Bunched Panties: "You're Not Gonna Read It, So I Might As Well Say It"

[benorbeen]

<b>IQ Test</b>

From Tickle by Emode ...

Congratulations, Ben!
Your IQ score is ***

This number is the result of a formula based on how many questions you answered correctly on Emode's Ultimate IQ test. Your IQ score is scientifically accurate; to read more about the science behind our IQ test, click here.

During the test, you answered four different types of questions — mathematical, visual-spatial, linguistic and logical. We analyzed how you did on each of those questions which reveals how your brain uniquely works.

We also compared your answers with others who have taken the test, and according to the sorts of questions you got correct, we can tell your Intellectual Type is Visual Mathematician.

This means you are gifted at spotting patterns — both in pictures and in numbers. These talents combined with your overall high intelligence make you good at understanding the big picture, which is why people trust your instincts and turn to you for direction — especially in the workplace. And that's just some of what we know about you from your test results.

I tested drastically higher than in elementary school, and perhaps even much higher than a few years ago.

The only thing I can knowingly credit is that I was better attuned to parallel constructions in sentences. I read them less for meaning and more for structure this time. If you don't know about mixing metaphors, I would guess you'd be more likely to not do as well on the IQ test.

Of course, there was no time limit to this test.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>It Feels Good To Be I!!!</b>

You know, I'm a pretty remarkable person, I really am.

Look at all these problems I've outlined of myself in the last 20 or so entries! What the fuck?? Am I really that bad?? HELL NO. I'm amazing. I don't mean that in some kind of inflated-ego kind of way. I am damn good. I do a damn good job at a lot of the things I do, I aim high, and I want to be remembered. (Kinda why I want to create a legacy for myself...) I feel like an even better version of my old self today. I even posted on the IRC about having mucus in my nose!!

I think I've actually lived with pretty great self-esteem. I mean, not in all areas, as I felt when it came to girls I was pretty unworthy of affection--but that wasn't my whole life. IT FEELS GOOD TO BE ME, DAMMIT!!! And so I hope you feel about yourself, DAMMIT. When you start seeing all those wonderful achievements you've made, all those things that are remarkable to other people in what you've done, You Should Stand Atop A Mountain And Breathe In The Clean Air. Think about it, You've lived X many years doing X many difficult things, NOT SOMEONE ELSE: YOU, and that's worth MORE than a pat on the back. DO NOT EVER, EVER LET ANYONE MAKE YOU FEEL BAD ABOUT YOURSELF FOR BEING WHO YOU ARE OR DOING THINGS AS YOU DO THEM. You don't go out and kill people, do you? I don't think so. You work hard at being the best you are, right? Or you at least want to, right?? Well, you're great, DAMMIT. And starting with that feeling, suddenly the doors open and that light shines on you like, well, I don't know, I don't have a good metaphor, other than I picture myself standing tall, proud, and blinding light shooting out from behind me, making me but a silhouette to you but a POWERFUL silhouette.

I LOVE ME. :inlove:

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Okay, Maybe, But Please, Dear God, Whom I Don't Believe In, NOOO!!</b>

I feel sooo fucking good right now!! But, please, Dear God, Whom I Don't Believe In, please don't make this out to be that I have manic-depressive/bipolar disorder!

Please don't feed me that diagnosis, whose most used treatment is Lithium! I don't want meds!!! I want self-esteem therapy if it's really that much of a problem!!!

I feel good to be I!!!

(I was fed sweet praise about who I am by my father yesterday. I'm noting here why I feel such a spike in my self-esteem.)

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Frank Gondorchin & Benorbeen (Arch Enemies) Enjoy A Game Of Paper-Rock-Scissors With Ross White</b>

<img src="http://www.rosswhite.com/archives/benorbeen1.jpg">

Thanks, Ross. That night will live with me for a long time to come.

Frank Gondorchin is not so much an enemy anymore, by the way.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>"a life without love is not worth living"</b>

Bullcrap. A life without love is still worth living.

Then, you're left with loving yourself.

And when you love yourself, then, poof, look what might happen.

The advice is that you can't love someone until you love yourself. It's not so much a rule (you can love someone without loving yourself) but there is a difference in the quality of love you experience when you're loving someone from an "I love myself" base vs. an "I don't love myself" base.

My brother & his girlfriend: They regard their own selves highly, thus they regard each other highly. They love themselves, and as a result, want what is a healthy kind of love in their lives. For them, being together is not some kind of rescue; for them, it is an added reward for their happiness.

They wouldn't articulate it that way, I don't think. But they've got pudding, and the proof is in the pudding.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>The New Calculus</b>

Given
LS, NLS. (NLS = -LS)

Set
LS¹ «» LS²
LS¹ «» NLS²
NLS¹ «» LS²
NLS¹ «» NLS²

Resultants

• LS¹ «» LS²
  LS¹ perspective. LS¹ seeks LS². Movement balanced as LS¹ maintains while LS² maintains. Interdependence established after establishment of independence. Under elimination of LS², LS¹ maintains relative balance. Converse is true.
  
  
• LS¹ «» NLS²
  LS¹ perspective. LS¹ seeks NLS². Movement imbalanced as LS¹ attempts to maintain as NLS² seeks to spread weight. Interdependence established after establishment of NLS² dependence on LS¹. Under elimination of NLS², LS¹ maintains relative balance. Converse is false.
  
  
• NLS¹ «» LS²
  NLS¹ perspective. NLS¹ seeks LS². Movement imbalanced as NLS¹ attempts to spread weight as LS² seeks to maintain balance. Interdependence established after establishment of NLS¹ dependence on LS². Under elimination of LS², NLS¹ moves to imbalance. Converse is false.
  
  
• NLS¹ «» NLS²
  NLS¹ perspective. NLS¹ seeks NLS². Movement imbalances as NLS¹ attempts to spread weight as NLS² seeks to spread own weight. Interdependence established after establishment of NLS¹ dependence on NLS², and/(or) NLS² dependence on NLS¹. Under elimination of NLS², NLS¹ moves to imbalance, with potential for NLS¹ to maintain relative balance. Converse is indeterminate.

¤ ¤ ¤​

LS¹ «» LS² = HL [¥]
LS¹ «» NLS² = CoL [d¥]
NLS¹ «» LS² = CoL [d¥]
NLS¹ «» NLS² = SCoL [dd¥]

Generally,
HL > CoL > SCoL

WT Syndrome → [colloquial] SCoL; often characterized generationally by positive exponential movement (i.e., dd).

F Constant → [colloquial] d; occurs with presence of at least one NLS.

Bar → [colloquial] Lowest LS level.

Corollary 1: HL characterized by placement of bar.
Corollary 2: "HL Power" expressed by addition of LS values. I.e., LS¹ + LS² = P(HL).

 

[benorbeen]

<b>I Feel Better Deleting This.</b>

 

[benorbeen]

<b>See Above Please. </b>

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Day 1</b>

Confidence is knowing what you're doing will work out, or moreover, will succeed.

Knowing is knowing with confidence.

Because you have a past history of surmounting obstacles, it helps you build your confidence.

It's when I look at the Christmas tree in the window. When I was flattened and depressed, I was seeing that Christmas tree as a lie, an unachievable goal, a paper house. "It never really works." Feelings of hopelessness ushered in after seeing Christmas trees in rich people's windows.

It's different now. A Christmas tree in a window is a celebration. An accomplishment. It's a success, that you feel good about yourself, that you reward yourself, that you complement yourself. It's not a Christmas tree in which you're trying to prove something to other people that you're feeling good; it's an expression of your feeling good.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Hm, Not Groundbreaking, But Supportive</b>

Low self-esteem can ruin a relationship


By PATRICIA DONOVAN
Contributing Editor

Squeezing the toothpaste from the wrong end, sneering at her cat or putting the toilet paper roll on backwards can irk your partner no end, even after decades together.

But new or old relationships, says UB social psychologist Sandra Murray, are far more likely to be ruined by one partner's low self-esteem.

Murray's research into the attitudes and behaviors of married and single couples has found that partners with low self-esteem often sabotage their own relationships. In a sense, they "create" the very situations they fear most.

In a study of married couples, for instance, Murray found that individuals who scored low on measures of self-esteem tended to anticipate—incorrectly—rejection by their spouses and so preempted the spouse by derogating them first. The spouses in turn, registered negative feelings about their partners on the days after they were criticized—referring to them as "needy," "selfish" and "overly dependent."

In another study, Murray presented college students with situations in which their partners acted upset. Students who previously had scored low on measures of self-esteem were much more likely to feel rejected by or hostile toward their distraught mate, even when other factors could be read as the cause of the mate's moodiness.

Murray's research in the Journal of Personal Relationships and the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology warns that low self-esteem may cause a sensitive and insecure individual to read incorrect meanings into ambiguous cues given by their partners. The behavior that follows provokes the very relationship outcomes they want to avoid.

Unfortunately, such problems can be found not only in new relationships, but can extend into those that have continued for many years. Murray found that even after 10 years of marriage, people with low self-esteem tend to think their partners love them less than they really do.

The good news is that Murray also has found that when a person has high self-esteem, he or she idealizes their partner less and feels secure about the spouse's regard, which in turn strengthens their relationship.

A professor in the Department of Psychology, Murray is part of the intimate relationship research consortium. She is the recipient of the American Psychological Association's 2003 Distinguished Scientific Award for Early Career Contribution to Psychology in the area of social psychology.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Yesman</b>

It's not just about saying "yes" to everything. It's not. It's about an improved mindset, so that you are confident, so that you tend to say yes. You tend to think that what is being presented to you is surmountable, and you say yes to it because you <i>can</i> surmount it.

That's different from the inability to say "no." With the confidence of saying yes comes the absense of fear of saying no. When you say no from a say-yes mindset, you do it because you are confident in your answer, that the result of saying no makes it no worse for you or the other person, that you recognize it would be worse for you or the other person to say yes under those circumstances.

*

GRRRRRRREAT rehearsal last night. I am so proud of them. I presented game theory ideas (even blatantly at times) and they responded very well to them. I think they liked the Prisoner's Dilemma manifestations in scenes--they are really funny scenes.

Most of all, they were playing with establishing their wants as early in a scene as they can. We tweaked scenes where deadlocks came up when the players were standing firm in both of their wants, someone's needing to concede to move the scene forward. <b>So suddenly, scenes seems sooooooo easy to understand, I believe for everybody.</b>

Vic said she felt "braver" in her scenework as a result of approaching a scene from wants. They're all BFA actors, most of whom were trained at Otterbein from a "what do I want in this scene" mindset. I had long thought that improv obeyed different rules than acting for some strange reason; today, I'm learning how <u>valuable</u> my acting training is in understanding improv, because it's not really different--improv is like a purer, rougher form of acting.

I believe I have a better "theory" for editing as a result of this rehearsal--why edit, when best, etc. It's not about just editing where the laugh is--it's something else. You Know That, Too.

Those things that I've thought were excellent in improv, they're making a helluva lot more sense to me in light of uncovering game theory.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Note to Self</b>

Right / Problematic
Wrong

It is right to ...

It is problematic when ...

It is wrong to ...

Human Needs vs. Company Needs

Hypothesis: in a draw, preferential to human needs over company needs

As a measure for what's the "best/right" choice by pointing out the wrong. Likely, human needs aren't "wrong."

Ref. Illegal workers want to work. There is nothing wrong with the desire to work. They believe they can seek it in this country, because there are companies who break the law in hiring illegal workers. It is not wrong with their trying to get work; there is something wrong in rewarding them with work.

"The dentist who gives the child a sucker should be punished before the child who eats it."

 

[benorbeen]

<b>All This Talk About Romance</b>

One thing I think is interesting that I learned in reading up on relationship-issues and stuff is what one person wrote: That the "romantic phase" of the relationship (that period of gushy EXCITEMENT! over the other person) ends once one person criticizes the other person. The relationship then moves into another phase (a phase whose name I don't remember).

In that light, several writers (a couple at least, I think) characterized the romantic phase of the relationship as a period when we exalt our partner, choosing to look around those things we might regularly criticize. That non- or reduced criticism is characteristic of that phase.

Now, I'm thinking, criticism of one's partner sounds natural at least some of the time, but I thought it was a really interesting observation. I could see such changes happening in my past relationships (romantic or otherwise) when criticism of the other person led to the end of all those nice, happy, blindly loving feelings. The dynamic of the relationship shifted.

*

It makes me wonder how the romantic phase is perpetuated. I can't think that it's "go blindly along, glancing askance of your lover's faults," but it's probably a different KIND of criticism that you're offering that doesn't interfere with the no-turning-back closure of the romantic phase.

And of course, I go back to a criticism where you love yourself first, which leads to a more accepting outlook on yourself as well as others in general. That maybe that love-yourself-first rooted criticism is what doesn't kills that romance; That low-self-esteem rooted criticism is what can end the romantic phase fast.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Crazy Cool Quotation from Julia Jordan's New Play, <i>Boy</i></b>

[SARA]
"It's only ugly if because you are fixated on a final result."

(She's talking about a Homunculus teratoma. The line is simple and throwaway, but it completely blew me away for some reason.)

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Wow</b>

Wow.

Look how much I'm writing. Wow. There's a lot in me. Wow. This is amazing. Wow.

:As:

Wow.​

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Tat</b>

Incentivize.

What reason to cooperate?

Tit for tat, that's where it's at.

The best strategy for the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma.

It can continue ad infinitum, but it won't when the tat's are a little less than the tits.

 

[benorbeen]

<b>I Guess I'm Now One to Post Song Lyrics</b>

For my later reference:

"Self Esteem" by Offspring

I wrote her off for the tenth time today
And practiced all the things I would say
But she came over
I lost my nerve
I took her back and made her dessert
Now I know I'm being used
That's okay man cause I like the abuse
I know she's playing with me
That's okay cause I've got no self esteem

oh yeah, yeah, yeah

We make plans to go out at night
I wait till 2 then I turn out the light
All this rejection's got me so low
If she keeps it up I just might tell her so

When she's saying that she wants only me
Then I wonder why she sleeps with my friends
When she's saying that I'm like a disease
Then I wonder how much more I can spend
Well I guess I should stick up for myself
But I really think it's better this way
The more you suffer
The more it shows you really care; Right? Yeah!

Now I'll relate this little bit
That happens more than I'd like to admit
Late at night she knocks on my door
Drunk again and looking to score
Now I know I should say no
But that's kind of hard when she's ready to go
I may be dumb but I'm not a dweeb
I'm just a sucker with no self esteem

oh yeah, yeah, yeah

When she's saying that she wants only me
Then I wonder why she sleeps with my friends
When she's saying that I'm like a disease
Then I wonder how much more I can spend
Well I guess I should stick up for myself
But I really think it's better this way
The more you suffer
The more it shows you really care; Right? Yeah

 

[benorbeen]

<b>A Prisoner's Dilemma That Is Succeeding (So Far)</b>

The "solution" to a Prisoner's Dilemma game is compromise in the face of defection by either player. What is going on between Benorbeen and The Post Insulters on the IRC is a Prisoner's Dilemma: Benorbeen wants to post freely on the IRC, The Post Insulters want to limit his posting. Benorbeen doesn't respond to insults, The Post Insulters don't respond to excessive posting.

If Benorbeen & The Post Insulters were to cooperate, each would have to agree to the following terms:

--Benorbeen posts less frequently
--The Post Insulters do not insult Benorbeen

If either party defects, the best strategy in playing a Prisoner's Dilemma is the Tit for Tat strategy, implemented by Anatol Rapaport in the Great Computer Tournament of (what?) the 1980s.

Basically, if you defect, the next move I make, I defect. If you concede, the next move, I concede. The "solution" that best satisfies both parties in the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma game is compromise, which is akin to consecutive concessions over the course of turns.

Gaddafi Hails U.S. Ties, Hints at Secret Cooperation
Mon Jan 26, 7:17 AM ET

ROME (Reuters) - Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi welcomed a thaw in ties with the United States in an interview published Monday and suggested their secret services were already working together against Islamic militants.

"Cooperation between Libya and the United States is good," Gaddafi told Italian daily la Repubblica Monday, a day after a delegation of U.S. lawmakers landed in Tripoli to talk about restoring ties and ending economic sanctions.

The Libyan government announced last month that it was abandoning programs to develop weapons of mass destruction, opening the way for better relations with the West.

Libya has also moved to resolve long-standing disputes over the bombing of a U.S. airliner over Scotland in 1988 and a French plane over Niger in 1989.

In the interview, Gaddafi hinted there could have been behind-the-scenes cooperation even before that against Islamic militants, including supporters of Afghanistan's ousted Taliban rulers.

"There are groups that are working against all of us ... it's possible that there has been cooperation between secret services, in particular regarding Libyan citizens who fought in Afghanistan (with the Taliban)," he said.

The U.S. delegation arrived on a U.S. Navy plane Sunday and its leader said it was the first U.S. military aircraft to land in Tripoli since Gaddafi overthrew the Libyan monarchy in 1969.

Gaddafi's gestures to the West have prompted some speculation that Libya could improve ties with its old foe Israel.

But the Libyan leader remained critical of the Jewish state in the interview, accusing it of possessing weapons of mass destruction and flooding Arab countries with drugs.

"I would say that there is a terrorism of individuals and a state terrorism; both need to be stopped. If someone destroys an inhabited building with an air-launched missile you cannot say that it is not terrorism," he said.

"The Israelis are throwing hashish along the Egyptian coast, in Syria and in North Africa. Maybe even the hashish that arrives in Libya comes from Israel. In fact, we're certain," Gaddafi said.

"I hope that on this point, the international community isn't deaf and blind as it has been on the point of Israeli weapons of mass destruction. It has hundreds of atomic (war) heads and a large chemical and biological arsenal."

Israel is believed to have about 200 nuclear warheads. The Jewish state does not discuss the issue, a policy it calls "strategic ambiguity."

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Double Concession</b>

I'm trying to figure out if compromise only occurs in the face of double concession, or if what people perceive as compromise is one person conceding and the other's standing firm.

I don't deem that compromise, but instead I deem that "polarity."

 

[benorbeen]

<b>Apologies</b>

Sometimes a concession can be so little as having a sentiment and the ability to communicate. I wonder how mutes apologize.

*

Apologies for the lame web design of earlier this month; I have overhauled Ben Hauck online for the second time this month!

http://www.benhauck.com