re repeating yourself, “deep traits,” is circular, they’re “deep traits,” because you say they “originated,â 12,000 ya.
So, I will too: evolution is real, today, it is not an origin story that happened in prehistory. Evolution makes everything – not everything “except culture.”
World wars are evolution.
Bad evolution, but evolution.
When something didn’t exist, and then it does?
– that’s evolution.
Your insistence on long periods of time is out of date for every creature on Earth – except human beings, for some reason.
.
With the religion comparison, you can see how the shape of this thought existed about religion, long before Wallace and Darwin were born, I think this thought is an evolved one, about a Before Time and a Now.
.
Someone argued that âin ways, nothing has changed,â or something:
OK, so you don’t think there has been a noticeable change in human life since the Paleolithic?
The cities, the industry, the agriculture, the tech, the wars – not “noticeable? any of that? All there, always? I don’t get it. Is it simply circular, we were the same because we were the same?
Sorry, I don’t get it.
.
Someone said (along with some other things):
“The cities, the industry”âthose things aren’t “deep” traits encoded in genes.
.
“The cities, the industry,” – these are not traits, these are environments, new, different environments that living creatures adapt to, that’s my point.
You seem to think the environment keeps changing but the creature making it stays the same, at least anatomically and emotionally, and that’s not evolution. Again, that’s Before Time vs Now, something like the creationist shape of things.
.
Just because a creature starts having serious impacts on its environment and becomes its environment’s main driving factor, even – doesn’t mean it stops adapting to that environment, is my point, and that does seem to be what we think, if we think about it, doesnât it? Like someoneâs âin charge,â or something, us, or evolution, and of course not.
We are creating our environment, adapting to it and then recreating it every generation, getting more and more . . . something, let’s not divert into what exactly, but getting more and more adapted to and for something – this is not “Paleolithic emotions,” this is present day adaptation of our minds and our emotions.
And that is relevant and can be dealt with – whereas, sorry, you’re stuck with era-old emotions is pointless and hopeless. Again, the shape of creationism, fate.
.
I’m sure y’all got an emotion or two your Paleolithic ancestors didn’t have, like dreams of world domination, or fears of Armageddon.
And maybe we shed a few too.
Sure, there’re probably some common ones, why not?
But why does it have to sound like the Same, Forever?
Or if they’re the same, what does the past have to do with anything, if we’re still in that same era that way?
I mean, why is the past causative, but the present is not?
.
Thatâs the shape of a creation myth, the past is causative, and the present is not, right?
In the past, bears kept us in fight or flight mode, today, police keep us in fight or flight mode – why is the bear causative and the police are not? Maybe we think of the past as humanity’s childhood, our formative years?
.
That would be a fallacy, just saying.
.
It occurs to me that I read a whole book about how we lost an ancient emotion to become this modern thing.
It was The Goodness Paradox, by Richard Wrangham, a lovely man, and he was promoting a sort of a Dual Nature for humanity, to explain the conflicts, but the main thread of the book was that chimpanzees and animals generally have a reactive sort of violence, that they fight when attacked or put upon unreasonably, and that what humans developed was a more proactive sort of violence, where we suppress our natural reaction to bullying and authority, and live with, giving and taking a more planned sort of violence, punishments, and war and whatnot – but that the natural chimpanzee reactivity is why they are terrible employees and you are not.
So, there’s a Paleolithic emotion we don’t actually have anymore, and a case that the violence our world suffers now is not incumbent, the old thing in the world, but our NEW innovation.
Stay and learn, they who have ears to hear, probably meaning neurology to hear.
.
I hadn’t changed topics. I thought the Goodness Paradox made the case that the troublesome emotions are new ones, not the OG primate ones.
But there’s a matter of interpretation, of time scales – whenever this happened, if it began 300,000 years ago when they start counting us as human, I would still say that is “new,” because we are new, and that we should think about our latest modifications as new, the latest, not the OG features: these features changed and we became human, this is our current species, and what changed to make us human is our most recent history, not our genesis.
It’s sort of the point of evolution that there is no genesis.
And if it’s only twelve thousand years ago, then I think it’s REALLY new. Part of my theory is that Allistics have been in the majority, or had the upper hand in this period, for twelve to fifteen thousand years now – and that is a flash in the pan for a species and they have soiled the bed spectacularly in no time, that the Allistic isn’t a viable genetic option.
Sorry, too much?
.
Really, what I replace the “Paleolithic Emotions,” meme with is the Antisocialization we all get in our lives today, we do not have to go cherry picking the deep past for emotions that of course we are going to have if we are treated badly, and we are, this is really what I think.
Sorry about that, it’s the ’tism, everything comes out sideways.
.
Having said that, itâs all part of it, creating this Antisocialization is what I call the new âemotion,â the new emotional manipulation, and I think it became the dominant way of life during what we call the Neolithic Revolutions, and this is not far from what E.O. said, that we are living with something from back then, except itâs crucial in my mind that what it is we are living with is not an old, ânatural,â set of forever emotions, but a newer and more sinister thing than normal animal emotions, a sort of a hack, a system of making ourselves feel bad, of forcing people into their worst emotions.
.
Somebody said Iâm simply taking a pithy soundbite too seriously.
Ah, OK . . .
If it were a one-off, maybe – and maybe it was for him, I can’t say. I don’t build these edifices over a single utterance, though, the whole world agrees with him . . . perhaps literally isn’t the word, is it, uh, mythologically? As a background to what they think about?
Yes, it’s the normal narrative: we had Original Sin, and now we have Paleolithic Emotions, it maps perfectly, so everybody basically believes it – whether the great man really did in his complex thoughts or not.
Trivers said we all speak in single notes and melodies, and E.O. spoke in chords, every word having six meanings, honestly, I know I am no-one to take on E.O. Wilson.
But this expresses a social belief, a common one. That’s what I’m arguing with. The popularity of the meme, not the author.
.
Same as those ones from Voltaire and Chomsky. Ha.
Jeff
June 2nd., 2024
No single Creator made this world. Nothing has an eternal Nature, and no-one needs to be controlled for it. The human world is made by humans, if weâre evil or broken, thatâs on us and us alone, and to a great degree we are those things and it is on us, something weâre doing. Something we are, most of us say, the Nature thing again, but no, Iâm sorry, thatâs off the table, at least it is in my kitchen and thatâs where you are right now, itâs something we do.
.
In evolution, otherwise known as life, what we do and what we are travel together. What you do is what you are, what you do is what you are becoming.
.
What we do is a lot of abuse to control the assumed Nature, and that eternal Nature isnât really there, so whatâs left? A lot of abuse to be what we are, to be what we are becoming, which, too obvious, but saying two plus two is a writerâs job, so: abuse victims and abusers. Itâs on us, and no-one else. And again, always, itâs evolution, this isnât something that happens to some eternal model of human in every life, all this is cumulative. In theory, and surely in an invisible reality, in the potful of water and frogs, every generation in a world of controlling abuse gets more so, more abusive, more abused.
Also, sorry to say, this doesnât happen in the wild, and education wonât do it. Iâm very much a privileged person, I donât know anyone who didnât go to school, but they all believe in the Nature. This happens at the top of our society, in the institutions. It is precisely the institutions of control that are at the centre of it. Who is rioting? The police, right? The peacekeepers, leading the charge for abuse in general.
.
I mean, Law is based in the Natures, and as such is against natural law, meaning evolution. Law makes crime and criminals, and always, life is evolution, so it makes them cumulatively. It is amazing to watch police budgets take over everything, and they cannot imagine that itâs just stupid and misguided. They say: the people are getting worse, we need more money, as though the change happened in their absence, as if they have only been trying their way for a month.
.
The simple logic, police are here, and people are getting worse, thatâs two plus two in evolution, otherwise known as real life, but there is this matter of neurotype. Two plus two isnât simple for everyone.
Jeff
May 7th., 2024
Iâm finished. Iâm done, said it all or said enough for the world for a few centuries anyway. But I will confess, itâs not very clear, the blogâs a mess of divergent thinking and divergent grammar to boot and I personally could never suffer through enough of it to get the point, and I donât expect anyone else to.
Iâve been fantasizing about auditing it for quality and relevance, see which ones were downright embarrassing and would turn you away and harm the cause and so need to be deleted, but honestly that thought centres around only a few entries, and any expansion of the criteria may wipe the hole thing out. Why bother.
Just know this: it was a journey, so the focus . . . evolves, probably from trying to express myself within the parameters of the NT science and psychology I began with to combat spanking, to evo sort of theories about why we spank, and then to neurodiversity based ideas about it, about how spanking pretty much defines and directs the majority neurotype.
It’s been a few years since Iâve boasted, but the kernel of the idea I began with has not changed and it has survived and evolved through all challenges, absorbing or simply refuting all challenges, but this only means that I am corroborating myself, it only means that within my view, I can make it all fit in a way that doesnât offend my neurology. Not to minimize it completely, the whole world of human beings offends my neurology. It wasnât easy finding my own mind. The whole world seemed to fight me.
On a personal level, this has been horribly, fantastically true.
Iâve learned something very recently, so itâs still hot, but . . . yeah.
Back to the blog, what I say here probably has its whole development in the blog somewhere, not that me saying it is a citation, but itâs an attempt to pre-emptively stop you thinking there isnât a whole lot of thought behind this rather short iteration, the puzzle.
Spanking makes for authoritarianism.
No-one gets âbetter,â as in nicer from punitive abuse, all that is just words, and lies to boot. An environment of threat and abuse in childhood changes people, maybe just Allistic people. It sets an epigenetic option for authoritarianism, for violence.
Because evolution is how the world works, not how your stupid Dad said it works, by threats and deterrents. We evolve, we do not avoid.
But they wonât stop, this is the puzzle.
Either they are ânice,â people who believe the words or they are less nice people who believe in the result, the aggression, and call it strength. Neither sort will stop, the last statistic I heard, surely a decade or two old by now, said that eighty-five percent of Americans self reported spanking (doing it to children, not getting spanked. This clarification is necessary on social media). The rise of fascism would seem to suggest that it has not lessened more recently.
It makes them aggressive, spanking, and they wonât stop, because they are aggressive and aggressive is good, when youâve been spanked. It is the most vicious of vicious circles, and it is the puzzle of the age, the one that because it hasnât been solved, we cannot stop the rich from burning the oil, because the authoritarianism of money is to be expected when youâve been spanked, because toxic madness is not something a spanked population can imagine life without. Spanking blots out the real world for the human social world of control, we are all forced to a choice by spanking, believe my mind and the reality I see, or believe Mom and Dad and survive?
Spanking pushes them over the edge into purely social. The violence in the environment sets them up to learn violence and hate, this is adaptation, learn it or fade away. The world is coming to a bad end, and we created an environment of threat and violence . . . weird to say: on purpose. I mean, spanking and cops, this is intentional, right? They certainly own it when they spank, itâs all You will do it My Way. They donât seem to think itâs an accident when they do it.
The puzzle is to make them see it, to stop the spanking and watch their stupid âNatures,â miraculously change for the better, to convince an angry, aggressive creature that life would be better without it, that they themselves need to want to evolve in the other direction and itâs already too late, but like the old saying, the best time is generations ago, but second best is now.
Jeff
April 10th., 2024
There’s a Part Two:
So, there are five blind men, trying to identify an elephant.
Why is this the job of blind men? Well, for the purposes of the story, letâs say this is the whole town, everyone is blind, and hey, why not the whole world? It will still work, as long as you and I, Dear Reader, are still in this world and not in the story. It is a blind world and a blind little town, and these are the scientists among this blind population, these five. Why five? Well the elephant is an unknown, no-one knew which to call and simply called them all, I assume they must all have their own areas of expertise.
These five have lives and do not live together, so when they are called and come to inspect the new thing, they come from all around, and each approaches the thing from a different direction. The nearest and first to arrive encounters the tail of the beast and proposes that someone has hung a rope here but is no longer about to claim or explain it. The next one comes up beside the first, touches the elephantâs leg and says, Rope, what rope, this is a tree, while another meets the animal head on and declares that the town has been invaded by a huge snake.
A fourth scholar upon arrival finds an ear and has a theory, it is a great fan for some reason, Iâm sorry, I only repeat the story, I wasnât there. I donât know how trees or fans just walk into town or suddenly appear â look, itâs not the point, OK?
Anyway, the last of the five appears with some pomp – apparently he was waiting in order to show up last – and broadsides the beast at full walking speed. Embarrassed and rubbing his nose, he bellows, What are you all talking about, itâs a bloody wall!
By now, a crowd has gathered and there is some quiet laughter and chatter going on. The other four examiners double checked and reiterated themselves, Sorry, no, itâs a rope, a fan, a tree, a snake.
Run, you fools! Shouted the one at the front. A snake this thick and standing this tall can surely eat people! But the other four were unmoved, assured of their own perceptions, and honest with himself, that scholar had to admit that the snake had not grabbed him, or demonstrated any aggression and all remained debating the situation, but the latest arrival, Mr. Wall, let us say, turned to address the crowd.
The wall broke my nose! Itâs a hazard! He declared. No-one has been eaten by any snake, and ropes donât break your nose by just hanging, and trees and giant fans donât simply appear out of no-where, someone has built a wall!
He waved off the objections of his peers, still addressing the people hanging about. Are you going to wait until you break your noses too? He waded into the crowd, taking peopleâs hands and having them feel his swollen nose.
Ouch! said some empath, No, we donât want that! What are those other guys thinking? At this, Mr. Wall grew serious. Thatâs a good question, he said, and honestly, I canât explain it. They seem to have taken leave of their senses, donât they? What sort of perversion turns a wall into a snake?
The buzz of the onlookers dropped an octave as well. Was there something wrong about the other scholars? Were they lying? Someone wondered, was this the first time? What other things have these four been telling us about? As these noises increased, the erroneous four melted into the background and made an escape, saying to one another, I may not know from walls, but I know from angry crowds, Iâm out.
It happened that soon after the event that the wall disappeared, along with a great quantity of produce from the stalls along the townâs main street, and so with further study impossible, the wall incident passed into history. Mr. Wall made great hay and fame off of it, he would be the Father of Wallology, while three of the other four saw their reputations suffer and their departmentsâ budgets shrink, and they faded into retirement.
Mr. Snake published a somewhat successful book about the missing produce, which phenomenon happened a few more times, although no-one felt a wall during those events, so no-one paid much attention.
It would be the Age of Walls now, and dissenters would find themselves on the wrong side of it.
Jeff
March 7th., 2024
Itâs not easy hearing about neurotype, hearing about it and that it means you. Iâm sorry. Iâve been trying to bludgeon people with it, I so ought to know better.
Itâs not easy for anybody, is it, and of course, it means everybody.
Itâs not easy for ânormal people,â either.
I think in normal peopleâs normal paradigm, in the world of âHuman Nature,â everyone is all things, at least we all have the potential for all things, like the individual is a molecule of the human element, made of what all of humanity is made of, a fractal sort of idea, as for one is for all, sort of a thing, but the existence of neurodiversity annihilates all that.
Perhaps we are atoms instead, and combine to make only neurotype molecules instead, and humanity is not one element but several, a compound element. From containing the possibilities of all of humanity within oneself to containing only some of them, this can only be a downgrade, a sad bit of learning for us all, but many folks on the divergent side learned it young and have lived with it already. For the Neurotypical, learning it must be comparable to the experience of a late hatching Autistic, what the Hell do you mean I am missing some big pieces and no-one cared to notice?
Except how many are forced to see it, not so many.
The force, ha – the Force – is on their side, and works against their self examination, to their own detriment. To know thyself is critical, but somehow we have evolved in such a way that not to has somehow become even more critical, we are a mystery, wrapped in an enigma, etc., insoluble and so unbeatable or something. There is something about your organizing principles canât be disturbed if you donât know what they are, or something.
Thatâs an intuition, too difficult to express. Donât worry, it wonât be on the test.
But I have been screaming, âYOU are a neurotype too!,â at people online and getting predictable responses, itâs not going great. I need a real plan.
I need a way to soften it, present it as a positive, somehow.
Iâve considered something like, âSpikeâs my friend, âcause heâs so big and strong,â and really, I canât let the idea go, it sort of is the point for me, and thatâs a compliment for them . . . but of course that will be the end of it, Thanks Kid, I know.
Sigh.
Iâm open to suggestions.
Jeff
March 6th., 2024