So, being woefully bored lately, my movie watching has changed a bit. I've watched a couple of "romantic comedies"; and then I started to notice something, so I watched a couple more.

Interesting stereotyping coming out of unHolywood.

In every one of these movies, they paint the male as affluent and detached, or sports loser macho man and buddy boy; but in either case, the male is always a retard about women and never wants to be responsible to a relationship.

Just wondering, is this how we actually view males in the country?

I don't know, Mas.

It could be stereotyping, but it seems like accurate reporting to me. But that might be because I've never been particularly impressed with maledom, which is the shits because I are one.

But "maledom" is a stereotype built on false perception.

I have fun with it, bashing people with unbending maleness, because it is just SO EASY to get a reaction over it. It's a riot.

But I don't actually live that way, and the stereotypes presented seem a bit ... myopic, at best. Every male doesn't fall into one of the two presented categories ... do they?

Well, most don't fall in to either group, but hollywood has to get people to plunk down the change some way. Most of us couldn't generate enough interest for a 30 sec ad...

I've never told anyone that I'm interesting; actually the converse, just kind of "that guy" syndrome. "Nothing to see here people, move along."

Plus, can't stand social attention/being inspected.

But really, the attempt to just simplify every male down to "this or that" is not only irritating, it's clearly false. Only a few of my friends fall directly into a category, other than them, most males I know are their own person.

I think it plays into the sheep mentality and generates more devisiveness than needs to be.

So what is new about stereotyping? What about the stereotypical jiggly T&A blonde who couldn't possibly be looking for anything but a good fuck? Every thing is society is reduced to some simplified bullshit. Why? Because we don't want to think. We just want to be "entertained".

That's my problem, the "entertainment" aspect is more at ... failsauce.

You will not be entertained by something that you are seeing for what it actually is, unless the something is Fox News.

We are not meant to dissect entertainment, simply to view it, allow it to ingrain itself into our thoughts, and eventually act according to that which entertains us. In other words, become one of those two categories of men.

It's easier that way, if everyone falls into one of two categories.

Hadi bey sende.

We naturally reduce things in this manner because our brains are finite in conscious processing space. Stereotyping is just another dopamine-neurone learning facillity - we learn over the years that (a reliable majority of) bottle blondes with fake tits and a saucey walk are out for a status-enhancing shag - and to be disregarded unless of course we ourselves are of a compatable status, at which point, when presented with a choice of bbwftasw's we engage conscious mind and begin to catagorize more stringently.

Without the instinctive ability to generalize, stereotype and otherwise asign abstracted properties as representative of whole classes of objects, we'd never be able to get out of bed.

The space this act frees up is supposed to be availiable for more important and/or novel experiences. Like "Ooh that tiger looks hungry, I have a palm frond, a stone and a rubber chicken - how can I keep myself alive..?"

The trouble with our (Western) societies is not that people are lazy TV-addicts but that we have a lack of Tigers and rubber chicken situations with which to usefully engage our free processing spaces. Your average Joe or June is faced with the same choices every day - Shall I do the same old shit (which btw. kept us alive reasonably well yesterday) or shall I do some different shit.

What motive do we have, without intruding external incentives, to do different shit..?

You know Pav, and that's exactly what it struck me as, that fucking Tab quote, all over again:

"All you guys panting, drooling, with your wank out, over here in group A."

"All you golf playing, Gulf Stream"ing", Valentino suits, over here in group B."

Really, all I could think was, "Yeah, fuck you too, unHolywood."

Good point Tab, I'll take that scenario, seems organically correct.

But, there is also the point that Kaku brought up in his videos on time: without a small bit of applied force to get into those tiger and rubber chicken scenarios, the brain does actually start to rot.

Survival is great and all, our "shit happens, find a way out" brain settings have been marvelously successful. But, it no longer has the environment it was formed from, and if you don't forcibly look for unexplored avenues ~ you wake up at 70 years old and all you have is, "where'd the time go?"