So you’re a – ? Perhaps, but I don’t look like one, which is incredibly important. You see it allows me to actually think those things, rather than those attitudes being a performance; a mating dance for some reproductive niche.
I mean, this is almost the hallmark of consumer ideology; an indicator of ideology itself. Because no one has ever sold an idea, they’ve only sold a brand. That includes a symbol, a manner, and something always… subtly psycho-sexual. Even if it’s only auto-erotic, maybe that’s uniquely human—it doesn’t really matter, but it sets one up for good humor and that’s really the only decent guide for one’s own thoughts. …or at the very least, saying that sounds very sexy.
This is something I do again and again, I think it’s a wonderfully subversive way to teach and perhaps the only way to teach. …listen to that sexy rhetoric again. But truly, subversion is absolutely necessary when illustrating a point because everyone already knows everything. Of course it’s not the only way, but the confidence of categorical speech oozes with what’s already been mentioned. The other method is creeping normalization, you know—boiling the frog slowly. Slowly pertubate the system. This process should take longer. Either way or anyway, the task is too trick, not to inform. Real knowledge comes from trickery. Fool the omniscient!
What about asexuals? Oh I don’t take them seriously, I suspect it’s often this autoeroticism, but I wouldn’t take narcissists and the neurologically anomalous seriously.
One thing I find really jarring—is the rhetorical arrogance of most people. The presentation of obvious answers to deep questions as final conclusions, I mean typically they’re just obviously wrong, but the lack of self examination collocated with such a presentation is disturbing. It might simply be the imitation of our elders. Listening to the demagoguery of American politics creates such presumption.
Featured Image: Bubble Chamber