Spanking - You know you like it

I was eating some Chinese food when I came across this couple, probably in their 30s. They had a little boy with a Power Ranger action figure. It was one of the new versions, so I couldn't tell you the name.

Anyway, the boy finished eating and was running around, being a typical little kid. The mom kept threatening, "Do you want to go to the restroom? Come on let's go to the restroom so I can give you a spankin'."

This continued the entire time I was there. She never went with him to the restroom, but she did smack him once.

So is spanking a good idea?

I think there's a lot of more effective methods of conditioning, but I know for a parent spanking can be the most appealing. I think there's some things you should keep in mind if you are going to spank your child.

First, don't make empty threats. The kid in the Chinese place kept acting up because he obviously didn't care that his mom was threatening him. If you say, "Do that one more time and I'll spank your ass raw," you better follow up as soon as they grin and see how far they can go past the line you set. That would mean next time in public, if you threaten them, they'll be more willing to comply.

Secondly, don't spank them if they're just being annoying. Spank them for disobedience. Children can't help it that they find gum under the table entertaining to throw at bystanders. Explain how that's wrong and let them know it's a bad thing to do. Then when they get spanked for it you can tell them, "Sorry, but I told you it's not nice to throw used gum at strangers."

Third. Try not to become angry. You'll probably be frustrated by them if you resort to spanking. But realize that spanking is a form of conditioning. You're spanking them to let them know their behavior is bad. You're not spanking them to take out your frustration at said behavoir.

Fourthly, don't be embarassed to disipline your child in public. They'll catch on to your embarassment and use that to taunt you. They know they're safe as long as there are witnesses around.

Of course, it's a great idea to try other techniques. One thing you could try is talking to them. While not all children are capable of understanding what you're saying, they can probably get the general idea. Explain to them their actions and ask them what they think of it. Find out if they realize they're being bad.

Reward them from time to time when they behave unexpectedly. Don't say, "We'll give you ice cream if you take that man's tie out of your mouth." Instead, if they go the whole duration of a public outing without an incident, or if you ask them one time to behave and they do, take them for ice cream afterwards. Then say, "I'm really proud of you guys for behaving while we were at church." If you tell them ahead of time, they'll come to believe that being good is only worth it if there's a promise for reward.

Well, there's my thoughts. Now go ahead and do some spanking if you're into that kind of thing.

Dressing

Here's something worth thinking about. This was on another person's blog:

Looking your best for people you don't even know.

Looking your worst for people you care about the most (around your house)

It's an interesting point. We do dress up when we know strangers will see us. We may not even get dressed all day if only our family will see us. It's interesting in that it sounds like it's backwards. But maybe it's not.

I don't think that it has anything to do with wanting to show respect for strangers. But we want them to like us. Strangers will judge us on how we look, as they have little else to go by.

I think it goes deeper than wanting to be liked. It's about being comfortable. True, pajamas are more comfortable, but they are also more intimate. Not having your hair fixed is showing the "real you" as you are upon waking. Exposing this more intimate side of us allowing us to be vulnerable. If you were in your pajamas, talking to a guy in a suit, who would feel in control?

The idea is a lot to do with trust. We trust those closest to us. We can allow ourselves to be vulnerable around them. And they will love us despite our food-stained attire.

The more dressed up you are, the more protected you are. Nakedness is vulnerability. And the spectrum goes from being naked to being in formal attire. Pajamas are down near being nude when it comes to lack of protection. Formal clothing is complex, and gives layers of psychological protection from strangers.

So even though it seems dressing up for strangers and not for loved ones is the wrong idea, it certainly says a lot to let someone see you in your natural state.

I want an Oscar

If only they had a category for best crush on Natalie Portman.

I've decided this year I've got to become famous. How else can I meet Natalie? I've been wanting to get into the movie industry for a while now, so I'll try to figure out how to do that before this year's over.

Let me know if you've got any advice. I think my plan will be to finish writing something, and find an agent to get that published or made into a movie. At the same time, I'll give acting a shot. Other than Natalie Portman, an Oscar would be a neat thing to have.

Ego - Imaging Software from God

We spend a lot of our lives trying to be ourselves. The problem with that is we are ourselves already. What we're trying to become is the image we want to portray.

No one would admit that they were trying to put up an image. Doing so would be "wrong". That's how counter-culture comes about. People want to show everyone that they don't care what they think about them. If you think about that a little, you'll see the problem. It's mother nature's way of using reverse psychology.

What is a purple mohawak? It's an advertisement that says, "I'm not comforming to your ideas of being normal. I'm a totally unique individual, going against the flow. I don't care what you think about it either."

Another big factor in one's image is religion. What makes religion so appealing isn't that it gives "answers" to the mysteries, but that it gives someone the pedastal to teach these answers. By believing the ultimate truth is on our side, then we become self-righteous. We use religion to reinforce our self image. We want to be right and religion makes us right. It tells us we are right.

This can also happen with people who do a lot of charity work. Often times they've done something in the past that makes people think less of them. Or for some other reason they feel as though people don't like them, or might try to attack their character. So, they set out to strengthen their character. By being a "good" person, you can shield yourself from attack. Do you think Mother Teresa had to put up with people talking smack about her? I'm guessing not. We all make mistakes, and I'm sure she had at some time in her life. But no one can say anything about it. She's immune to character assasination.

These are just examples of how our imaging software works. We're programmed to desire acceptance and understanding and will do whatever it takes.

What's the solution? Do we reprogram ourselves to not desire acceptance and understanding? I don't think so. It may not even be possible. People who say they don't need to be understood or accepted are putting up an image they see as independence. Their greatest weakness would be vulnerability.

How do we stop imaging ourselves then? The first step is to realize what you're doing. When you understand who you're trying to impress and how, you can begin to see what about you isn't true.

After you take down the false image, you have to turn off the Imaging Software. Stop portraying an image. This will probably leave you feeling lost. You have no image, and you still don't know who you are. You'll feel that at least the image gave you a sense of meaning.

But now that you have gotten rid of the image you can begin to discover your true self. Start asking yourself questions like: "What am I passionate about?" "What do I want out of life?" "What makes morality?"

Of course, before you can take that first step you have to want to know yourself. You have to be open to change. Once you start to learn who you truely are, everything you thought you had believed could change. If you say, "I know who I am and what I believe is right, I'll never change it," then you probably don't know who you are, but you've got an image that's become self sufficient. The software is running itself and you'll have a hard time Control, Alt, Deleting it.

Soap Operas, the Hidden Dangers

Besides being TV Trash, a new theory says that Soap Operas could cause health problems. Do you watch Soap Operas? Enjoy them? Get caught up in the drama?

If you answered yes to those questions, then I bet you are overweight and probably have high blood pressure.

But Soap Operas taste so good! Where's the harm?

The health hazard when it comes to Soap Operas is stress. Stress is a terribly dangerous thing. It can wreak havoc on your health, and it also strains your mind. Soap Operas create a world inside your head filled with stress. There is never a peaceful, tranquil moment in a Soap Opera. And by getting caught up in it, it's as if you're having the stress of everyone's character in the show. Meaning you could have on your mind the stress of going through a break up, having an affair, lusting for a forbidden love, hiding a secret and so much more, all in a single week.

People watching Soap Operas can easily become addicted. They feel like they need something interesting going on in their life, and they get it from TV. This could easily lead to TV addiction, which could keep you from doing much physical activities. Sitting around watching TV every chance you get will make it hard to lose weight. And of course, if you're fat, you're going to stress about it. Especially since it's the fat girl on the TV that never gets someone to love her.

If you find yourself in love with Soap Operas and can't turn away, try not to watch them before bedtime, or watch a silly comedy afterwards. Friends is a bad choice as it contains a lot of elements of a Soap Opera in terms of story arcs. Seinfeld or Family Guy, or even The Simpsons would be the best stress relievers. In Seinfeld, there is always closure (with the exception of a few hour long shows in syndication as two episodes). The story of a Seinfeld episode is done in a manner where it's not at all emotionally dramatic, but fully comedic. And no matter what the circumstances, it all wraps up at the end of the show and you leave happy, smiling and laughing. Family Guy and The Simpsons are cartoons, so you can't feel empathy for the characters as being people ("Oh, no. They shot Bumble Bee Man!" isn't as stressful to you as "She doesn't know Armando is cheating on her!"). Their sense of comedy is also pure humor. Family Guy more so. The Simpsons has some emotional draws from time to time.

The key thing here is stress. The chances are you'll stress out in your life sometime, it's best if you try to reserve stress for important things.

How to Make it Work

If you're lucky enough to have somebody you want to keep, this is for you. I'll be imparting some of my knowledge about giving women what they want (and it probably works fine for girls to use on guys as well).

Women want someone they can trust and who understands them. Simple?
Trust is key in a relationship. The hardest part for us to do is trust someone. We are taught not to take candy from strangers. The news makes it seem everyone's out to harm someone else. It takes a lot to give your trust to someone, and doing so is a big gesture in itself. If you want your woman to trust you, you have to trust her. Take her at her word all the time. Always give her the benefit of the doubt.

But what if she's cheating? Lying? Thinking dishonestly? Or something else? You won't win either way. Suppose she's cheating on you. If you believe she is, and ask her, she'll either say yes, which will crush you, or no, which won't satisfy your need to know. The only thing you can do is trust her.

You think that won't work. She'll walk all over you, do whatever she wants behind your back. This is why it needs to be mutual. When you're the one being trusted, it's important you don't abuse that. Even if she never finds out, the fact you lied to her will make you have a problem trusting her. If you could hide something or trick her, then why can't she do the same to you? This kind of thinking will only hurt the relationship. You have to be 100% honest with her and trust that she will be honest as well.

Of course, you might be saying, but if one person is honest and trusts the other, but the other one isn't, then the honest one gets screwed. It's like that game show, Friend or Foe. I'd hope if you're dating someone you'd consider them a Friend and not a Foe. If you don't put in your side of it, then it won't work anyway. So all you can do is push the 'Friend' button and hope you were right about her.

The second key to women is understanding them. We know that they rank up there with existence, the Force and Jello when it comes to understanding, but the truth is it's possible.

Women all have stuff. Their stuff can be anything. It's whatever is going on in their lives, their thoughts, their feelings. And as a man, it's your job to get her to tell you about her stuff and understand.

Men want to fix everything. That is one problem that prevents us from understanding. "Jerry said I had a big nose." A common man would respond with, "Want me to knock him out for you?" or "Here's $1000, go see Dr. Farooq." Trying to fix this won't work, although she'd probably be happy to have you beat someone up for that or give her some money. What she really wants is you to understand. Think about what she feels. Then, tell her. "He really upset you." or "It sounds like you're really hurt by that."

To understand someone, you have to learn to listen. And here's some tips that will help you listen:

1. Don't ask why - Asking why is counterproductive to communication. It's an attacking question. You can't expect to understand or accept her reasoning either.

2. Don't offer solutions - You can't fix emotional problems with a simple solution. You have to sit back and understand and have empathy for the problem at hand. If you start devising a solution, then you'll miss out on what she wants to tell you.

3. Reflect feeling and content - As we talk, we want to know someone's listening. Let your woman know you understand by reflecting back her feelings or the content of what she's saying. Paraphrase what's she's telling you. Refelecting content helps you to make sure you've got all the details. When you're unclear about something, tell her how you interpreted it and see what she says. When you are listening closely, you can pick up on her feelings. Letting her know that you can sense how she feels tells her you do understand. You realize what she's going through and how it's affecting her emotionally. Think about how you (and other people) act when they're mad. They stomp, slam doors, yell. It's all very obvious. What's going on is that they want someone to realize and know they're mad.

Those are just a few of the biggest pointers for understanding women. There's a lot more to knowing how to listen, but I'll post about that later (if there's any interest).

That sums up my advice. If you read this through and try it out, you'll have a great relationship. Look forward to some more great relationship advice from me in the future.

Excerpt from "Fountains of the Abyss"

Here's an excerpt from the book I'm working on. It's current title is Fountains of the Abyss.

**** Begin Excerpt ****

Scorching pain strays through her body. She manages to lift her torso, bringing her face up off the ground. Emily removes a nugget of asphalt from the gash in her right arm. Her legs strain as they lift her up.
As she pats herself off, Miller's car makes a quick u-turn. Emily panics as she notices the tan vehicle approaching. She turns around in an effort to run away, but her legs won't move. The car comes to a stop beside her. Her brain sends a signal to her
body, again telling her to run. She begins to move, stumbling at first, but eventually gathering grace and speed. An incoherent yell comes from the car. Then, it starts following behind her. Emily knows she won't be able to outrun the vehicle, but is intent on trying. She pivots to the left and grabs on to a fence post. Miller stops. He yells at her out his window. The panic combined with the physical pain make it impossible for Emily to comprehend what he's trying to tell her. She lifts herself up, ready to leap over the fence and dart away, but then she stops. Her foot touches the ground. She clears her mind and looks back at Miller in his car. He obviously would have shot her already if he wanted to, or not have rescued her in the first place.

**** End Excerpt ****

Star Wars

It has almost been a year since the Star Wars saga was completed with Episode III. I was extremely impressed with it too. The prequel trilogy had a lot of problems with it, but with Revenge of the Sith, it redeemed itself. George Lucas has always said that these movies should be viewed as one film, that he didn't make six movies, he made one movie. Of course, when the original Star Wars (Episode IV) came out, it seemed as one movie. It had the hero leaving off and blowing up the Death Star. Watching it felt like seeing one good movie. Sure, Darth Vader escaped it in, but lots of movies have the villain escape to leave the possibility of a sequel.

After the success of Star Wars, we got to see the rest of what Lucas had planned. Episodes V and VI both seemed like a whole movie each, but definately seemed best together as one movie being the sequel. It had the hero going off on the journey, and losing. But in Return of the Jedi, true to the title, he returned to win it all. So although Lucas may have intended them to be seen as one movie, they certainly worked as individual movies.

The prequel trilogy changes things up. The first movie can't possibily be viewed as one movie. It has no hero. Anakin is the hero of the entire prequel trilogy (and saga depending on your view), but in Episode I he isn't seen until quite some time into it. Qui-Gon is obviously the Old Man (Mentor) and Obi-Wan seems more like the Sidekick or Shapeshifter (something like Han Solo).

Episode I wasn't complete. It had a happy ending (although that was part of the evil plan), but it didn't complete anything. It wasn't supposed to. The prequel trilogy actually was meant to be viewed as one movie. In Episode I, Anakin leaves his home and crosses thresholds, but doesn't get any further down his journey.

Well, okay. This post doesn't have a point. Maybe (probably not) I'll come back to it and rewrite it to make sense. I do want to say though that I really liked Star Wars. I'm definately looking forward to the 2008 TV series.

Also, my favorite character is Senator, Supreme Chancellor or Emperor Palpatine AKA Darth Sidious. Check out Senator Palpatine's Blog.

Go Google

Wow...Google's amazing. I heard today rumors about a possible PC or Google-brand hardware in the near future. I'd love to have it. Google has aleady been providing great services online and keeping with their motto of "Don't be Evil". It's a truely amazing company. I would give up on Windows for a Google OS and I wish they'd make printers too, so they'd finally work right.

I heard recently about a deal with AOL and Google in the works. I don't know what all this would affect for me, as I don't use AOL, but it's a terrible idea for Google. AOL bes Evil, the opposite of Google's first commandment. AOL is the SPAMMiest of the big Internet companies. It sends out unwanted CDs to everyone several times a year. They also insist on their users using their own web Browser, full of excess junk they want you to see. Google is all about getting rid of that junk. The only thing on Google's search page is your relevant searches, ads labelled to the side and relevant searches from other Categorical sections. However, maybe Google will change AOL and make them behave appropriately. This deal will surely bring more power and potential to AOL and Google and will most likely be good in the long run. I disapprove of them choosing AOL for this though, unless they intend to have a good, long talk with them about how to be a mature, responsible Internet company.

Speaking of Google, there is one critic that I know of that opposes them. Daniel Brandt operates a site called Google-Watch.org which is full of ramblings against Google (their PageRank system, privacy issues, cookies, etc.) It seems that Brand also operates a site called Namebase.org which doesn't rank high on Google's search. It seems this is probably what caused the hatred of Google. But I assure you, his website doesn't deserve a ranking on Google. No one wants to read any of it. His site looks like a piece of crap full of cheesy Paint drawings and subject links such as: Terrorism, Big Business, Assassinations, UFOs, Nazis, Elites, etc. This is obviously a conspiracy nut.

The Nonexistence of the 4th Dimension

I have been looking into theories on 3+ Demensions and have finally come to a conclusion that I feel I can live with for a while. It is my recent belief that there is no 4th dimension. Three dimensions (width [x], length [y] and depth [z]) exist in all of reality, everything that is known and unknown.

There are two ideas or purposes to dimension. The primary one is shape. The idea of demensions was created to describe shape. Every object with mass has three dimensions. Subatomic particles, no matter how small, have properties pertaining to the three dimensions of xyz. A sheet of paper, although it usually representative of a 2D plane, has thickness and therefore, three dimensions. Photons and particle-wave duality may seem to allow for the possibility of one or two dimensions, or none at all. However, if an object has no dimensions, it has no mass and therefore no shape.

The other purpose of 3D is to provide location coordinates. Since everything with mass has an xyz, everything with mass can be a relative xyz distance from anything else with mass. A coordinate system is an idea. It has no mass itself and is defined however the user decides. It is possible then, in the idea of coordinates, to have a point with a value of 0 for one or more dimensions. It is also possible to have a single point or plane imagined onto the coordinate system. It isn't possible for an object with mass to exist within the confines of a single, absolute point. An electron with it's center on 0,0,0 would still, at the same time have parts of it existing in other points.

Because a coordinate system is an idea we use to comprehend locations, it's not real. It only exists when someone is thinking about it. So, the 2nd purpose of dimension isn't significant in knowing the reality. Because it exists as a mathematical idea, however, it can be used to estimate properties of 4th dimensional objects. But those objects are only figments of our imagination.

Some theories state that the 4th dimension would be Time. I've heard some people call color or emotion a 4th dimension. However, they're not. Time could possibly be a property such as color or emotion, but it wouldn't be a dimension. Dimensions are for shapes. Everything with a mass will have a size on its x-axis, y-axis and z-axis. By saying that a crate that is 3' by 4' by 6' exists in the year 2005 doesn't give it a 4th size to include in its dimensions. Instead of trying to label it a 4th dimension, if time exists, it should simply be labeled as time. If you wanted to say that Larry Nugget was standing at N34d12'15"E (x and y) and his nose was at an altitude of 3416.12' (z) and it all happened at 4:22 pm on January 12th 1833, that would be how you say it. We have a coordinate system (idea) for explaining location, use that and attach which ever extra dimensions you want as a side comment to the coordinates. In the end, Larry's nose being at x,y,z at 4:22pm doesn't mean anything without assigning it a meaning.

I guess it seems to me that all the bs about a 4th dimension is just that. It doesn't seem like anything more than a theory (and that's all it will ever be) and even it's use seems to be to make it possible to store more information with 4 digits.