#also the thought of Ratio as a owl person thing trying to figure out what's going on in the Construct and arguing with the Narrator

[aquillwieldingmagpie]

I don't know WHY, but for some reason I've had a vision of a Golden Ratio Slay the Princess AU.

I genuinely don't know why, maybe it's because of Ratio's owl motif and one of 2.1 quests being named A Cat Among Pigeons (in reference to Agatha Christie and possibly Aventurine's role) and then later owning three black cakecats even if he's mostly associated with peacocks? Maybe it's because I somehow associate Aventurine's many masks and personas we see over the time we know him with the Shifting Mound's many perspectives and how both her and him are so confident their respective foil won't kill or betray them at the end of everything (and are even fine with it if it does happen), how both the Princess and Aventurine always, always fight for freedom and are denied it until the very end of their story when they finally are granted a true escape through their own efforts and an outside force be it through being show the way or death? How they're both connected to a being so much larger than them but have no say over it (the Princess being seen as only a part/perspective of the Shifting Mound even if she can be found at her heart, Aventurine was blessed by Gaiathra Triclops and ultimately none of that did them any good).

Or maybe it's because I can practically hear this line from the Princess coming out of Aventurine's mouth to Ratio the more close he is to knowing who the real Aventurine is after I woke up in a cold sweat from a nap to write this out:

"Have you figured out what you want to do yet, or are you going to keep trying to find a center that doesn't exist?"

(The Princess saying this about herself and how she's the heart of the Shifting Mound and hasn't really been herself or stopped playing a role through the entirety of the game, but in this context Aventurine saying that there is no 'Kakavasha' or 'No.35' or even 'Aventurine' anymore, just the many masks he wears even though he admits to himself he hasn't changed)

I have no idea if this is anything though or if it would fit their characters at all though. Maybe it's just a silly vision I'll write out one day, maybe not.

[tangled-the-series-forever]

Rapunzel and the Lost Lagoon

As soon as I heard about this book, I put it on my birthday wishlist. But alas, my birthday had come and gone. No Lost Lagoon. Apparently my mom didn’t see it on the wishlist, so that’s why. Flash forward to Christmas Day and I held the book in my hands, which were trembling with excitement. Not really, but you get the idea. I had been waiting to devour this book for months on end and I did. So without further ado, I will present to you this handy-dandy post that encapsulates my thoughts on Lost Lagoon before, during, and after reading. I thought it would be fun to record my expectations and compare them to what I discovered. If you’ve read Lost Lagoon, what did you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts! ❤️

Before Reading

honestly, I’m not quite sure what to expect. All I know is that there’s a lot of moments between Raps and Cass and I am ready for them!

maybe it explains how Cass came to be Raps’ lady-in-waiting? (I hope so because I’ve always wondered this...)

I think I’ll like the book as a whole (I’m hoping I’ll love it)

I’m guessing that it is cute, funny, serious, and adventurous all in one

maybe we’ll learn more about Cass?

will Raps tell Cass about her life in the tower?

what will be the ratio of lighthearted to serious moments? Am I more likely to laugh or cry? Probably both 😅😂😂

this book’s design is absolutely gorgeous! 😍😍😍 I literally just stared at it for a while beginning to read it

During Reading

Rapunzel’s hair hasn’t grown back yet? Oh, it’s her first week in Corona. Okay...

“Something was missing. I was hoping painting would help me find whatever that was, or at least help me end the afternoon on a happy note.” (is this relatable or what? I know not to chase after the elusive beast referred to as happiness, but I do often strive to end the day on a good note because I feel like Satan wins if I don’t)

Friedborg is Arianna’s lady-in-waiting? That makes more sense now. I always feel bad not knowing much about her or her background. I hope she makes some appearances in the book (no sooner did I type this than I look down and skim the scene where she teaches Raps how to sit. Crazy, right?)

Eugene referring to Rapunzel as “my girl” (so sweet 🥰)

“Eugene’s warm brown eyes and mischievous smile are irresistible from any angle” (she’s head over heels, ya’ll 😂💕😂)

first look at Cass 🥰 That’s my girl! Not only does she want to be part of the guard, but she wants to succeed her father as Captain! Go after your dreams, girl! I support you ❤️

“I’d rather shovel sheep dung than mend clothes and gossip.” Mood 😂😂

she recently discovered a hidden spot by using maps of an ancient underground tunnel system? How cool!

okay, but Cass’ animosity towards Raps is fair. And the fact that she refers to her as “that girl”? Priceless

names of nearby nations? Like, yes please!

the irony of Cass piquing Raps’ interest in her by leaving as soon as she can after throwing the shot put 😅😂😂

Cass worrying she got herself in trouble by practicing shot put. Poor thing!

the angst Cass feels towards her dad because he wants her to be a lady-in-waiting when she clearly doesn’t... so relatable (it’s tough when a parent’s expectations and our own dreams/desires don’t match)

I didn’t realize Cass created the maps herself! She’s so determined to prove herself to her dad, it hurts 😭😭

I wonder if the pools in Yultadore are what make up the lost lagoon...

“Her enthusiasm was so shiny and bright I had to squint” (I totally understand this)

pretty boy Eugene and his quips 😂😂

Cass trying to keep her distance from Raps by calling her “Princess” and firmly saying “Goodbye” before shutting and locking the door behind her

So that’s how Cass and Eugene met... okay, cool. Nothing too crazy or weird. I don’t know what I expected but it’s nice to know how their battle of wits began

I’m noticing a pattern in the words used to describe Cass: knowledgeable, brave, etc. I think that’s cool because I feel like her pessimism gets a lot more attention in the series. It’s nice to acknowledge her other qualities as well.

Arianna chose Cass to be Raps’ lady-in-waiting. I always wondered how she got the position. I’m loving how many little things this book is explaining 🥰

Also, just noticed the bird illustrations on the page of every new chapter. I wonder if there’s a pattern...

OWL!!! 😍😍 he literally “senses her distress”. I wish we got to hear about how they met

I wanted to cry for Cass. Poor thing just wants to follow her dreams. I like the way the finality of the decision was described. It’s so tragic 💔

“When Cassandra saw him [Eugene], her face clouded over like a stormy afternoon” 😂😂 I love how Cass doesn’t try to hide her feelings about people. It’s true that she keeps personal things close to her chest, but not when it comes to what she thinks of others. Honesty is the best policy, right?

I love how Cass continuously prompts Raps to keep reading the poem. She’s like, “Yeah, yeah, just get to the good stuff” 😂

about that poem... maybe it’s from Herz Der Sonne’s perspective. Could the “truth sealed in precious stones” be a reference to Zhan Tiri’s disciples and how they were trapped within stones? And what about the three gems? What’s the emerald tapestry supposed to be? Does it reference Saporia? I HAVE TOO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

“A few times I thought I heard some rustling behind me, but I kept going” (me: yeah, Raps is definitely following her) 😂

me when I realize the “emerald tapestry” is grass: 🙃

why is Cass so fearful around water? Did someone try to drown her? someone please tell me who is responsible so I can PUNCH THEM IN THE FACE 😅🤣

painfully ironic how Rapunzel can swim despite being locked in a tower all her life and Cass can’t

Raps nonchalantly offering to teach Cass how to swim just warms my heart 🥰❤️

okay, so Cass is responsible for her fear of water. That’s almost worse because it invites shame and self-hatred, which makes it more difficult to push against that fear or overcome it 😔

the importance of Raps agreeing to help Cass even after realizing she doesn’t want to be her lady-in-waiting is HUGE. This is something I feel like should have happened throughout Season 1 but never did (Raps supporting Cass and trusting that she has a good reason for things even if she doesn’t understand)

“But now I have to teach you which fork to eat your waffles with and stuff” 😂

the first time they call each other Cass and Raps 🥰😍🥰😍

woah, I didn’t expect there to be a time jump. I should have known because I kept wondering why they would depict Rapunzel with her blonde hair on the cover if this takes place before it comes back. Anyways...

I forgot to take notes as I read the majority of part 2. I’m currently a chapter or two away from part 3 and all I have to say is that something bad is about to happen. I can feel it. Dahlia’s definitely shady and so is Marco. I suspected Marie earlier but now I’m not sure. She wasn’t obvious until she was but now she’s not again so maybe she is guilty after all? Either way, Raps is making dumb decisions and I’m over here yelling at her to get her life together before she gets killed or kidnapped (whichever comes first, I guess) 😅🙃

Cass is absolutely roasting Rapunzel and I am here for it! Don’t mind me just munching away on my popcorn over here 🍿

Cass said she’s finally gonna leave Corona so I bet Raps will fess up and tell her that Dahlia’s been helping her with the painting for Cass so Cass will let her guard down and think Dahlia’s okay after all. But... she won’t be and they’re gonna realize she was the bad guy after all 😎

didn’t think Cass would get attacked 😅 also, the fact that she is highly skilled and powerful yet trips and twists her ankle is such a mood. Like, that’s literally me in a nutshell. She is beauty, she is grace, and she falls flat on her face 🤣🤣 while I’m here, I’m guessing Marco is her attacker because he probably has a rough voice

Okay, so I guess Dahlia really is innocent then... idk, I still think she could be up to something

I WAS RIGHT!

Marco’s the bad guy and things just escalated quickly cause now he’s got a knife against Cass’ throat 😳😬😵

so Dahlia’s innocent after all... I thought she or Marie might be working with Marco but I guess not (kinda disappointed to be honest)

okay so this Dahlia chick is exasperatingly hilarious 😂😂 she legit took part of Raps’ bookcase to use for an art piece. Like, who does that?

“Pascal shook his head, totally fed up” me too bud, me too 🤣

After Reading

so I did get to see how Cass and Raps first met (also how she first met Eugene as well)

I like how they combined their talents and passions at the end to create the map painting

There were a bunch of lines that made me laugh, although there were just as many that hit me like a knife to the chest (pretty much anything angsty from Cass’ POV) so I like how it made me feel all the feels (I felt like an investigator trying to figure out who the bad guy was and that was a blast 😆)

overall it was pretty good. I did feel like the characters were off (Arianna seemed like she swapped personalities with Frederick at times and Eugene apologized for joking Cass- as if!), but other than that I enjoyed it. There were a bunch of new characters being introduced so it was somewhat hard to tell who was bad and who wasn’t but I guessed correctly in the end. I was hoping there would be more than one bad guy but oh well.

I’m glad I read it because now I know a few extra things about Corona and its surrounding countries (plus I can finally read through all the Lost Lagoon related tumblr posts I saved for later... I was waiting until I read the book and here I am!)

If anyone needs me, I’ll be going through LL tumblr posts. I should definitely be sleeping but that’s not important 😅😂😂

[dianamjackson]

How To Achieve World Peace (2020)

I have figured out a few things that explain common phenomena in society but are routinely overlooked.

I can explain why conservatives and liberals have always existed, and why conservatives are often in power. I can explain ‘black sheep’ of families and why almost everyone has a ‘weird aunty’ or a ‘weird uncle.’ I can explain why artists are so often depressed, so creative and so misunderstood. I can explain conformity and non-conformity. I can explain Michael Jackson’s attraction to shiny things, and everything else about him.

The thing to remember is that we are animals like all the others, and that our evolutionary history shaped us — not culture. People who think culture is stronger hold that individuals choose their preferences in life, which is false. People choose the things they do because they’re programmed that way by evolution, and it is not one size fits all.

There are two main sorts of humans on the earth: family types (making up at least 80% of the population) and leaders (making up the rest).

Family types evolved to survive, raise families and do exactly what their parents did. For this reason they are conservative, incurious (because any new thing is a potential threat to existing conditions), blinkered and have a practical and deductive intelligence rather than a synthetic and inductive one. Leaders are explorers — their education never ends. Their permanent curiosity ensures they are forever exploring, making new connections and forming new hypotheses.

Without this neat ~80/20 balance, human society would not progress. Without the leaders, no new inventions would be created and we’d all still be living in caves. Without family types, nothing could be instantiated and there would be anarchy. Nature or God or whatever is responsible for the order we see in the universe worked this ideal ratio out so that beings could develop and differentiate and proliferate — basically, to make manifest the creativity of the universe.

I remember a few years ago reading Satoshi Kanazawa’s book The Intelligence Paradox, wherein he describes the traits of people with above-average intelligence: they are usually night owls, are less likely to marry and have kids, enjoy experimenting with drugs, are highly curious and creative. I think he was fired from Psychology Today for stating his findings. Ah, political correctness getting in the way of science, again.

Growing up I noticed a pattern in every family I encountered: the parents were normal enough (after all, they were parents), one child was robust and similar to the parents, and the other was a highly sensitive, interesting and curious type. If there were more than two children, there were more robust types than sensitive types.

Growing up I had a hell of a time in my family. I loved staying up late reading, writing and playing music. I loved the night so much that I covered my windows during the day, which is something Jimi Hendrix also did. My parents were dismayed and couldn’t understand why I was so different to them. I also liked going out for days, exploring and experimenting. I was, of course, extremely artistic from the beginning. I understood concepts at school very quickly, and got in trouble for breaking the rules and prioritising my own ideals over that of my superiors.

All these behaviours label children, and the adults they become, ‘troublemakers’ and rebels. “Why can’t they just behave?” parents and teachers lament. Well, because evolution programmed them that way. But back then I would’ve utilised a far shorter answer.

Leader types, being highly sensitive, experience the discord of growing up in families of followers very intensely and in far higher resolution. If a father is strict and domineering, the sensitive child will feel he is ruled by a tyrant. Off-handed criticisms will be stab wounds that are nursed for years and years. Their deep processing will have them mulling and stewing over the slightest things that followers forget in the very next moment.

Thousands of years ago, human tribes had to hunt animals, gather foods, build shelters, live in the shelters and raise families. Distinct human types evolved to carry out these different tasks.

Leaders are the hunting and exploring type. They were the ones who went out, probably at night, to look for food. To be good at this, they had to be highly sensitive so they could hear every noise, smell every smell, feel the vaguest touch on their skin and see the slightest movement. They had to be brave and bold to explore scary places. They had to be graceful and silent as cats to sneak up on prey, but aggressive enough to actually kill. They had to have loud, developed voices in order to communicate with other members of the hunting party. They had to be confident of their own opinion and communicate it effectively to others in order to lead.

They also had to be able to imitate other animals they encountered, to seem less threatening. They also had to be ingratiating in order to win the trust of people they only just met — and they would have met many people on their travels. They had to be highly adaptable to quickly get used to ever-changing environments. They had to be physically robust and agile to withstand the rigours of their itinerant hunting life. They developed the classic ‘rolling stone’ personality — Jimi couldn’t stand being in the same place for three months, let alone years. They also needed great and detailed memories, to remember where they’d been.

With their keen vision they would spot anomalous objects in the environment — shiny things might indicate water, and colourful things (especially red and yellow) would indicate food. Look at the colours and shiny things Michael wears and is attracted to. Watching him shopping is literally watching a leader type hunting in the forest thousands of years ago.

Their sensitivity is responsible for their artistry. As I read somewhere (possibly in Elaine Aron’s book The Highly Sensitive Person), not all highly sensitive people are geniuses, but all geniuses are highly sensitive. Charles Darwin lined his room with cork to keep the noise out. Jimi, as mentioned, covered his windows with black fabric. All this is to minimise stimulation. Because highly sensitive people take in so much more information from their environment, and process it so much more deeply, they need to restrict it only to what is most important to them.

Being a night owl, as Kanazawa found in his research, was related to higher intelligence. Much hunting probably occurred at night, when the animals were about, or it was easier to travel without being seen. The peace and stillness of the night also minimises stimulation for highly sensitive leader types. Intelligence itself is required to make connections between disparate phenomena, entertain several possible explanations, and synthesise information to decide on a verdict and course of action. The activity of hunting would have honed the intelligence of leader types. Any kind of physical bodily movement and coordination increases brain power — dancing for example. Moving the body in space. I relate this to moving ideas around in one’s head. This is how I did philosophy at university: I literally saw concepts as interacting forms in my mind. Einstein also thought in visual-spatial terms.

Something fascinating about stimulation is that leader types seem to become rapidly overwhelmed by experiences that family types consider quite routine and harmless, but at the same time, they crave intense stimulation. Paradoxical personalities, innit? Clearly, not all stimulation is created equal: a normal day in an office as an employee would be intense and overwhelming for a leader, but then they go out at night, attracted by the bright lights and shiny things of the city, loud music and the stage, and crowds.

A hypothesis of mine is that leader types are born with ‘happy’ neurotransmitter deficits. The strong correlation of substance use and abuse with artists, I think, is related to this deficit. In general, almost everything that makes us feel good — no matter what type of animal you are — does so because it fulfils some evolutionary prerogative. Leader types evolved to be sad — is what I’m saying. They are naturally sad. Therefore, they are forced to do things of a specific kind to alleviate that sadness. Michael is really good at being sad, but he’s also really good at alleviating that sadness. Drugs, alcohol, excitement, driving fast, athletics, dancing, bright colours, shiny things, movement, strong sunlight, making people feel and do things, eating certain foods, exploring, romance, helping and educating people, learning, discovering, conquering, mystery — all of these things alleviate the natural depression of the leader type. Fasting, too. What could more blatantly inspire a person to go out and hunt, besides hunger? Both Michael and myself had anorexia, but his was more extreme perhaps because he was more sensitive or his upbringing was more damaging, and he was constantly in the spotlight. But apart from the self-soothing reason, and the aesthetic reason (wanting a “dancer’s body”), I think we literally like to be hungry, as it were. I do believe he said, in his delightful hyperbole: “I hate food.” It keeps us searching. Anything that inspires a leader type to go out and be a leader will feel good, because that’s what nature wants us to do.

Mystery is integral for the leader type. It’s one of the main motivators of action and a guarantee of happiness and flourishing. I finally understand the propensity for this type to entertain idealistic romances and muses. Try making a person give up something that guarantees them happiness! As C. S. Lewis said so well “Desiring desire is the fullest possession we can know.” I finally understand this. What I want is to be in a state of desire, because it’s animating, life-giving, exciting. Why else would I love improvising so much? I love the mystery of not knowing what will come out of my guitar, what I will sing, or what dance moves I will come up with. I love mystery so much that all my essays are pretty much streams of consciousness.

Everything is on a spectrum, including family type/leader proclivity, and gender too. Effeminate men prefer masculine women; masculine men prefer feminine women. It’s all about balancing genetics to bring about the best complementarity. Who you’re attracted to is not a choice. Those with feminine hips are attracted to masculine hips; those with deep-set eyes are attracted to protuberant eyes; square-jaws are attracted to heart-shaped jaws; pinched-in cheeks are attracted to smoother, convex cheekbones. You can set your watch by this stuff.

Leader types also tend to be gender-indeterminate, or “in the middle” with respect to the male-female spectrum. This gives them the best of both worlds — e.g. deep empathy and nurture from the female side, and single-minded determination and action from the male. I do not think this is a degeneracy. Rather, in my view it is actually a requirement for leader types. To be too male or too female would be a hindrance for a leader.

In politics, there will always be conservatives and liberals, and more conservatives than liberals, because these represent the two primary types of humans, and their ratio, on earth.

The way to achieve world peace is to acknowledge the two broad types. Both are necessary for the survival and continuation of the human species. Conflict can seed change, but oftentimes we could do with a little less conflict and a little more understanding. Understanding of the millennia-old biology of our species that is — not politically correct ‘tolerance’. We need to understand things instead of merely tolerating them.

But the sobering reality is that family types can never fully understand leaders, and leaders can never fully understand family types. Each has a very different evolutionary prerogative that is very deeply ingrained. For one to understand the other, the one needs to literally inhabit the physical body of the other — which is currently impossible. Type ‘goes all the way down’ — the nervous system is different, the brain is different, the emotions are different, the values are different — everything is different.

This is why ‘black sheep’ — a derogatory term that betrays a lack of understanding on the part of the family types (but it is after all in their nature to demonise difference because it is threatening) — get along better with friends, aunties and uncles and other leaders unrelated to them instead of their own families. And it’s interesting that they’re called ‘black’: I have noticed highly sensitive leader types do often wear black, and I think this is to minimise stimulation. It’s one less item for them to process.

This is why certain kids act out at school, and why every person I admire from Debussy to Miles Davis to Isadora Duncan to Walt Disney quit the schools they were at. This is why Michael left the Jacksons and struck out on his own. This is why Zappa stayed up all night drinking coffee making the music he wanted to hear regardless of what other people thought about it.

This is also why the majority of people — the followers — shun, disbelieve and are afraid of leader types. The reason J. K. Rowling had to pitch her book to 200 publishers was because she saw the value of her work, but the publishers — who aren’t leaders — could not. The more innovative a thing, the less followers can comprehend its value. Followers are biologically programmed to play it safe and not take risks. This is infuriating for leaders, but the solution is not anger, but rather perseverance. Think of J. K. being turned away from the 199th publisher. Perseverance. Bang on long enough about something and family types will eventually stop feeling threatened because now you’re part of the furniture.

Another paradoxical thing about family types feeling threatened by leaders is that leaders are, in almost every instance, seeking to make the world a better place with their works. Think of Tesla. Leaders need family types — the two are in symbiosis — so it is definitely not in a leader’s interests to harm their followers. They are shepherds, not wolves. Empathy for their pack is high, because a leader who doesn’t care for their flock will not be followed for long. The extremely high degree of similarity between myself and Michael can be, to a great extent, explained by the fact that we are of the same human type (and probably share some genetics too). He has all the characteristic leader type qualities: he’s highly sensitive, an artist and a musician, he’s obsessed with the way people and animals move and is very curious. He loves bright colours and shiny things, which are food. I believe he said he loved Disney films so much “I could just eat (them)!” (I told a friend once that his photographs made me hungry; he looked at me like I was insane.) And of course the beautiful — Michael loves beauty — he goes weak in its presence. If there’s something he doesn’t understand, he’s fascinated by it and will obsess over it. He has a highly developed somatic-neuronal ability (that’s my term; I don’t know the correct neurological term), which is why his movements are so fluid and why he can imitate others so easily. He’s both male and female, has a great strong voice, resists authority, is ingratiating and immediately loveable, likes climbing trees and running around, staunchly believes in his own vision and he made looking after his ‘tribe’ the central mission of his life. He owned thousands of books and was constantly reading, usually by himself. All Michael’s searching made him very knowledgeable, of course. He liked to associate with fellow talented and driven people, from whom he gathered even more leadership advice. Michael’s not messing around — the advice he gives you is the advice he’s given himself. He experiments on himself. He’s a leader — a real leader — so he wants to help. One day I was dancing at home and came up with a certain move. Two weeks later, I happened to be watching a video of Mike’s and saw him do the exact same move. I couldn’t believe it. At the time I came up with it, I had no memory of having seen him do any such move. I was dancing in the mirror, and happened to trace the outline of my thigh with a finger — it was totally spontaneous and improvised. I liked that I was drawing and dancing at the same time — I do draw and dance, so it was exciting for me to do them simultaneously. In his video he was dancing to Dangerous, and he did that move. I thought “So now he’s copying me?!” This kind of thing happens often, and not just in dancing. For example, I’ll have some opinion about something, then later hear that he has the same opinion about that thing. Or I’ll happen to think of something I did when I was a lot younger, and it turns out he did the exact same thing. Then there’s the Star Wars thing, the one glove thing, the cape thing, the cutting the front of our shirts thing, the liking the same colours thing, the gum and TicTac thing, the similar music taste and compositional style thing, the sitting down with one leg or arm stretched out thing, the liking the exact same part of the flight attendant demonstration thing... We even have the same taste in women. Type, type, type. Once you know someone’s type, you can pretty much get out your checklist and starting ticking things off. Although, I don’t at this point know where type ends and genetics begin, because a lot of these similarities must owe to genetics, not type. I’ll work on this.

Being childlike is, I am positing, an integral part of the leader-hunter-HSP type. Mike and I both retained our childlike attitude to the world. For me, I distinctly remember the day I made the decision to never grow up. I was 14, on the basketball courts in junior high school near the end of the day. I thought “It’s just so much fun being a kid, I’m not going to grow up. Why should I?” It was also around that time that I decided what my life’s goal would be, having just read Freud: to be myself. I didn’t want to be a fireman or a lawyer or a teacher — I wanted to be myself, my truest self. Even back then, I knew this was a worthy goal, and I knew that it would be difficult.

Mike famously identified with Peter Pan, and passionately championed a childlike view of the world. He often claimed this was because he was denied a childhood, but I think there’s more at work here than that fact alone. Even if he had had a more normal childhood, he’d still probably have remained pretty childlike, because that’s an integral characteristic of the leader type. Being childlike — being open, innocent, relentlessly curious, able to withhold judgement, and trusting — is essential to being a leader. If leaders weren’t open to new information (i.e. adaptable), etc — they wouldn’t be effective leaders. If a leader didn’t trust his advisors, he couldn’t get anything done. Suspicion is poison.

It’s known that Mike was trusting. He advised his friend Brett Ratner that one of the big lessons he learned was “not to trust everybody in the industry; there are a lot of sharks.” But a person who is naturally trusting has a hard time trying to become the opposite, let me tell you. To be trusting is beautiful; when a trusting person is betrayed, it is not they who have erred.

It has fascinated me over my lifetime to observe the way sexual desire can be completely decoupled from child-rearing. Leader types definitely have sexual desire: just think of Jimi. Mike too, Madonna, Greta Garbo, Picasso. With men it’s fairly straight-forward, but I always wondered how female leaders could get away with it, seeing as they’d be having so many children but no desire to look after them — clearly a less-than-ideal situation. Maintaining a pregnancy and then a baby would definitely slow them down and make them vulnerable to attack. Nature may have solved this problem by making leader types infertile. After all, their genes will be passed on via their siblings’ children, so there’s no need for them to do it personally. It prevents overpopulation. And besides, their legacy is cultural innovation, not physical progeny. Some say that Mike was infertile. It could well be that this is by nature’s design.

Barbara Sher calls leader types ‘scanners’. Scanners are people who flit from one thing to the next, seemingly at random, are reading 50 books at any one time, and change careers frequently — you get the idea. But my contention is that leader types do this in order to get the best ‘lay of the land’. If they didn’t, if they were a specialist in some tiny nook of expertise, what would they know about the world? Nothing! All they’d know is their little area (which there’s nothing wrong with by the way, it’s just not the scanner approach). Scanners scan. They try to get the best view of everything — figuratively and literally.

I know this type is rare, but I don’t know how rare. I’ve certainly never encountered anyone as similar to me before, but then I don’t know everyone. Surely a person with such obvious and anomalous qualities would rise to prominence, almost by default. They’re generally in art, but not just anywhere. They’re in the ‘I’m either myself or dead’ camp. Michael’s well-known because he’s well-known, and because he so strongly felt the need to share his values with the world, he thereby revealed himself. There could be many of us. Some may prefer to remain unknown. I don’t know yet.

As I said before, everything is on a spectrum, so you could be a more or less extreme leader type, and a more or less extreme family type. There may be sub-types. The ‘lone wolf’ is an extreme leader type. Aldous Huxley said “The more original and powerful a mind, the more inclined it is to the religion of solitude.” I think lone wolves relate best to other lone wolves; other types will simply be too different. They’re introverted because there’s a whole world inside their heads, and much of the outside input they’d encounter would actually hinder their progress. As a leader, stepping outside of the leader pack can be incredibly demoralising. Out there, there's a flattening going on. If you have a sleepover with kids, all of a sudden it's about sex. If you say the n word, it's suddenly all about race. And you think, “Why is everything about sex and race? Are there not more things to discuss? Develop some granularity in your approach already!” The flattening is in full swing at the moment, with so many red herrings slapping around that you can’t hear yourself think. (Contemplating that kinda makes me hungry... All those shiny fish...) Maybe the majority do this in order to feel safer: if they can reduce indeterminate phenomena to something simple, then they can feel like they know what they're dealing with. Simplify and blame. It’s a stupid game, and so boring. I'm not at all surprised that artists feel the need to invent entirely new worlds to escape this shit.

So there you have it: there is a naturalistic, evolutionary explanation for so many of the specific human behaviours that we observe in society. The choices people make are, in large part, due to their evolutionary type. Encountering Michael was the icing on my cake of investigation, because I reasoned there had to be an explanation as to why we’re so similar and I knew that it wasn’t due to mere chance.

So if you’re a sensitive, introverted kid who likes doing their own thing and your family gives you hell for being strange and different — for God’s sake, understand that there’s nothing wrong with you. Nothing at all. You’ve been designed to be the way you are over millions of years of evolution, because this is the only way humanity can work. You are the reason we have electricity, cars, great works of art, beautiful films and music, incredible dancers and athletes, mathematics, poetry, physics, philosophy, engineering, comfortable houses and beds, heating, space exploration, wonderful stories and the rule of law. All of these things were invented by leader types. The most important thing is to know who you are. It’s Quincy Jones’ first rule too. Once you know that, you will make much better decisions in all areas of your life. “A guy can dig ditches and enjoy it”, as Jimi said. If you want to be happy and effective, you must be doing things that align with your particular nature.

Don’t waste years doing things other people tell you to do. What do they know about you, anyway? Do they know your deepest desires? No they don’t, because to discover them is long, personal work. No-one can do it for you. Your mum can’t do it for you. I don’t care if she’s your mother and she wants the best for you -- she’s not you. Don’t do things for extrinsic rewards like money or fame. I recall reading a teacher who complained that all his kids just want to be famous, but then he asked them “Famous for what?” People who become famous do so because they’re passionate and obsessed with something and thereby become very good at it. Don’t desire to be famous, desire to become obsessed with something. Fall in love with something. Then you’ll probably become famous anyway, but by then you won’t care, because all you want to do is the thing you’re obsessed with.

But family types are essential too. Just because they don’t innovate, they create a stable society in which everyone — including leader types — can live. They create and maintain order, follow instructions and implement your ideas. They start families and actually create the people society needs, including all future leaders.

The two types must know about, respect and be thankful for each other, for neither could live without the other.

Masses of conflict rage each day because people think that other people act the way they do by choice. But things are so incredibly ingrained, that it’s quite absurd to think that anyone makes any kind of choice. We do have free will, but can only exercise it to the point our fundamental orientation allows. Can’t fight one’s nature, as Orwell said. Fight it too long and she’ll make you pay, with your health or your life.

It is apparent to me that my entire discussion has remained completely materialistic. I’ve not touched upon so-called ‘supernatural’ phenomena at all. I don’t like the term ‘supernatural’ because, if something exists, it is natural — no matter how perplexing or odd, everything is Nature, everything is natural. It’s not like the earth and its rocks are natural, and then precognition of the future and witnessing midnight processions of long-deceased people — as Jung and others did, centuries apart mind you — are outside of the natural. Everything is natural. If it happened, it was natural, and there is an explanation.

Now it might seem boring to learn that all these things in fact have a boring materialistic explanation. But as usual, there are many more things that we don’t yet know. The perplexing nature of time, for example. I suspect that time is very different to how most people conceive of it, but that discussion is for another time.

Back to the strictly material. A few hundred years of culture won’t put a dent in millennia of evolution. Culture is itself an outgrowth of evolution, and it needs to humbly acknowledge this fact instead of thinking that now it is king. The patterns and drives of Nature are king, and they explain everything. DS 06-07/2020

[new-moon-tea]

Cage in the preschoolers!

Yes, cage in the preschoolers. Why? Because I for one wouldn’t want to worry about a child flying off and getting stuck in a tree! I mentioned before about a few families I frequently thought about while thinking of this beloved hypothetical of mine. But this is just the start, just the beginning of this phase of life and probably the most difficult. I often imagined high school and preschool mostly, but what about elementary and middle school? When would be an appropriate age for learning how to fly? We teach our kids to walk as soon as they are able, so logically the same would be for those with wings, but emotionally I could never! Are you nuts?! But then where? I think we’d start off with highschool, but again, it makes more sense for my written rambles to begin from the first stage: preschool.

Preschools need cages. I’ve said it what feels like eight times now but it’s only because I’m worried! I mean I remember kids would just walk off of school premises when I was growing up for basically no reason so imagine if they had wings! I’d like to hope not a rough cage, maybe more like netting, but what if they fall? You see, kids run and fall on playgrounds all the time. So in theory, logically, flying shouldn’t be fussed over any differently. Except a rough trip and falling are different in heights and that’s a serious issue. What about -if- they fall? I can’t say I’ve very heard of or seen a bird fall from the sky just because they tripped on their own wings, but what about a clumsy human child? Thinking more on it my worries sort of go away, remembering or comparing it to swimming when as a kid I’d try to swim all the way down to the bottom but the burning need for air would discourage me and I’d retreat back to the sunny surface. Or like running and trying to sprint fast enough to pass that stupid mile in high school, only for the pain in my legs make me think “yeah it’s not worth it,” and relax my pace. I mean, aren’t playgrounds planned for giving kids enough room to run around and cause a bit of chaos? So I assume whoever is designing these cages would know how much space to include for them to fly around safely, or maybe young kids would wear bands to keep their wings folded? It would make sense to use these bands right off the bat until we figure out how to train kids, which would likely begin in highschool, and as this training became more reliable and founded we’d push for it to be taught earlier and earlier. So let’s go over this again.

In preschool the first order of business might be to close all schools, it might be to keep all winged kids in classes to start (oh those poor teachers…) and then likely followed up with some sort of maybe government issued band or recommended scarves be tied around their chests so they can’t fly off. Then once things settle down we start building cages, hopefully made of net strung up on archways and maybe add some platforms for kids to fly onto! I’ll carry over these concepts to kindergarten because heck if I know the difference between the two, right? I imagine they might occasionally do special days where an animal keeper brings in an owl to give them on example on how other creatures fly, to help get them to understand their own wings, before an official-esque winged person comes in to teach basic wing exercises, but is this crazy to think of? We don’t bring in athletes to teach kids how to walk or run, but that’s because we learn from our parents. If a winged child happens to be the ⅓ of population but their parents weren’t, they couldn’t teach them on their own, right? Or could they? I suppose it could be possible but only after we have a better understanding on how to teach them, rough idea right now I’m picturing one parent training them to stretch their wings and maybe giving more airplane rides, and gradually working towards things like encouraging their child to fly from the arms of their father, kneeling on or over a bed or couch, and getting them to fly over to the other parent on the opposite side. Oh, youtube videos from young adults who maybe got their wings in late highschool, rebelled against panicked government regulation because heck it, they have wings now, and learned more quickly because of this, would definitely help! I’m pretty sure that was a confusing sentence but that’s how we roll when discussing the fate of our world if ⅓ of humanity’s population got wings.

Elementary school would be only slightly different, while I did state, though not confidently, that there might be platforms in playground for flying children, we don’t actually know what age they even would begin flying. There are many different species of birds but with my loose and lazy research let’s use the bluebird as an example, though note I lazily used both a western and eastern bluebird for reference. So, bluebirds “fledge” at about 21 days and linger for another 14 before becoming independent. I’m operating under the assumption they learn to fly at 30 days, roughed out to a month, for easy calculations. These bluebirds also can live to around 6 to 10 years so I’ll use 8 years as an example. So if we do the math and compare this as a ratio to humans on the average lifespan of 80 years… Well, correct me if I’m wrong, but here’s how I calculated this. The bluebirds live 8 years, learn to fly at one month old. Twelve months in a year, times eight, gives us the ratio of age of flight to lifespan at 1/96. So we need to solve for human flight age (x) out of 80 years, transferring it to months gives us x/960 months.

-1-      -x-

96 = 960

96x= 960 x 1

96x= 960

96  =  96

X = 10 months

So I am right in picturing a baby being taught to fly by their parents! It was gonna bother me and throw off my following rambles on elementary school if I didn’t get that off my chest. Now then, on the topic of elementary school. Let’s begin on the premise this is before we’ve understood how wings work. I think they’d also get the bands and such, and assemblies all over the world to politely inform students they should not be flying until the school gives any further notice. Of course this would only be at the school, maybe some parents would watch their kids glide off the porch at home, or others might worry themselves sick over their children… I think school would get a bit frustrating for students, who now run on less space due to the winged students needing more space for their wings. I would guess that it’d be mostly similar to kindergarten and preschool but with a bit more trust in their students to play it safer, and that carries on over into middle school as well, but I see a few major differences. Anywho, once we did learn more about wings it’d be much easier to accommodate, we made need special chairs, or new chairs universal for both standard humans and winged humans to sit comfortably, maybe wing rests? And platforms for kids to fly on/off in the playground, I’d suggest “take off” slides that flip up and make it easier to glide a bit higher or further but we’d be in trouble if a normal kid just slid right off...oh! Landing pads? There could also be ‘hideout’ like structures on jungle gyms for flying kids to get into like a bird’s nest! But there’s always the safety concerns. Do you think we’d do special easter egg hunts where we hide eggs in trees for winged kids? Or is that unfair to earth-dwelling humans? It’s a lot to consider, and earlier I stated while a lot of this carries over into the next school level I’ll be adding some changes in middle school.

For starters we’d probably be instituting special gym classes, or at least options, for flying kin. Perhaps it’s like an elective for gym? Or would it be mandatory? Can wings even get fat? I’ve only seen a fat bird once, pretty sure it was because it was pregnant, but no fat wings… I imagine at this point they’d stop with the bands on wings, or at least focus on preschoolers and kindergarteners before middle school. Of course I also picture kids struggling with this a lot harder, feeling like the odd one out or some nerds thinking they’ve just become the main character to the story, others humble-bragging and being assholes because no middlescholer is a functioning human person. I see elementary kids both excited and scared of their new wings in all honesty. I also picture middle school kids being punished for flying when not supposed to be by giving them bands, and imagine very frustrated girls as their changing bodies just got way even more changed. Could you wear a bra with wings? Eventually, I suppose. I pictured elementary school kids daring each other to fly up to a tree or something and see even more daring challenges in middle school, with added “you should fly over and get us mcdonald's!” to the response, “no!” followed by a  “why not?!” immediately put down by “Well why don’t you walk or run there?!”. Which is a conversation that I’ve listed before but needed to be re-said as it is more relevant and carries over to high school.

High Schoolers I imagine way more confusion and distaste for their wings. I picture some becoming more popular due to their wings, but there’s a lot going on at that age and this would not be a positive change. It’d likely be easier with some maybe counseling groups, helping kids vent and discuss with other kids with wings too. I also think teenagers, or would hope they’d be smart enough to know better than to fly at school, but I also know they’d for sure try it like everyday after school. I also picture high school to be the first one to receive a gym class on how to fly, before it transitions down the line to middle school as well. I wonder if you’d need a license to fly? Or would it be like walking and biking? Logically it seems that it wouldn’t be necessary, but what about in cities where that can be alarming? I only ask as my thoughts first go off onto how city schools would go about teaching flying. There’s so much to be thought of when planning for this ridiculous hypothetical, but for now I think I’ve said my piece on how schools would act, or at least try to act. Maybe I’m missing finer details that’d only become apparent as we change for this new world… Y’know I’ve taken to asking my friends again, one who we’ll call Red, like Blue, insists on genocide being the first reaction. Don’t get me started on this ridiculous notion, it doesn’t make sense anymore. But heck, here we go!