Kate 1 |
Kate 2 |
You have cured me of my pseudo-misogyny. I was posturing a bit. I will cut it out. The basic facts are that women and men are different in very many ways. They will never be the same and trying to pretend otherwise is futile self-deception. But that doesn't mean I don't respect women or think that they are worthy of equal intellectual status. I will check through the site and remove any silly posturing and just start telling it like it is.
Oh yes, one more point. I am killing off the Shoot the Nuns page. Too violent. But I do think an alternative title for the site is necessary because so many people don't know what memes are. I want a title that is novel, unique and understandable by everybody with an IQ in three figures.
[Other mundane website talk deleted.]
Hard at work today. I have some holiday entitlement to use up. A full Monday to Friday on the computer for 18 hours a day is the plan. My wife has taken the children to North Wales to see her mother. That has been planned for a while. I had to take the holiday or lose it, so I just took the earliest available slot as my brain is so full of stuff to write. By the time this email is sent the first page of Kate will be up on the site. If you can think of a better title I will be grateful, it is OK for the name of the file but hardly the most click-worthy of titles. I have put your email link in quite subtly, as a mailto link in the top and bottom signature on the page.
Do you want to give me a few personal details or a description of yourself? My wife asked me what you were like, how old you were, what you did for a living... err...I just smiled.
I guess from your writing that you are between 20 and 40, English and well educated but in what and when I have little clue.
I have to admit my wife is a little jealous of the attention. That is another difference between men and women, women are jealous of attention, men are only really jealous of actual penetrative sex. Bill would have done better if he could have told Hillary that he did not have an affair with that woman... Just a meaningless sex game. But he thought like a man, as long as he didn't penetrate he wasn't being unfaithful.
Which sex is right? Both, by their own standards.
If you want me to change anything on Kate just let me know.
Martin
Author of
Correct Me If I'm Wrong
This is my new signature file for newsgroup postings. I think it should do the trick.
Dear Martin, Just got in from night out, so a bit drunk. Please excuse the consequent extra typos and loss of coherency. I'd imagine that spending all that time working on your site is pretty much heaven for you. Although 18 hrs a day sounds a bit cross-eyed-making. #eeeeee How many children do you have? Hm, not sure about a title for the page. After I've had a look at what you've done, if I'm inspired, I'll get back to you. On the subject of pictures, I'll see what I can do. A friend took a couple of photos of me tonight, using a digital camera, so maybe they might be some use. Again, I'm very ignorant of the possibilities,so I'll speak to him and see what he says. Biographical details:I'm 22, currently doing an engineering degree at Oxford, from a tiny village in darkest Cheshire, and desperately seeking employment for next year. I'm happily unsingle with a soon-to-be lawyer called Neal, and (as you know) my top recommended reading is Darwin's Dangerous Idea by Daniel Dennett. 
I think women see being unfaithful on an emotional level. If a man makes an emotional connection with another woman, looks at her a certain way, etc., then that counts as unfaithful to women. It's the intention that's important, not the actual act. I think the female rationale is that whilst the husband was having this deep and meaningful moment with the 'other woman', he can't have been thinking about his wife. And he should always be thinking about his wife. The different sexes draw the line at different levels. But the male perspective seems to be that so long as he doesn't actually go through with his desires, then flirting or whatever is okay. I think either perspective is okay, so long as the line, whichever line it is, isn't crossed. And the closer you get to it, or the further along it is in the first place, maybe the harder it gets to be 'good'. Right, need my bed now, I think. Kate
|
Oh, my name in print. What a buzz!! Excuse me. I told you I was drunk. Yes, I like all that, thank you for the odd bits of tinkering you have done that make me look more professional. I think the way you have put in the contact bit is cool too. I'm being a sycophant, and I know you don't like that, so I really will go to bed. |
 |
It has just turned 6:40 am and here I am, sat at the computer and I have already had a bath and changed some font settings. This could well be the day that I set the new personal best for geekery.
Last night was terrible, utterly dreadful, Outlook Express went serifed on me. Instead of the neat text of Arial for my incoming messages it was all curly and serifed and anti-aliased, grey wishy washy and gruesome. I hate serif text and I cannot understand why so many otherwise sane people constantly repeat the mantra that it is supposed to be easier to read. On paper a good restrained serif font is readable and easy on the eye but on the screen it has no advantage. I like a nice san-serif font like these:-
Fonts like these are extremely readable on screen don't you think?
I have two children. They both have very popular names, it might be a good subject for study for somebody interested in memes; why do names suddenly become so popular and unpopular? Why has John suddenly become so rare despite being virtually the top name in Europe since Roman times? I am fairly comfortable with my name. I rarely have to be big Martin or anything of the sort, it is suitably uncommon (but not unusual) that everybody calls me Martin except my bank manager and (ex) accountant. The only problems I have had with it have been in America, I hated being called "Marden", I seriously considered dropping it and introducing myself as John instead.
Engineering student eh? No wonder you don't think like a girlie.
I get relatively few female visitors. I am working on a theory at the moment that goes something like this; men and women think in different ways, at least there are different archetypal thought habits and processes, if you think like the opposite sex too much it is disabling, if not enough you are a social cripple too. There is an optimum level of other-sex thinking. Girls who can act a bit like one of the lads can reap a benefit, but if they overdo it they de-sex themselves and lose their appeal to men. Mel B springs to mind, fantastic body but not girlie enough to be really attractive.
My wife is a very female woman and she might benefit from a touch more of male pattern thinking. My sister is quite female, but she has a dash of masculine thinking in her too which has helped her make many male friends, marry well and have a successful career. My mother has far too much male. She has an obsessive hobby, a disregard for her appearance and has sex with a woman. I can get away with stuff like that, it is harder for a woman.
For men a touch of female thought patterns can help with creativity, especially with design flair and self-deception. No real man could ever be a dress designer and believe his talent was worth ten grand for a frock. Are there any heterosexual male astrologers? But a little touch of the female thinking in an otherwise red-blooded male can do wonders, I think James Dyson is a classic example, perhaps also Richard Branson.
OK. It's a load of bollocks I know, but just about as convincing as most stuff in Women's magazines.
Suggestions for mind blowing reading:-
Unweaving the Rainbow by Richard Dawkins.
The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker
How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker
and anything else by Richard Dawkins.
I have finally managed to get my hands on Unweaving the Rainbow after nine months of trying at the library, as it was I had to snatch it from the recent returns shelf but it is a terrific book.
Martin
How did your day of geekdom go? Sounds truly terrifying. You should develop a good outdoors counter-hobby, like rock-climbing or something, so you don't get prisoners' pallor. I didn't know what serifs were, had to check with the boyfriend. Looks like the kind of font Americans would favour. I use times new roman, when I want to look officious, but I think Arial is a bit friendlier. They are good names, but like you say, they're very 1990s. Funny. When I was at primary school, and secondary, virtually all my friends were called either Catherine, or Kathryn, or Kate. Maybe by the time I'm naming my kids, things like Ethel and Arthur will be the height of fashion again. At university, there is a glut of Andrews, so we have things like handy andy to distinguish them. I'm desperate to read some more Dawkins. Most of my friends here are biologists, so I used to raid their bookshelves for good reading matter. I was allowed to read about half of The Blind Watchmaker before it got stolen back off me. Dawkins is a lecturer at the biology department here, and he was rather prone to self-recommendation when it came to reading lists, so they all had plenty of his stuff. I went into a couple of good second hand bookshops the other day, but there wasn't anything of his. I did pick up a couple by Stephen Jay Gould - is he any good? I have a feeling that Dennett wasn't particularly complementary about him. I'll also start keeping my eye out for some Pinker. Male mind/female mind.Tricky one. I'm not sure that these supposedly male and female ways of thinking aren't just stereotypes that we all subscribe to. Like the 'male' tendency to suppress emotion, to therefore be less forthcoming about emotional topics. And on the other side, women's intuition, and the 'female' tendency to be more controlled by emotion. Surely these things can't be put down to anything other than social conditioning. But there again, maybe if this conditioning is what causes these things, it's there for a reason anyway. When the father tells his son not to cry when he cuts his knee, is it because the father knows his son won't attract a mate later in life by being a cry-baby, and will therefore be less likely to pass on his genes? Likewise, the unconscious coaching in being gentle, sweet and innocent that the daughter receives early on in life, is this to later attract the attention of a nice, butch, protective mate? It's all very well the new-age man thing, but men do have to be masculine in order to be sexy. And like you say, the independent, 90's woman needs to have a soft underside if she's to have sex appeal. What about success in other aspects of life then? These days, successful reproduction is not the end of the story. Maybe that is why there is this modern vogue for independent women and emotionally connected males. By learning to unlearn some of the stereotypes we are given, we have unlocked some of the extra potential of our minds. The trick is, then, to compartmentalise when you reveal your 'other half'. Whilst flirting with his secretary, or closing a deal, the male executive is wise to be influenced by the cave-man in him. Whilst putting together a really impressive Power Point presentation, he can unlock some of his female creativity. How will this make my audience feel? Right, I feel a glut of femininity coming on - I'm going to ring up my best friend (Catherine, obviously), for that most female of things, a girly gossip. Get some fresh air. Kate |
Stephen Jay GouldAn interesting writer but I am not sure if I agree totally with all his theories. Some of his stuff is very good, very readable. I read quite a bit of his stuff when I was desperate to stay awake. He has a good imagination for allusions and metaphor. He is good at communicating wonder, which has to be the main feature in a popular science writer. I don't know about Dennett's attitude to him but when I think of Gould and Dawkins I am reminded of my mother's dog. Everyday another dog was lead past her gate and he snarled every time, twice a day, four times on Sunday. I think they are like that, pent up jealousy and more. They would make a good couple on Celebrity Deathmatch if it ever went highbrow (what a weird thought.) (Sorry if I loose coherency it is the fault of Zanussi chest freezers. I sold quite a few of them because I preferred to lean in that part of the shop, there was a incentive program running that I barely knew about and I ended up winning a load of Victoria Wine vouchers... I think you can deduce the rest.) Male and femaleIf anybody tells you that gender is socially conditioned just laugh at them. My own experience of having children and watching other people's children confirms the view that sex is not just something that goes on between the legs, it goes on between the ears too. My two children are as different as chalk and cheese, or Yin and Yang. But I have done my best not to reinforce the stereotypes. I cuddle my son openly and I have never told him that boys don't cry. Richard DawkinsHe is a bit of an egotist perhaps but he is right to be so. He is brilliant and he is right. And he has a wonderful wife who I fancied like mad when I was young. (Check out Dawkins, Mrs Richard in my A to Z index.) I was recently thinking who I would most like to visit my site. If there was a single person it would have to be Richard Dawkins. As for types of people it would have to be young, intelligent atheists. The smarter the better. Female undergraduates at Oxford would rank rather high. Independent women.That is a subject for another day. Ahhh, well, 17 and a half hours so far. I'll just upload this and see if anybody has bitten on the newsgroups, that should round the day off nicely. Martin |
Dear Martin, Sorry not to have written in such a while - it was the end of term, which is always a bit hectic. Thanks for your messages. I just spent about an hour looking at the new stuff - I like the bulletin board, and will try to come along and contribute. Also read that bit entitled 'Christian Science'. People like him/her are the kind that really get me going. How they can believe that the fact that science doesn't yet have all the answers, is a valid argument against science, and in favour of religion, I just don't know. It seems to me that people's understanding of what science is about is really poor. I suppose it is in Christianity's interest to misrepresent grossly what it is that science is doing. The number one strawman argument. Yeah, I've been reading the newsgroups. I've also just finished reading Richard Dawkins' Climbing Mount Improbable. Fantastic stuff, should be compulsory reading for everyone, everywhere. Did you see Stephen Fry on Room 101 tonight, by any chance? He put New Age living and all its associated paraphernalia into room 101, as represented by one of those Dreamcatcher things. He spoke brilliantly about how he hated all that kind of 'woolly thinking'. Man after your own heart, in that respect. Did you see that thing in the news (low budget news, admittedly) about how some scientists have 'proven' the existence of telepathy? What do you reckon? Free-thinking claptrap, or scientific reality? I'm undecided, but from what I've read, it seems like the science was reasonable. The way I feel about a lot of this kind of supernatural stuff is that eventually it will either be disproved, or it will be incorporated into science. I saw Uri Geller speak a couple of years ago. And he bent a spoon. Really, no strings attached. But I don't think that was because he was magic, or operating outside the scope of science. Just outside the scope of known science. Or maybe just clever sleight of hand, but I don't think so... Unfortunately he somewhat shot himself in the foot credibility-wise, by attributing his powers both to God, and to aliens. Right, going to bed. Kate |
I missed room 101. Pity. Although I did see Anne Robinson and her bit about the Welsh "what are they for?" I thought she was a bit restrained. I find the Welsh are very nice people, but terrible as a people, if you see the distinction.
I think I half remember something like you have one German and you have a bore, two you have a bund, three you have a Reich. One Englishman and you have an idiot, two you have a club and three you have an Empire. Although that obviously refers to public school Englishmen. One Italian you have a poser, two you have a retreat and three is an unconditional surrender. OK, only half funny but there is some truth there in the way in which characteristics vary between the individual and the group. I find the Welsh better as individuals. See a Welsh celebrity on a chat show and you get good TV, if another one comes on to join them go and make a cup of coffee.
Stephen Fry is an interesting man. I am sorry I missed him. I often catch my wife muttering "pity he's gay..."
My wife has dreamcatcher earrings. I think he is quite perceptive. I hate the idea that we are so short of superstitious tosh that we actually need to import it from other cultures. I sometimes light incense sticks or scented candles, there is some basis to some aspects of aromatherapy, but nothing supernatural, smells have effects on people as do other drugs. Crystals are just decorative.
Climbing Mount Improbable is one of the best books ever written. I will be including it in my new recommended reading page, which will probably have its first edition this week. Any suggestions? Ideally in review format, just a few hundred words
Intellectual Celebrity Deathmtch
Uri Geller Vs. James Randi, it could be on the undercard of the Dawkins Vs Gould bout. This is getting interesting, Intellectual Celebrity Deathmatch... Perhaps ten minutes of intellectual debate followed by all in wrestling. We should get Jerry Springer and Jesse Ventura as co-hosts.
Telepathy.
I didn't see the report you mention. I do not close off my mind to the possibility of telepathy but I don't regard it as very likely. I am quite confident that 5 to 15% of what I and conventional science dismiss as highly unlikely will turn out to have some basis in fact. The problem is knowing which bit. Telepathy as a human talent if real would as likely occur in level headed hunter-gatherers or third world farmers as in pure-bred Romany Gypsy side-show bullshit merchants. If another sense did exist it would not be supernatural, it would be a natural ability, like being able to waggle your ears. People would discover it, do it, notice that other people found it unusual and they would try and find other people who could do it too. Nobody likes to be seen as a freak.
The last thing a real psychic would do is play up the freakiness and surround the talent with layers of half-baked theory. Real freaks sometimes end up in side-shows, exploited by shysters. Most apparent psychics seem far more like the self-proclaimed freaks who are actually con men.
Susan Blackmore has studied parapsychology for years and I believe that she has not found any evidence of telepathy despite numerous attempts. The vast majority are attention-seekers or con artists. If there was really something in telepathy research into it would not be as meagrely funded as it is. Susan Blackmore would have the finest equipment that the Universities of Las Vegas or Monte Carlo could afford. If I had psi power the nearest casino is where I would be going, and I would not be wearing any crystals or a pyramid hat, I would be doing it as low key as I could, I am attached to my kneecaps.
Do you like the new colour scheme? I think it is very easy on the eyes. I went shopping in Manchester today and bought some trainers to match, two shades of grey and blue-grey, they are great, comfortable, nice colours and no brand names or logo at all, I could not have designed them better myself.
Martin
My spellchecker is right, we should ignore aromatherapy.