I would like typed answers to these questions: 1) Why does mainstream media always want us to think about sex? 2) Why has the fashion industry become so successful as opposed to feeding the hungry or advancing science? 3) Despite having more information on the internet than we could hope to comprehend in a single lifetime, a lot of it incredibly useful, why do we use it for porn? 4) Why is it that everybody seems to know about all the rich bastards that rip them off all their life but they still resign themselves to this fate? 5) Why is it that a lot of people are aware of overpopulation but are not aware that it will take its toll and keep having children regardless of the earth's caring capacity? 6) When we have all the information we need to produce perfectly developed humans (not eugenics, just good environmental stimuli) and we can literally raise children as geniuses, why do we not do this? 7) Finally, an extension on the last question, we have a planet that we could turn into a paradise in approximately 20 years, why do we not do this? Answer any or all, or none at all. Use the letters on the squares in front of you to transcribe your thoughts to digital information. PS: Go and google how much CO2 is generated by a google search.
I just want to respond to your answers to these first three. 1) That's just untrue. It's true that you don't have to look, that you can decide what you think about.. but, very clearly, the media DOES WANT you to think about sex. Everything is sold with sex. Sex is about immediate pleasure and ego. They want you to think about it so you buy their products (which they are implying either directly or indirectly, will increase your sexual attraction and status). 2) The industry giving to the poor is meaningless when the industry also perpetuates poverty and inequality. And, like with sex, when people are concerned with vanity, they seem to care about little else. I am a massive critic of people who give money to charity, and then continue indulging in lifestyles which are ONLY attainable through oppressing other societies. 3) There is nothing wrong with pornography IN THEORY. In reality, a huge number of people watch far too much of it, and become desensitised to the point where they have to find more extreme forms to get off. Paedophilia IS becoming normalised, slowly. At the rate we are going, in 30 years time the age of consent will have been lowered. It is seen as totally acceptable for fifteen year olds to dress provocatively, and listen to music with absurdly sexual lyrics and dancing (See Miley Cyrus and similar) Pornography doesn't encourage partners to be sexually liberal with each other, and explore new and interesting things.. it encourages sleeping with as many different people as you can. Pair all these obsessions (sex and fashion) with a growing depression and hopelessness in our society, a sense of giving up, or at least, leaving it for our "parents"(the government) to sort out. All of these things that I mention are far more obvious in the younger generations. My dad often thinks I think people are less intelligent and more dangerous than they are. One thing humans have never been good at is looking ahead and realising where things are headed. So if things are not as bad as all that NOW, it should be paid attention where they are going.
Your "answers" really make me think you are an uninformed individual with a very basic and non-functioning mental toolset. You disregard the vast majority of science, sociology and "hippy ideology" with punitive ease, in fact you seem to live in a world of fantasy! You seem like the kind of person that would think brasseye is real! You have hardly answered the question that was there in most of your answers. Media that is aimed at children contains increasing amounts of near-nudity, adult references and is only presented by people who are deemed sexually attractive. All the while, sexual education seems to contain nothing of use and does not in fact educate or empower any young people on the subject. And that's just the kids. Supposing I owned some farmland, enough to feed 300 people. Now, suppose I had 300 people working for me and I paid them in such manner that they could not sustain themselves but could not work anywhere else because I had erected a large fence around my land, trapping them. Suppose that when the crops were ready, I took all the food and ate it with my family, then I gathered all the left-overs on a plate and gave it to one of my workers. This situation is not unlike fashionistas supposedly giving to charity. By the way, they are not giving their money to charity, they are using the presentation of a piece of material to get people with more money than sense to give their money to charity. Designing dresses for charity, how utterly sickening. Look at sweatshops, who owns them, where the clothes are sold, how much money is made in the process and how the "employees" are treated. Then look at your answer. If you don't feel silly then there is probably something wrong with you. The "need" for people to get hard? Please explain to me where and when the need originated for people to get hard (excepting the natural breeding process) and how it is a need, not merely a desire. To imply it is a need is preposterous. And I tell you what, I can get hard in a bare room alone, without the internet. I agree that the human body is a beautiful thing, so why do so many "actresses" in this business undertake extensive cosmetic surgical treatments ALL OVER there natural bodies, then cover themselves in make-up? Surely the beauty of the human body is expressed far better in the arts and sciences or in a natural environment? Nothing wrong with porn, eh? Perhaps you have never viewed the bigger picture or perhaps you are insane, who knows? I'm pretty sure you look at the firgures and statistics relating to how many people have viewed porn and do regularly (including children) you could be pretty shocked. "1000's of us may be wiped out at a time" I think you'll find there's no need for saying "may remove us", natural disasters can and do remove thousands of us at a time, as do diseases, as do the incredibly scientific weapons that have taken us millenia to develop. However, this does NOT slow population growth, the only thing that truly does is a drop in the birth rate (which has, mercifully, happened recently, certainly in Europe). Life expectancy for people born today (in the UK) is 138 in some estimates. You fail to realise that farming is also an industry, it comes under the industrialisation that you mention. We have learned that the only truly sustainable, non-damaging and healthy form of farming is organic. Sadly, there is not enough farmland to organically farm food for every person on the planet, the human population would have to be less that half of what it is currently to be viable. There are technoloogical solutions such as hydroponics/aeroponics but they are often shunned and substantial efforts to introduce these far more environmentally sound mediums are never made, despite wide knowledge and awareness on the issue. The link you have provided does nothing to answer my question or support your answer. You believe (I gather from your slightly vague answer) that the education problem is a monetary issue? There is plenty of money there, always has been. You have not answered the "why" in my question by saying that it costs money to educate people nowadays, why does the money needed for such projects never appear and why do reforms to the curriculum never involve a better education? Your last answer is just stupid and, once again, does not come close to actually answering my question. On the plus side: Your answers are so bad that they make your grammar look good. Here is a link to the song "expansions" by lonnie liston smith, pay attention to the first line of the song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vHH5Hon6M0"]YouTube - Expansions - Lonnie Liston Smith (12" Vinyl) 1975‏
I would have agree, sex sells. Perhaps the distraction of increased status and sexual attraction keeps people's minds off the fact that what they are buying is crap. There are plenty of companies (that JML company springs to mind) that have become successful, relying on their range of products and their practicality, not a sexual image in site. So sex is not always the clincher in consumerism, though it is a massive part. What I don't understand is that when there is no buyer/seller involved, when it is merely entertainment or just plain everyday life the pushing of a sex-obsessed mindset is still pursued by those behind the curtain. It is most odd. Certainly one of the main problems with pornography is its addictiveness and the psyche-bending effects it has. In a society where we are all supposed to be good and kind, respecting our own bodies and the bodies of others at all times, such an abundance of access to a taboo is having a very detrimental effect on many minds. Really though my question is why we view pornography when instead we could learn practically anything on any subject or be using the internet for an increase in income or any other life-improving means. What makes us choose the choice which is clearly not the wisest? My interpretation of history is that up until 100-200 years ago, we were doing ok. After the dark ages and perhaps begun by the renaissance, education; healthcare; culture; social security; social values; human understanding and technology were all steadily improving. All of a sudden, thigns took a real turn for the worse and moral and social values began to decline. So now we have the younger generation becoming worse than the last, like you say, but it seems this is quite a recent thing. And your last point is why I ask like questions like the seven in my original post, if these things are no addressed (besides other criticl issues) then how do we expect to live a healthy mental life, let alone produce a healthy generation to continue the species?
Ah, that is true. I thought of "mainstream media" and "sex" and thought of advertising. JML and the companies like them though, do not just rely on practical products, but on perpetuating an insane fear of germs and disorganisation, and an obsession with obliterating imperfections of all kinds, to the point of mental illness. (Did you know you can get all the bobbles off, with bobble-off? That jumper was COMPLETELY RUINED before using the bobble-off!) Other parts of the media sex obsession is sometimes indirectly selling things, like the actual magazine.. but then, why people WANT it so much, i'm not sure of. I feel like the understanding of it is on the edge of my mind, but I can't quite get there. Something to do with how good it feels, and how it's an EASY way to feel good, and humans have lost any comprehension that difficulty builds character. Sex represents being a baby, shitting wherever you are, being fed, sleeping. I haven't articulated this well, but you might get the jist. That all goes for the pornography thing too. It seems our brains are addicted to pleasure, and it is the easist pleasure to attain. The funny thing is, I think a lot of people feel we are currently the most moral we have ever been. They see the "bad" as being expressed by a minority that we are at war with, but who is part of that minority exactly, is somewhat vague. I am torn between thinking there is some great meaning and purpose behind everything, and thinking it is all just random and meaningless. If there IS meaning, then this stage of our existence is about a certain type of development, which probably would not be happening without war, or the absurd demands of the masses, which no doubt fuels scientific discovery, even if for the wrong reasons.
1) Why does mainstream media always want us to think about sex? cause many think of sex all the time 2) Why has the fashion industry become so successful as opposed to feeding the hungry or advancing science? cause people like looking good or classy or something 3) Despite having more information on the internet than we could hope to comprehend in a single lifetime, a lot of it incredibly useful, why do we use it for porn? cause no one can get a slutty date 4) Why is it that everybody seems to know about all the rich bastards that rip them off all their life but they still resign themselves to this fate? I didnt think this ones true 5) Why is it that a lot of people are aware of overpopulation but are not aware that it will take its toll and keep having children regardless of the earth's caring capacity? A lot of mommas want cheeeeldren 6) When we have all the information we need to produce perfectly developed humans (not eugenics, just good environmental stimuli) and we can literally raise children as geniuses, why do we not do this? cause we're all lazy as shit 7) Finally, an extension on the last question, we have a planet that we could turn into a paradise in approximately 20 years, why do we not do this? cause then the world would just be too damn easy... what government wants that?
You could fit the entire population of the world into the state of texas. We are very very far from being overpopulated. As for greenhouses gases and the world heating up? so what A super volcano, a star in our neighbourhood going supernova or another big comet / meteor strike (see Dinosaurs) and we are all fucked. All the big disasters over the last decade were to do with earthquakes / volcanos nothing to do with SUVs
I have heard a number of people express this sentiment. That what we do is only as bad as that of a super volcano or an asteroid... Do you know though, the big difference is WE CAN THINK. We have the capability of DECIDING what we want to do, and how we want to effect our environment. Natural disasters do not have conciousness. And we do. And we really want to be on par with a natural disaster that wipes out life?
All of your answers are true, but they ALL just make me say.. "And why.. *insert your answer here*?" They're just the basic reasons. It doesn't explain why we think this way. Our minds and thoughts are not just some random force that we can't control. We CAN control them. We can shape them. So why do we choose to be lazy? Why do we choose to have children rather than adopt kids who NEED parents?
Collectively we are pretty stupid. You dont have any choice. Choose enviro friendly dishwashing liquid at the supermarket over the cheaper brand, your carbon footprint is still bigger than the guy in Sierra Leone living on a dollar a day cos he didnt drive to the supermarket, doesnt wear rubber soled shoes, washes his clothes in the river. Didnt contribute the 1kg of CO2 made to create and transport the plastic bottle that enviro friendly dishwasing liquid came in
Simple sex sells and it can be used to sell all kinds of garbage we don't really need. You see sex is natural and it's a NEED. We all need human contact and SEX in order to survive as mentally healthy people. But instead we're bombed with a message that sex is dirty, dangerous and immoral. So we refuse to engange in sexual contact, conversations, etc. This creates a mental breakdown and we will buy any stupid garbage they tell us in order to try and fill the void in our lives. What a question. The third world fills a very important role in a money driven world. The poor and hungry will work for pennies and nickles. So clothes are made cheaply and sold for big bucks to people that are desperate to be loved by others. And science is sterile and doesn't any solve problems. Science is only a tool and it tends to serve the most powerful in our societies. Wheras education, philosophy and compassion can and do solve problems. They are solutions. Because sex is a basic human need. But instead of living in a healthy society where people say. Hey, lets play a little. We say," sex is dirty, dangerous and immoral." Porn then becomes the ultimate expression of the society's mental mass ilness. Fear and the average person really doesn't want to fight. Most people just want to eat good food and make love and babeis. The earth's population is tied directly to the hydrocarbon revolution. In laymans terms, it's the oil industry that created this over-population problem. Not sex Read George Orwell's book, 1984. He says one thing that is absolutely true. "Ignorance is strength." Dumb and uneducated and neurotic people are easy to manipulate. You can turn them into defacto slaves without them being able to figure it out. They'll kill for you, give you their children to die for you, produce products that will cause cancer, etc. Because if our problems are solved. IE: We turn this world in to a paradise. Then we will no longer need the market. There will be a defacto equality amongst humanbeings and the mega rich and powerful will cease to have a reason to exist. Therefore, as long as there is problems, they get to live in a comfortable paradise while we "serve" them.
Also: Back 2000 years ago, in Jesus's day everyone was running around getting married at like 12/13, the age of consent was more like 9. Rape would have been more rampant, pedophilia certainly was. The most vunerable of society certainly were worse off. Fastforward to the 1950s, those involved in organizations caring for children, priests, teachers, counsellors ....some of whom were still getting away with certain unpleasantries cos that kind of thing wasnt talked about. Or even in the world today, child prostitution is a far bigger problem in the third world than the first. The more you suppress a society, the more things get swept under the carpet and those most vulnerable end up paying the price. We are better off now than we have ever been, victims are more likely to expose the perps, our cyber law enforcement agencies can more easily hunt down those that would have been otherwise hidden. The real age of consent is increasing
In the national newspapers in the last couple of days, the salary increases of the nation's largest earners were reported and berated. A few months ago, the same happened for bankers' bonuses (with special attention to RBS as it is alledgedly tax-payer owned). I implore you to investigate the distribution of wealth on this planet. If you still do not believe that inequality exists then I expect a very good reason. Lazy? That's simply untrue, we expend vast amounts of energy pursuing sports, money, social lives and generally living. Children's lives are gradually becoming more active again in countries like ours and lots of time and resources are spent on mainly keeping children entertained but also on their education and health. Uninformed and uneducated do not equate to lazy. So you do not believe that the rich rip off the majority of the people but you believe that governments are deliberately holding back technology, maintaining war and destabilisation and enforcing inequality in the monetary system? Why would any government not want an easy world? You make a good point on the sex question. Perhaps I am wrong in thinking that it is something external influencing us to think about sex, maybe we always thought about sex and the mainstream media was just a medium to express these thoughts? It is highly possible that people thought about sex all the time when there was no mainstream media, in fact there are areas of the world with little or no media but lots of sex. Up until recent decades, the mainstream media contained little or no provocative material, beautiful women and men, yes, but not full-blown provocation like nowadays. It is this appearance of sexual imagery that interests me.
So, because all the world's people could fit into one American state means that we are not overpopulated? What a very strange mind you have. If everyone were to be crammed into Texas, we would have just over 32x32 feet of land each (actually some would have water because Texas is not just land). You seem to discount the fact that people need to be clothed, fed, watered and, of course, entertained. Not to mention health and sanitation. I suggest that you review the calculated predictions for resource and food consumption as opposed to resource and food production, then I dare you to say that again that we are very very far from being overpopulated. I thought this forum was for hippies and people like that... My impression of hippies is that they are concerned for our environment, obviously you're not. The "so what" would be rising sea levels, too hot and dry to farm in some places, too cold in others. So stuff that's going to mess people up badly. I find it amazing that you can pretend that science doesn't exist... A major disaster recently involved, yes, an earthquake and a tsunami. It also involved a nuclear power plant, which made it thousands of times worse. Side note: A Russian politician claimed it involved the Russians, too. What you seem to be saying is that because the effect of SUVs on the environment has not been a problem in the past, then it won't be a problem in the future? And I must say, it depends where and how the meteor strikes... It was NOT (according to many credible scientists) the actual meteor strike that killed the dinosaurs but the fact that it hit the Earth in an area with lots of sulphur in the crust. This blew loads of sulphur into the atmosphere and killed of a lot of the dinosaurs. Some survived but eventually succumbed to various ice ages and things like that. Take crocodiles, for instance, supposedly around in one form or another since the time of the dinosaurs. I don't wholeheartedly believe this view to be true, I just can't stand it when people say silly things like "a meteor killed the dinosaurs". Sulphur and extreme cold were more likely the culprits. Many theories abound. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dino_prog_summary.shtml
Dammit, if it's not sex used to sell products, it's fear. Now I'm scared that nobody would have sex with me if I wore my bobbly jumper. I'm scared that a lady won't bobble me off. You are suggesting that advertisers/companies/the powers that be are aiming to reach the a goal of... "approval" let's say, in our minds and there are 2 paths there: 1) The honest way, with hard work and being valued by people by making them feel valued; or 2) Make us associate them with (or become over fixated with so we don't know what we're doing, like babies) a gratifying feeling, such as sex or a nicer, bobble free wardrobe. I cannot wholly disagree. The meaning and purpose? That is down to the individual. To some, all of this wordly confusion is an homage to Satan. To others, it is God's will. To others still, it is a sign that God's will is not recognised so Satan is roaming free. To me, I see no reason in a meaning, why try to define a word that can't be read?
We do have the choice to not buy washing up liquid at all. Hmmm, I'm not sure I trust your view of history. Grown men were marrying girls as young as 9 in Victorian/Edwardian Britain so you really needn't have gone back that far. As for the rape and paedophilia, please cite your sources for such a viewpoint, I am not aware of much evidence to support whether or not people were being raped and abusing children at this time. I would assume that strong family structures and incredibly painful death penalties would ensure less of that sort of behaviour but you could be right. As for the vulnerable of society, medicine and care could not compare to today, so as far as I know most babies with birth defects were culled, so as to prevent a painful life being lived and a burden being placed on the family. I remember learning (though I cannot vouch for its authenticity) that autistic people at the time were highly prized as they could undertake equations and labour that many were uncapable/scared of doing, also right up to these days "freak shows" have not been unsuccessful, many containing what you may describe as the vulnerable of society. In terms of drunkards; landless peasants; mentally infirm; farmers hit by drought; ugly widows and the like, they probably were worse off but it should be kept in mind that anybody can become a vulnerable member of society in these forms. Though I do agree to some point, I think that when you say we are better off now than we ever were, the "we" you are referring to is you and the people you know and are aware of, the world that YOU live in and imagine. Although you mention the fact that child prostitution is more rampant in other parts of the world, you do not factor this into your opinion, it seems. Or your point about suppression, though I agree with both of these points. Also, you mention "cyber law enforcement agencies", I think you'll find that really the authorities find out about those that are hidden from groups that are, in a way, cyber law enforcement agencies, but they are more often than not activists and certainly not employed as law enforcers. The hacktivist group Anonymous is a fine example of this. Also, more and more these days we are seeing evidence that it is the hand that feeds us that also feels our genitals (I mean the authorities and institutions, not parents). Often very basic steps are not taken to prevent the abuse, either, despite ample knowledge and resources, which is unexcusable.
