!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> pegasus horse cake.: it's worse than that, it's physics jim!


it's worse than that, it's physics jim!

yes yes yes laptoppy is connected until the battery runs out in a place (hooray) that smells like cigarrette smoke and you know how i detest hate dislike cigarrette smoke (not so hooray) because it stays in my throat and it chokes me and it goes 'ah here i am, second hand cigarrette smoke, i will now invade your lungs and increase your formerly unexistent cancer risk' while it twirls its moustache and laughs, throwing its cape over its shoulder, with a bold rolling eye.

anyway, 'tis a special occasion.

so here is some stuff i've been making on adobe illustrator






my hair had such a level of saltiness earlier today that when i ran my fingers through it i ended up with iodated sodium dust all over them.

and my butt is bright pink and it hurts.

while i was saltifying myself and burning the derriere, i read a magazine on psychology i'd picked up a couple of days before. after learning i was susceptible yet socially assertive enough (i have had to second-guess certain people's intentions several times in order to remain unscathed from their future emotional blackmail, that's my excuse; and of course a not very heightened outlook on my self-esteem due to very embedded lazy perfectionism, but that aside), i enjoyed reading an article on how men and women differ in their communication. while men historically have been taught not to exteriorise and dissect their feelings, gaining their ‘not knowing how to listen’ fame, women do so, and out loud, inviting the other party to volunteer feedback, gaining the ‘talking too much’ fame. men inform, women express.

um, the premise here is generalisation. i for one cannot stand generalisation, and the word ‘normal’ – since it's based on frequency and frequency is not enough a justification for what ‘normal’ may or may not represent – but i have to admit i am guilty of several of the female communication habits, as i am one, such as not finishing sentences (perceived as a lack of structural development by men, women's intention being the invitation for the listener to participate actively in the exchange), and dividing one conversation into different ramifications jumping back and forth (apparently men consider this chaotic).

i read ‘men see a forest as a whole item, while women see forests as a group of individual trees’ to which i agree on a personal level, as i've always preferred to start off with a concrete example in order to expand upon the point.

however, according to this article i am also guilty of male habits such as remaining silent, having internal monologues, reacting badly if i'm interrupted in the process. we cannot generalise.

the most entertaining aspect of reading this was comparing these two communication models to the couple I know the best: my mom and dad. and they totally answer to them - to the point where my dad sometimes omits verbs and says things in a series of noun beats in order to achieve maximum precision and conciseness. and, in my mom's case, let's say that if she's not talking it's because she's watching tv.

i think the bottom line of the article was to point out that men tend to say ‘i don’t like this’ and women tend to say ‘i feel threatened by this’.


so kiddies i will now catch up on bloggies.


<< Home