Rationality and Irrationality

I wrote a very long letter/message in response to a very good friend of mine, I have a tendency to seriously forget things that I have put in my head and my system of thought and I thought the letter in it self is very good in trying to clarify whats in my head. I also have a tendency to not be able to think when I'm angry, kind of neanderthal in my part - I think after this post I would like to kick Levi Strauss' ass for being such a white Frenchman, just as much as I want to kick Xavier Sandner's ass for being such a white Frenchman.

Cap'n Liyana Tassim Septembarrr 14 roundabouts 11:07 in the evenin'
Okay one thing I admit, I don't work well under pressure buuut
let's start off with one thing, I also remembered that there was a concept that I was utilizing and it was far more useful than clear cut questions of 'What is kinship?', If kinship was not necessisated by blood and that to inherit or receive money/land/goods/etc. was by way of what? So the concept I used was Carsten's degrees of relatedness. That I thought was an excellent idea, for one, if I used degrees as the main theory compass to explain the process of how people received inheritance/rights/positions, therefore, there was more validity to and truthfulness to the concept than not. So there were as you say positions but such positions does not necessarily (or as you say, categories of positions) entail specific rights, negotiation yes, is by way of one - but, what is salient in this feature? Degrees of relatedness, investment for one is both (in)tangible and I have detailed or (ofcourse I need to iron) the course in which people CAN negotiate their positions this was the feature that demarcates from fixed patriarchal patrilineal matriarchal matrilineal societies, the existence of PREFERENCE. If for instance other societies these rules are set or fixed and there is no way to go about it in bilineal societies this is not the case, therefore other means or ways are needed to explain said phenomenon.

On the question of rationality and irrationality, now I remember, I wrote a paper when I was doing political sociology between the English legal system and the Islamic legal system, one was highly rational and the other considered to be irrational - however, rationality does not imply that it is a 'good' thing rather, the system was built in such a way that it is difficult for people to be judged, waiting years in line to be brought to the court of law, this is because the system is highly rational and highly bureaucratic, on the other hand the Kadi judicial system was irrational and was subject to case by case basis, ofcourse this is traced by historical junction ala Michel Foucault. Irrationality therefore as I have found out does not necessarily mean that the system is bad, au contraire, irrationality is in fact in this cultural system is more beneficial especially when we are dealing with numerous cases quickly and effectively. Therefore, I do not agree that rationality is completely and wholesomely the best way to go about in judging people or a cultural state of mind so to speak. Btw, how sick are you mi amor? This I think forms my system of thought, I suppose it is different for yours. Well, now I am thinking straight - adieu

Dr. Laura Schlessinger

Now when I heard the latest controversy concerning the infamous talk show host, I thought, obviously nothing could justify her actions in this rain weather storm/shit. However, I also looked into several of her publications although nothing would induce me to read one and be appropriately gagged throughout. Ofcourse the advice she gives out is simple enough, you give in order to receive without needing to analyze the actual implications of those men's actions towards their wives. The examination ofcourse is done in part of the women whereby if they act a certain way, certain prescribed/proscribed ways that signifies what a 'REAL' woman is and therefore they will receive the amount of attention and affection that they want. But the question is, only as a devil's advocate because of course they have every right to receive the happiness that they wish to have and the kind of structure that they wish to present/portray/exist in their lives. But honestly, going far back and talking about the first season of Desperate Housewives, Gabriel goes back and realizes that what she wanted was all the wrong things that she really needed. Although the whole point was for her to have marital bliss and have a baby and all that. But what does a woman want? And why does society have to point it out what they want? Can it be examined further that what you want is not really what you REALLY REALLY want but a product of what you think you SHOULD want?

Congratulations Australia!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Another Rainy Day

Things have gone a bad turn for me, thankfully I'm getting off unscathed (I think). I'm getting divorced and I don't talk to my mother. I hope things go out well. Other than that, on other issues around the world, I haven't taken the time to talk about the recent fiasco with British Petroleum. So far at SeizeBP.org which I recommend everyone take the time to read, the oil spill is still ongoing. Obviously mentions by government filled newspapers and any other forms of media, the situation is supposedly 'under control' What with the things that are going around on earth right now, with the huge crack somewhere in South America, I would have hoped that people would change their actions and ways. I am still on a semi-carbon diet, I don't ask for plastic bags anymore, I vehemently refuse if someone tries to give me a plastic spoon or fork although I think I should take this a little bit further by taking my own stuff when I want to take away food, like a container or something. I can't live without my computer off, hmm, that doesn't sound so promising although I did set it off to low performance. What astounds me still in the Beunri media is that they only tell people to turn off their water heaters when it's not in use. Hell, are we Rockefellers or something?! Shit, even Rockefeller was an extremely stingy person, so much so he installed a public coin phone at home so that his family, friends and workers couldn't call as they liked. But really, what have they been doing? Leaving it on all day long? People take what? one or two showers a day? Why is that thing on the whole day?!I cannot conceive of the things that we constantly do. And all this fuel for what? I took part as a volunteer for a Green Debate in my university as a water carrier LOL. Interestingly although the whole issue was 'Green' water bottles were used everywhere, what's wrong with water jugs or tap water? Although the issues were there it was hardly green, God knows why. Obviously it was a gimmick in part of shell, I'm not saying it's a bad thing, in fact it could be a good thing. Or am I too extreme? We need some green advisers that's for sure.

Cultural Hegemony?

looking back towards Antonio Gramsci's Cultural Hegemony made me wonder. There are loads of examples that support this theory and very much influences a lot of people. It has also been known that cultural hegemony has the ability to uproot localized cultures and deem them as 'bigoted', 'other', part of the 'lower' etc. when there is absolutely no evidence to support that 'their' way of doing things are better. For instance, protocol, often you see that you're giving loads of movements or even wasting a lot of materials - for what? For what exactly? Sure humans have the need to celebrate or worship/meet the queen but is it necessary to use much waste in the process? Doesn't things like this actually cost much more and difficult to boot? It's like going to the opera house, sure it's for culture, definitely I don't see the wrong in that however, I do see a problem when it utilizes much waste. Wastefulness indeed, like JLos watches or Beyonce's million dollars' worth of wigs. Gramsci has a serious point and I would like to say that I'm wrong but honestly in more ways than one, he's right. Buttress this claim against the French dude who says that certain people make it because of 'Cultural Capital'.

My dear stars

My dear stars,
where ever you are,
under the blanket of dark,
and your little pointy mark.

Fascinating me until I just stare and stare,
It's not like anyone cares,
But I'm okay I think,
I just want to wait and let it sink-
in

I'm kinda lost and my dreams get stranger and stranger,
I'm not in any real danger,
just dreaming again on and off on and off,
then I wake up wishing I was asleep again

The grass is close to my feet.
It's rather cold - no heat.
I wonder what you're doing there,
untouched by this dirty earth,
And all the blood that we didn't spare,
heaven and earth heaven and earth.

The trouble with packed foods

Now lately this has been bothering me and I rewatched The Story of Stuff again. Think about it, you want to eat some biscuits then you go buy some old-fashioned Khong Guan biscuits. The new Khong Guan biscuits now come individually packed while the old ones are only once packed, this time one pack has mini packs! You eat one or two mini packs then you throw it away in a few seconds...how is that fair? It comes with the package, I always refuse plastic spoons or forks for the plain reason that they get thrown away afterwards, for what? For a single use of a thing that biodegrades in 300 fucking years! Ditto for our sanitary pads and kids diapers. Why in the world is it so difficult to be sustainable? I need to go on a carbon diet.

I wonder if I'm a racist?

I wonder if I'm a racist when it comes to finding men who are attractive, if I am spot me out here's the list:-

How often do you see positive images of women in movies?

Granted that the most recent movie I watched with a positive image of a woman was Sigourney Weaver in Avatar (and she's not even the hero) a lot of movies I have watched seems just to limit women and womenhood in general. Sigourney Weaver is a good example of an actress who have jumped the boundaries and is able to become the hero (woohoo~!). Seriously how often do you that to be the exception and not the norm? My GOD!

You, Me and Dupree
- Kate Hudson is a schoolteacher

Bride Wars
- Kate Hudson is a successful lawyer but sort of breaks down in the middle of her meeting just because she has blue hair, and all because of something as 'frilly' as a wedding. Oh she's also portrayed as a 'bitchy' woman.
- Her bestfriend Anne Hathaway is ...gasp, a schoolteacher.

Glee
- I like Glee and the actress Jane Lynch was great in it...just sayin ha3

and the list goes on and on

successful women = bitchy = need love and affirmation of some hot hunk
middle class women who are teachers = smarmy and mousy ( I'm soo not against teachers even though I hated a lot of them during high school, the point is, one of them was a great teacher and she was a woman, never had a great male teacher, nuff said).

When is the next female character the hero again like Aliens? I haven't seen one in ages, when Sigourney Weaver (as a 9 year old kid I watching it) was carrying her large guns I have never felt that 'this looks wrong', au contraire, I was rooting for her, looking at her kill those effing aliens. When was there a positive image of a woman holding a gun looks so right? (not saying that I'm promoting violence either) Well, Buffy the Vampire Slayer is one although not my favourite, but Xena was and she was my favourite (kick ass Xena! She was even wayyy better than that show Hercules she spawned out of).Where are the female heroines? Good God I think we need a fifth wave of feminism...

The fragmentation of Nationhood

I think as everyone might be aware of the comings and goings of Malaysi a similar trajectory can be seen with what is happening elsewhere around the world. The existence of minority communities. What we are truly living in at the moment is a post-nationalist world. The nationalist world while still in full effect elsewhere is becoming increasingly fragmented. Sure, Malaysia has had its problems and yes they have for these past few decades created racial riots severe enough to see that they cannot be together and they cannot be apart. It's like the Malay saying, 'Talan mati bapa, luah mati mama' (To swallow your father will die, to spit your mother will die). Malaysia definitely cannot exist if for instance it decides to fragment itself (which it would very improbably won't). The thought rose to me when I was reading Thomas Friedman's 'From Beirut to Jerusalem'. The Lebanese which saw the multiplying minority becoming a majority and like Malaysia too the Malays saw the extreme increasing number of the Chinese right before their eyes. Neither of these countries could exist without the other (well, that is their logic) but in a post-nationalist world where every country is fragmented in terms of race could be very well underhanded. These are wars of identity and ethnicity. Something in truth, very well historically engineered to exist. I wonder what is going on, honestly I am beginning to be suspicious that this is the work of creating non-fluid identities but a more marginalized ethnicity and country without regard to how much it forces people to become uniform. Whatever the arguments proposed for unity and sameness, I think could be summed up by the experiences of the untouchables of India and now I found out, the 'burakumin' of Japan.