Sociocultural Evolution

Posted on April 2, 2012 by

I have been learning much from one of the commenters on this blog:  James Williams, Author and Presenter on Autism.  We have had a long exchange about how one particular social taboo has affected James and his friends, not only the Autistic Spectrum but also Neurotypicals.  Due to the extremely negative social implications James has experienced when speaking of this taboo, James chose to email me the details rather than post it publicly on the blog.  After our exchange, I requested James’ permission to publish his email, because I feel it is a vital example of not only our common struggle with one of the largest issues for humankind, but also a beautiful solution.  The majority of our comments can be seen as comments to my post Social Football, however, the final comments I feel to be too important to have lost pages down, hidden in multiple exchanges, therefore, I have included here the ultimate exchange in its final form.  I commend James on his self-conduct, in his life and in his comments.  James is an honoring and respectful example of sociocultural evolution.

James’ email is in italics, my comments are in all caps:

Birdie,

In this e-mail I shall write the underlying issue that I have disguised for the purposes of censorship. In my opinion, it should be written this way, because the posts are purposely written to convey a general point built from a specific issue.  THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO COMMENT ON THIS SUBJECT.  I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN INTENTION OF PROVIDING MY PERSPECTIVE ON THIS, NOT AS ADVICE, BECAUSE I AM NOBODY TO GIVE ADVICE, BUT RATHER AS A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT BECAUSE IT IS SOMETIMES DIFFICULT TO TAKE A STEP BACK FROM EXTREMELY VOLATILE EVENTS IN ONE’S LIFE AND SEE THE BIG PICTURE.  I FIND THAT WHEN I CAN SEE A LARGER WORLD VIEW, THINGS IN MY LIFE THAT I MIGHT VIEW AS ISSUES CAN TURN INTO GIFTS.

In my two “Social Football” posts, I describe two aspects of my social life–one regarding how I ended up making friends with a group of gender rebels, and how their strong passionate beliefs enabled them to be very accepting of me, since I openly supported their gender rebellion. The other is about how my worldview was changed due to the struggles of my AS friends. Interestingly, both aspects of my social life, although belonging to two very different social circles, were linked together due to a core issue that was a major part of the social interactions of both my gender rebel friends and my AS friends.  THE ISSUES SURROUNDING MENSTRUATION ARE LIKE A FESTERING INFECTION AFFECTING THE EARTH ON A GRAND LEVEL.  FROM MY PERSPECTIVE YOUR SEEMINGLY COINCIDENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN IT IS MORE THAN COINCIDENCE.  IT LOOKS LIKE A PERFECT STORM OF SKILL SET, SOCIAL PLACEMENT, OPPORTUNITY, AND SUPPORT.

What was the issue that linked us all together?

Menstruation. Also known as a girl’s “time of the month,” or a girl’s “period.”  THE TV SHOW “2 BROKE GIRLS” HAD AN EPISODE WHERE ONE OF THE GIRLS WAS UPSET WITH THE TABOO OF MENSTRUATION AND WAS OPENLY THROWING THE ISSUE INTO THE FACES OF RESTAURANT PATRONS WHERE SHE WAITRESSED.  I BELIEVE THIS SHOWS A READINESS AND A NECESSITY FOR THE KIND OF CHALLENGE THAT YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS ARE PRESENTING.

When I befriended the gender rebels, one of their strong beliefs was an opposition to society’s menstrual taboo. They believed that since all girls have to cope with menstruation, girls should have the right to speak freely about it with whoever they want to. They believed firmly that girls should be allowed to talk to boys about their periods if they wanted to, and that since menstruation is a uncomfortable thing for girls to cope with, girls should be allowed to speak about their menstrual problems with whoever they feel comfortable with, not who society tells them they should talk to. And there were some girls who voiced that they felt frustrated with rules telling them that they could only talk to other girls about their periods, since they often struggled with making friends with other girls due to the “cliquey” nature of many girls at my school.

This was one of the reasons why I was given such unconditional acceptance among the gender rebels. Since period talk does not make me uncomfortable, the female gender rebels valued the fact that they could talk to a guy about menstruation. And the male gender rebels valued me for this too since they saw an example of yet another male who was not bothered by such discussion, thus revealing that they were not entirely alone in the world. WHILE YOUR EXPERIENCE IS THAT YOUR MOTIVATION WAS FOR ACCEPTANCE, MY OBSERVATION IS THAT FOR MANY, ALL THE ACCEPTANCE IN THE WORLD WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH TO CAUSE THEM TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH IT THE WAY YOU ARE.  IT TAKES AN ADVANCED CONSCIOUSNESS TO GRASP AND EMBODY THE PHILOSOPHY YOU HAVE ADOPTED ABOUT THIS UNCOMFORTABLE SUBJECT.

I have also pointed out in my posts that I have a small group of AS female friends. One common issue I hear routinely from my AS female friends is that they struggle to cope with menstruation. The “medical issue” that I described in my post that worsens my friends’ functioning and causes physical struggles, is menstruation. When many of my AS friends get their periods every month (or sometimes before, or just before and during), their symptoms with AS worsen and they lose a part of their functioning. At the same time, that functioning loss is often quite visible, yet due to society’s rules, they cannot openly reveal why they have lost their functioning. And then, when their period ends, they return back to their usual AS selves, only to have a loss of functioning next month. Some of my AS friends have actual physical ailments, and suffer from massive headaches, vomiting, and the inability to digest food during their periods. Another issue that emerges is the struggle with managing menstruation–I have traveled with two adult female friends with AS and both times I have traveled with them, I have had to assist them with their menstrual hygiene. Both knew how to use menstrual supplies but both needed to be reminded of when to change their supplies. And my close AS female friends come to me because they do not feel as if they can talk to other females about this issue, viewing them as being too judgmental to listen. NONJUDGMENT, WHAT A BEAUTIFUL CONCEPT, AND ONE NOT OFTEN FOUND IN HUMANS.  THANK YOU!

Although the gender rebels and I spoke freely about this subject, they did so based on moral beliefs. But when my AS female friends and I get into this subject, we do so because my AS female friends often feel as if they do not have many other people they can talk to about their menstrual struggles. But the core belief of both–that society’s menstrual taboo is wrong–links together both parts of my social life. And I have met a few men with AS who value me for my willingness to listen to those AS females, since they too have female friends who struggle with the same thing and they listen to them as well. One AS male told me he was happy to know he wasn’t the only AS male he knew that comfortably listened to period problems.  AGAIN, I SEE A MUCH MORE BEAUTIFUL INTERACTION TAKING PLACE HERE THAN A SIMPLE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS SUCH AS ACCEPTANCE AND CONVERSATION.  IT APPEARS TO ME THAT YOU ALL ARE CREATING THE GROUNDWORK, THE FOUNDATION FOR FUTURE BENEFICIAL INTERACTIONS SURROUNDING A CORE HUMAN ISSUE, AN ISSUE THAT COVERS EVEN MORE THAN WHAT IS APPARENT ON ITS FACE.  IT HAS VERY DEEP-RUNNING VEINS OF MALE/FEMALE INTERACTION IMBALANCES AND DISTRUST.

So there you have it. This is the issue that changed my worldview on things, and forever shattered my way of thinking. And this is the issue that my friends and I navigate together. And if you are offended, you may discontinue any social ties you have with me.I AM NOT ONLY NOT OFFENDED, I AM ENERGIZED AND GRATEFUL FOR YOUR INSIGHTS ABOUT THIS, BUT I THANK YOU FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO ADDRESS A SUBJECT WHICH COULD OFFEND ME.  THAT TAKES GREAT, GREAT COURAGE IN THIS WORLD OF OURS.   I UNDERSTAND YOUR CHOICES IN THIS REGARD HAVE PLACED YOU IN A POSITION TO RECEIVE NEGATIVE REACTIONS.  SOME MIGHT VIEW THIS AS A SIGN THAT WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS “WRONG.”  I SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING AS AMAZING.  – BIRDIE

James

Posted in Autism, Health, Social Issues | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Unified Theory: Design of the Universal Supercomputer

Posted on February 21, 2012 by

A note to the user:  Move your viewpoint around:  Are you the atom or the universe?  Are you the human or the heart?

1- Everything is a consciousness, just like you, except the original consciousness knows everything, and the smallest particles know only themselves.  Everything grew out of the one, in divisions of 12, like a family tree, and everything can be traced back all the way to the starting-point consciousness.

2- Everything you see and experience is one form of consciousness or another.  Your experience is dictated by the instrument you use to measure it.  Light, sound, energy, electricity, fire, water, space, crystal, radiation, all consciousness.

3- Everything has a unique identity which is a frequency on the spectrum of All That Is.  Every instrument limits or achieves its reading entirely based on its ability to measure.  An instrument can measure only that which it is built to measure.  Instruments are self-limiting.  Everything is a measuring instrument.

4- Everything is the same hologram.  Any one thing is exactly like another, it is the observer that creates an image of differentness.  No matter how ‘large’ or ‘small’ (which exist only in comparison) everything is constructed identically.

5- Everything is unique.  Everything has its own unique viewpoint, point of view and experience.

6- All dimensions exist at the same time, but some dimensions are occupied by one or 12 or 144, and some dimensions are occupied by unimaginable numbers, multitudes.  Each dimension has its own frequency which is based on its number of divisions.  Energy travels at the same speed from ‘beginning to end’ no matter how long it takes or how many cycles it moves through on its way.  There is no beginning or end to anything, it is one thing stretched out into a loop/spectrum which returns to its starting point, always connected from beginning to end, and unextractable from the whole, but observable for its unique energy signature.

7- Identities are bounded by multiples of 12.  Anything less than a whole set of 12 is incomplete.

8- Everything is one closed system.  Like the Earth’s atmosphere, if one part heats up, another cools down, wherever there is a push, there has to be a pull, wherever there is an increase in pressure, there must somewhere be a decrease in pressure.  If energy ‘comes in,’ it must also ‘move out.’  If you see movement forward, you know that movement is catching up to you from behind, whether this is a very short loop or a very long loop before the movement out returns home.  The ‘time’ it takes for this movement out to return home is always the same amount/instant of measure, but if a lot of experience, change of energy state, takes place, it will seem to be a longer period of time, thus the experience of time is relative or subjective to the experiencer.

9- From beginning to end the same identity underlies everything, the consciousness, the energy, the thing that moves by progressing through the computer-generated broadcasts which the observer reads and interprets into a self-centric image.  Therefore, everything’s viewpoint is unique.

10- Everything has an opposite, because if it does not, it would not be in physical form because only moving/changing energy can be read/observed, and movement in a closed system automatically causes its opposite action.

11- Everything is a pump, spark, will, choice moving energy out and in within itself, and when the pump ceases to pump, the identity loses its identity or coherence and its collective signals break down into their smaller identities.  The pump is a snapshot electrical signal which simultaneously broadcasts a 3D-image signal broadcast and measures the energy-state response of those interpreting/participating.

12-The choice/response plus the current object coordinates and trajectories are calculated by the supercomputer, and the result is the image next broadcast to the participating consciousnesses, measurement, calculation, broadcast, measurement, calculation, etc.  The broadcasts, the signals the observer interprets as physical reality, are fleeting images produced in one’s psyche.  Therefore, any illusion of time, movement or force is your interpretation based solely upon what you observe.  They are but images on a screen changing over time so quickly that you believe they are happening fluidly and continuing solidly moment to moment.  All an illusion.

Posted in Unified Theory, Virtual Reality | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Creation of Physical Reality from Entangled Waves

Posted on January 24, 2012 by

CARRIER WAVES AND THE CREATION OF PHYSICAL REALITY FROM ENTANGLED WAVES

Carrier waves=an identifiable frequency found in connection with another (main) frequency which is, for this communication, the main frequency of a physical object.

Physical reality=that which can be measured by a physically manifest thing such as a mechanical measuring instrument or a human’s sensory systems.

Nonphysical reality=that which man and science considers not “real,” or “nothing” or the entangled state.

Everything has a detectable energy signature, and this can be recognized by a measuring instrument, then mapped or graphed out into a form recognized by humans and the scientific community as “real,” because you can measure it.  If you can’t measure it with something already existing in the known (recognized) physical world, it does not exist, it is not REAL.  Now, quantum physics tells us the “reality” is that there IS NOTHING except nonphysical frequencies which are read and graphed or interpreted into physical images.  The image may be the graph from an EKG machine, or it can be the physical experience that a human has on Earth.  The way that nonphysical frequency/signal soup becomes a spatial image is with carrier waves.  Carrier waves are attributes or poles and spins and characteristics, attitudes, that are imprinted onto an object’s main frequency signature.  These attributes tell the universal supercomputer how to calculate the “next frame” of our physical reality.  The universal supercomputer views a snapshot of every aspect of every “thing,” calculates the outcome, and projects the next frame, which is then broadcast.  When an instrument, such as a human, encounters this broadcast, the brain also encounters the carrier frequencies which are read by the brain which has a program which allows it, with the aid of the carrier wave, to place the signal within its spatial coordinate program in order to construct a physical image in your mind’s eye.  The carrier waves are only found on signals which are “born” directly through interaction with another physical object.  So when the human encounters a recognizable or palpable signal withOUT a carrier wave, the brain is confused and “sees” things such as images or lights which cannot be associated with a solid physical location.  You see this commonly in reflections, and uncommonly in “ghosts” or apparitions which are simply readable
signals with no carrier waves or no physical coordinates.

Evidence of the carrier wave phenomenon is in binaural recording, audio recordings which use an artificial head to simulate the interpretation of frequencies associated with physical occurrences.

These couple of paragraphs hold within them the understanding of how entangled signals, a mass of nonlocal confusion, can be the basis for a physical experience.  Closely related to this is the explanation for communication at “great distances” as well as other unanswered questions of physics.

Posted in Autism, Unified Theory, Virtual Reality | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Social Football

Posted on January 16, 2012 by

This blog post is about the main differences between NT and AS consciousness, how this manifests, and what can be done to resolve the difficulties caused by their differences.

The main difference is that the Autistic Spectrum consciousness is a very masculine-based viewpoint, while the neurotypical consciousness is feminine-based.  A masculine consciousness feels most comfortable with outward obsevation of patterns and physical objects.  They often, perhaps even usually, ignore the emotional aspects of interactions or issues.

The NT consciousness is a feminine-based one, which means it is most concerned with how it feels, and it often uses subjective bases to make decisions.  The feminine-based consciousness has very good reason to do so.  It might defy masculine logic, but it is actually quite logical for the NT consciousness to do so, and here is why:  You cannot trust outward NT appearances or even language because NTs can and do lie and deceive each other regularly.  Therefore, if one cannot rely on physical evidence in order to make decisions, one must develop, 1) one’s intuition, and 2) a system to measure or learn about others.  This measurement is used mostly for safety, whether that be physical safety or safety of one’s own interests.

Now, the NTs have developed a rather complex social system for measuring each other.  It is a bit like a Rorschach test which uses vague, seemingly meaningless inputs, and then examines the responses for intent.  For instance the handshake:  An NT can learn an amazing amount of information from this simple, seemingly meaningless social interaction.  A “firm” handshake is judged as a sign of someone who knows how to play the game appropriately.  A handshake that is too strong can be used to determine that the person wishes to intimidate.  Many conclusions can be further drawn about why they wish to intimidate, but the details of that are unnecessary for this communication.  A weak handshake tells you that the person is socially unskilled and/or physically weak.  Tidbits like this are gathered together with all sorts of other such tidbits and then added up, often over considerable time, to give the NTs a basis for decisions about how to interact with each other.  In the case of close relationships like couples or business associates, it may take years to accumulate enough of this type of information to reach a point where NTs feel they really know each other and can trust each other or not.  Frankly, most NTs never feel safe with each other no matter how much such information is accumulated.

There are many very subtle social inputs used to measure each other.  Every response given is examined and judged for “what it means.”  Very little interaction is taken literally.  To take someone at their word is dangerous.  Social interaction is a game of strategy, with layer upon layer of “If I do this, she’ll do that, so instead I’ll do this,” over and over and over.  This is why I call it social football.  You, the AS, are tossed a ball (vague social interaction used as an input to elicit information), and how you respond to that “ball” is run through the NT’s internal computer, which has been preprogramed with historical experience and conclusions, and the results of their calculations are used to decide how to interact with you, the AS.

Additionally, the NTs have developed categories of “types” of personalities, based again on historical interactions, in order to assist them in making decisions as quickly as possible about how to interact with each other.  The more quickly they can identify and categorize another’s type, the more quickly they will know how to act in their own best interest.  Logically, these categories start out with bulk categories like jock, intellectual, alpha male, submissive female, etc., then moves to subcategories such as fatherly or motherly, immature, unpredictable, abusive, socially effective or ineffective, etc.  Now, if the NTs cannot place you into a historically effective (survival-based conclusion) category, you are an unknown and therefore automatically go into the category of “UNSAFE.”

Now, while it may be theoretically possible to observe and learn the complicated social interactions which make up this “social football,” it does not make a lot of sense to take this path where a less cumbersome task but also effective solution is available.  I would propose that the AS, being the easier one of the two opposite poles to understand, categorize themselves and explain themselves to the NTs.  If the AS were to offer the NTs an easy and clear “manual” which tells them all about the AS, and IF the AS over time proves itself to follow the behavior in its own guidebook, you would then have a very strong foundation upon which to build NT/AS interactions going forward.

The NTs most needing of this type of manual are of course the parents at this time, and because of the dire necessity, the hunger, for this type of information, it is likely that the manual will have eager early NT/AS manual users.

Posted in Autism, Creating Reality, Social Issues | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

Guideline #6: The Kobayashi Maru

Posted on January 11, 2012 by

This post is about the unsolvable equation and the possible responses to it.  In Star Trek, cadets at Star Fleet Academy take a test called the Kobayashi Maru.  It is a computer-simulated scenario involving a disabled civilian vessel in the Klingon neutral zone.  The test does not contain as part of its program a winning answer.  No matter what choices you make, a lot of people die.  In the Star Trek universe, it is a test of character:  How does the Star Fleet candidate react to a no-win situation.  There have, however, been notable attempts to circumnavigate the test in order to reach a winning outcome.  Captain Kirk reprogrammed the computer in order to do so.  Although Captain Kirk cheated, he received a commendation for original thinking.

I believe that there exists on Earth one of these no-win situations, a situation which could benefit from some original thinking.  I do not wish to limit your imagination by giving you a defined, present-day example of this unsolvable equation.  I wish rather to relate an archetypal story, one which is recognizable in many common daily interactions.  This archetypal story and the solution that I propose will then be adaptable by the user.  Additionally, this is only one possible solution to the unsolvable equation, and I challenge you to take the test yourself.

“The Brother Equation”

Two sons were born, one of the mother and one of the father.  The mother loved both sons equally, while the father favored his own son.  The father’s son was unusually gifted in intellect, while the mother’s son was gifted with size and strength.  The fact that the father favored the intellectually gifted son hurt the mother’s son’s feelings so that the mother’s son sought to find favor in his father’s eyes by showcasing his skills of strength and power.  Unfortunately, the mother’s son chose to showcase his strength and power by comparing it with the relative physical weakness of the father’s son (in other words, he bullied the father’s son).  To the mother’s son, this was a perfectly logical calculation and not meant to actually physically hurt his weaker brother.  He merely wished to have their father acknowledge that his set of skills had value also.  Unfortunately, again, the father’s son only understood his own experience in which he was shown to be at the mercy of the stronger brother.

This angered the father who was also more the intellectual type.  The father could not reason any logical basis for the mother’s son’s behavior except that that son must be simply “bad.”  The relationships between and among the family members disintegrated until the family was divided in two.  The rift caused by this circumstance was unresolvable based upon the prevailing system of judgment or resolution of that day.  In other words, the logic of the intellectually based individuals could not rationalize any basis for this bullying behavior except to reach the judgment that the mother’s son was harmful.  If only they had had the emotional capacity to recognize the strong son’s emotionally based reasoning, the father could have logically, even by intellectual standards, recognized his other son’s need for acknowledgment and recognition.  If each son had been nurtured and valued according to his own set of skills, they could have learned to cooperate in an extremely mutually beneficial manner.  The intellectual but weak son could benefit from his brother’s strength while offering his brother the benefit of his greater mental acuity.  It could have been the classic and beautiful wizard and champion interaction, or like the advisor to the king.

This scenario reveals the limitations of a system which uses only physical elements in its equations such as “what happened.”  The father showed favoritism, and the weaker son was bullied by the stronger son.  Both sons have every logical right to feel harmed.  By current standards which judge everything by right or wrong, bad or good, this is a draw, so neither one, by societal standards, is required to make amends.

Now, since the scenario is causing severe discomfort for all involved, its resolution is not just desirable but necessary.  Because it must be resolved and the current standard cannot do so, I propose an overhaul of THE SYSTEM.  Under this new system, it is not necessary to measure or judge or punish any of the involved parties.  The resolution would seem like a pretty simple premise, but why not just pick themselves up and say “Do over!!!” and move on, move forward?  The benefits of feuding have been more than amply explored and can be scientifically proven to be reproducibly nonbeneficial to all involved.  Unless you count the benefit to the scavengers on the battlefield, and I don’t.

I further propose that since the strong son’s emotionally based being has a very real need to not be viewed as lacking, and also in part due to the strong-yet-emotional son’s lack of skill in intellectual reasoning, it is therefore the intellectual son who must take the action that will lay the foundation for a suitable way in which to move forward, and move forward without punishment for anybody involved.  The system would look like this:
The intellectual son uses his intellect to create far-reaching, beneficial systems and products.  The intellectual son is held under no requirement to interact with a strong son who would harm him.  When the strong son sees the benefit of the intellectual son’s creation, and when the strong son expresses a desire to join the intellectual son’s network, the intellectual son does so using the same basis that he uses when choosing to interact with any other person:  Does this person have anything of benefit for me and my creation?  Yes, of course the strong son has many skills which could benefit the intellectual son and his creations, and when both interact based on a beneficial/nonbeneficial, free-choice system, punishment is not required to direct behavior because the system itself fosters beneficial behavior.  The consequences of nonbeneficial interaction is non-inclusion, and we all know what a very large deterrent non-inclusion can be.

Now, under the current system it would be considered a reasonable or logical conclusion for the intellectual son to consider himself a bigger person for having been wise enough to resolve this age-old equation, but this single, “logical” conclusion would negate all benefits inherent in the new system.  The new system must be based on a nonhierarchical, beneficial/nonbeneficial litmus test, not “I am better and therefore must help my nonsimilarly skilled brother.”  Remember, each brother has their own skill set and each is valuable in his own way.  When every individual is utilized or mined for each one’s unique attributes, the overall pool of resources available to everyone will be so greatly enhanced that you may just find our small blue planet becoming more and more like heaven on Earth.  Now, how would you solve the unsolvable?

Posted in Autism, Creating Reality, Deprogramming, Guidelines, Middle East, Social Issues, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Guideline #5: CONTROL

Posted on January 9, 2012 by

This post is about unraveling the mental and emotional twists and turns that have brought us to our present-day culture which operates on fear and manipulation.  It is unnecessary to go back in time to the first instance of animal hierarchy and survival stories.  If you look closely at the dynamics surrounding just a couple of very everyday situations, you can regain an accurate sense of your place and security in life.  This can then be used to fix multiple other situations you will encounter in life.

First let’s look at the tool most commonly used to gain control over you:  Peer pressure in a school setting, especially bullying.  Nearly every child is subjected to this type of conditioning even if they do not go to a public school, because their parents or guardians have already been subjected to the treatment and pass it on without the child actually attending a public school.  And if the parents don’t pass on the control issues, everybody else that you will encounter will enforce this social dynamic.

It all starts with placing the child in an environment where all control is removed from the child, then subject them to situations that will indelibly imprint them with the feeling that they are unable to control what happens to them.  Once you have seeded this belief that others can hurt you and you can do nothing about it, it becomes a fact of life, because if enough of the culture has succumbed to it, it becomes a scientifically provable and reproducible reality that you are at the mercy of others.  This environment creates a LOGICAL CONCLUSION that you are at the mercy of others.  This has been a particularly deep-seated issue that has taken me a lifetime to resolve, but I assure you, it is possible to remove this societal implant.

So in school as well as other areas of life the “bully” is allowed to operate and flourish.  Even though everybody knows that this gut-wrenching abuse takes place every single day in one form or another, it is only now being addressed in schools.  We know the new rules about no tolerance for bullying are yet ineffective, but it is a step in the right direction.

Now, it seems that most people believe that bullying is a normal part of life and that it is even desirable because it teaches you to be tough.  Also, bullying can be tolerated because when children become adults, it is a common experience to believe that the bullies perhaps did not have as much power as we believed as a child, so it is almost like the boogeyman in the closet:  You grow up and realize your fear was perhaps out of proportion.  Unfortunately, the damage is already done.  The boogeyman or bully may no longer be a literal factor in your adult life, but the fear and fear responses learned remain operable.

But still, we can take a lesson from our ability to understand the situation better once we become adults and are no longer forced to interact in large groups where this dynamic is tolerated, meaning you graduate from schooling.  At some point the child leaves the controlled military environment of the school, and they now gain a broader perspective on what happened.  The child-now-adult gains some control over what happens in their life.  So here is the first step to erasing the control imprint:  Recognition of the system and its result, and recognizing future attempts to reinforce the imprint.  Like school ending, you will often find you are in control of what happens, and even if you must accept a negative outcome at the hands of another, you are always in control of whether you believe you are at the mercy of others.  You are always in control of whether you feel that others have control over you.  And that is the crux of the issue, the ability of others to instill in you the BELIEF that they have control over you.

A major factor at play in the ability of others to bully effectively is with things:  physical possessions, or say, status.  If you believe that these things have the value that society places on them, you may allow others to control your behavior based on the gain or loss of physical possessions or status.  Society currently places unhealthy value on the appearance of wealth.  If you maintain control over your ability to make changes in your life (the main obstacle often being financial stability), you will be in a very strong position because you will have many more choices available should you find yourself in a difficult position.  For example, if you do as everybody else and buy the largest house and the nicest car and home electronics and computers, you become a slave to them.  You find yourself in a position where you feel that you must keep your present job at all costs, otherwise you lose all those things.  However, if you allow yourself a cushion so that you could survive if you needed to change jobs, then you may still have a boss, but he will not be able to bully or control you by threatening your job.  Whenever you retain or create options for yourself, you will retain control in your own hands rather than somebody else’s.

Now, there can be many sneaky ways that this belief in the control that others have over you can pop up.  For instance, the fear that comes from a physical imperfection or personality trait that others find unacceptable.  These more insidious, nitpicky fears may run through our thoughts almost constantly, creating a very unhealthy internal environment.  But how does one not succumb to the lack of control these fears cause when it is a fact that you can’t control how another feels about you?  The answer is to know that you ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS have the ability to seek out people who are like you or those that accept you no matter what.  There is even a belief that there may be only one suitable mate for you, and this is true bologna.  If your present relationship does not support you, learn from it, make a list of what would be supportive, and then go create that relationship.  Society puts great value on being accepted by everybody, but this is not even possible!  The media creates the image that life is a popularity contest.  Don’t buy it!  Just look at popular culture.  Is it even logical?  Do you really want to be accepted by a culture whose main purpose is to acquire the biggest, best or most expensive house, car or diamond???????  Maintain your naturally strong ability to recognize what is logical and beneficial.  When you are grounded in this knowledge, you will be less likely to compromise yourself for another.

We are not meant to live in fear.  Even animals do not live in fear.  Fear is meant to get you out of life-threatening situations.  Anytime, and I mean any time you find yourself in fear (and it is not a life-threatening situation), assess your circumstances for the reality of the situation.  Are you afraid of not being liked?  Then set a goal to find people that like who you are.  Do you not believe there is anybody that will like who you are?  Assess where you came by this belief.  Are you bludgeoned daily with the idea that you must fit perfectly our culture’s model of perfection?  Why is that?  Does that allow others to control you through fear?  The irony is that NONE of us fit our culture’s model of perfection, and there are multitudes of people who, if they were not brainwashed like everybody else, would love the opportunity to be themselves and also be accepted.  But it is going to take courage to break away from this mirage of an ideal that keeps the masses under control, beginning with dislodging the implantation of the conclusion that you are at the mercy of others.  As long as you understand the system of control, and as long as you steer clear of social pressures that can cause you to make decisions that place you under someone else’s control, it is possible to operate within our culture and even have plenty of lovely physical possessions, yet maintain the ability to change your job or life if you find yourself being forced to make a choice between your best interests and somebody else’s.

Posted in Creating Reality, Deprogramming, Guidelines, Social Issues, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Guideline #4: The Breaking of an Old Paradigm

Posted on December 31, 2011 by

There is an ancient custom or belief that the oldest, most knowledgeable person becomes automatically responsible for anybody with less age and knowledge.  I can’t think of a single culture where this isn’t a valid premise.  Strength and experience may become factors, but there is always this last, basic rule which can cause leadership to be thrust upon a person based only on his age and knowledge rather than desire or ability to lead and make decisions on behalf of others.  I would propose that this is an antiquated habit and could be replaced with a more modern and beneficial decision-making structure:  The network.

Consider this:  Is a very old library with the largest inventory of books and thus knowledge the best choice for a leader?  I would propose that the library, or rather the human repository of much knowledge and experience, is best suited for just that:  Gathering, storing, and organizing information for retrieval.  I believe the type of individual which has reached such maturity and skill in being a repository of information will have a viewpoint whose skills and interests lie in the area of information gathering and organization and will thus not have the best set of skills necessary for MAKING DECISIONS on behalf of others.
Additionally, wherever you rely on one source for information, you limit yourself to that person’s subjective experience, organizational ability, and retrieval skills.  When you think about it that way, it hardly makes any sense to narrow your decision-making resources to such a limited resource.  Perhaps this can work well in a society of small numbers and little variation among its members, but where there are large numbers with great complexity of needs (a society containing many cultures and/or many physically diverse areas such as deserts versus swamps or snowy climates) a one- or few-brain central decision-making repository may be too limited to adequately respond to the needs of enough of its members.  This is also a very weak system in that it is relatively easy to identify and remove these “heads” from a system (a system being a person, a country, a corporation, etc.) and wreak havoc on the system’s ability to function.

I propose that the new paradigm would decentralize the “library” into many networking nodes with each node being responsible for its own area of interest and expertise.  For example, I have noticed that those on the Autistic Spectrum share information about themselves and their interests with little personal filtering.  While this makes the neurotypical person uncomfortable, it is the only thing that makes sense when organizing and building a network.  If you don’t truly know about a person and their interests, because a culture requires personal secrecy at all costs, it is very difficult to gather information efficiently from ANYBODY.  This creates an environment where many people operate and make decisions in the dark, or only a few have the necessary information to make decisions, which is a setup for manipulating others with this valuable information.
The AS’s natural tendency to organize based on shared interests is the perfect basis for building a strong network for easy information retrieval and polling of large numbers of members for efficient and beneficial decision making for the many.

I would further present the premise that this decentralization would work similarly to a free-trade system in that when any information about anything is available to anyone, any individual or group can gather information and then based on that information create a product or action which is brought “to the market,” and the market decides whether it benefits them or not.  The market being any individual or group in reach of your product or action.

The idea of networks and nodes is not a new one and its strength is undisputed.  You can take out many, many nodes before it handicaps the functional ability of the system.  This is because, in part, the nodes create a complex tapestry of interwoven connections, large and small, through many diverse dimensions of size and reach.  In other words, when individuals are allowed to meander about, connecting with others, forming and reforming groups which have flexible boundaries, the connections become too complex and numerous to unravel the system without taking out nearly every aspect of it.

I envision a worldwide network similar to the Internet, but one that has as its basis genuine individuals such as the AS who form their networks based on a genuine, perfect trail of who they are and what they want and need.  I am not proposing that our network of governments be disassembled.  To the contrary, if governments would avail themselves of a network created in the way I propose, the governments could take advantage of this easy access to genuinely valuable information in order to meet its constituents’ needs in a timely, up-to-the-minute fashion.

Fortunately, the structure is already there, it simply needs valid information and appropriately structured groups.  And by appropriately structured groups I mean, again, those formed by individuals representing themselves genuinely and openly.
Now, this openness, due to the present nature of our society, could lead to abuse and manipulation at the hands of those that operate in the way of the old consciousness, but I hearken back to the statements (found here in the comments below the post) of James Williams, Author and National Presenter on Autism, when he states that he and his friends, which consist of both NTs and ASs, have formed their own safe zones, and if and when the AS-based network of safe zones becomes strong enough, it would naturally be adopted by old-consciousness systems able to recognize the value created within a network founded on TRUTH.

Posted in Autism, Creating Reality, Guidelines, Rules, Social Issues, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment