You are currently browsing the monthly archive for October 2013.
Not the most encouraging study.
“Princeton University psychologist Susan Fiske took brain scans of heterosexual men while they looked at sexualised images of women wearing bikinis. She found that the part of their brains that became activated was pre-motor – areas that usually light up when people anticipate using tools. The men were reacting to the images as if the women were objects they were going to act on. Particularly shocking was the discovery that the participants who scored highest on tests of hostile sexism were those most likely to deactivate the part of the brain that considers other people’s intentions (the medial prefrontal cortex) while looking at the pictures. These men were responding to images of the women as if they were non-human.”
Arb and I are now down to only one cat. This is how I’ll remember Lilith
Not long after her boneless lying in the sun picture, we started noticing Lilith was losing weight. And then her coat turned nasty like she wasn’t grooming herself properly, so it was vet time pronto. I assumed it was just worms again, since Lilith hunts and hunting cats tend to get whatever parasites infest their prey.
As it turns out, Lilith had lost a whole lot of weight, and it was only the last rapid bit we’d noticed. Read the rest of this entry »
It’s nice to see a little Sun everyone once and awhile in the toxic soup that is comprises much of the Media in the the US.
Gotta catch them all, can you distinguish all 20 variations? :)
BWV 582/1: Passacaglia
The passacaglia is in 3/4 time typical of the form. Bach’s ostinato comprises eight bars, which is unusual but not unheard of: an ostinato of the same length is used, for example, in Johann Krieger‘s organ passacaglia. The opening of the piece, which consists of the ostinato stated in the pedal with no accompaniment from the manuals, is slightly more unusual, although this idea also occurs elsewhere, and may even have been used by Buxtehude.[8]
There are 20 variations in BWV 582/1. The first begins with a typical C minor affekt, “a painful longing” according to Spitta, similar to the beginning of Buxtehude’s Chaconne in C minor (BuxWV 159).[9] Numerous attempts have been made to figure out an overarching symmetrical structure of the work, but scholars have yet to agree on a single interpretation.[10] Particularly important attempts were made by Christoph Wolff and Siegfried Vogelsänder.[11] Some scholars have speculated that there is a symbolic component to the structure of the work: for instance, Martin Radulescu argues that BWV 582/1 is “in the form of a cross”.[12]
There is agreement among most scholars that the Passacaglia builds up until its climax in variation twelve.[citation needed] This is followed by three quiet variations, forming a short intermezzo, and then the remaining five variations end the work.
Bach performer and scholar Marie-Claire Alain suggested that the 21 variations are broken down into 7 groups of 3 similar variations, each opening with a quotation from a Lutheran chorale, treated similarly to the Orgel-Buchlein written at a similar time:[13]
- Bars 8-12, the top part spells out the opening notes of “Nun komm’ der Heiden Heiland”
- Bars 24-48, a cantilena spells out “Von Gott will ich nicht lassen”
- Bars 49-72, the scales are a reference to “Vom Himmel kam der Engel Schar”
- Bars 72-96, recalling the “star” motif from “Herr Christ, der Ein’ge Gottes-Sohn”
- Bars 96-120, ornamented figure similar to that in “Christ lag in Todesbanden” accompanies theme in the soprano then moving successively to alto and bass
- Bars 144-168 “Ascending intervals in bass recall the Easter chorale “Erstanden ist der heil’ge Christ”.
Alain also points out that the numbers (21 repetitions of the Passacaglia ground and 12 statements of the fugue subjects) are inversions.
“Here’s the thing. Men in our culture have been socialized to believe that their opinions on women’s appearance matter a lot. Not all men buy into this, of course, but many do. Some seem incapable of entertaining the notion that not everything women do with their appearance is for men to look at. This is why men’s response to women discussing stifling beauty norms is so often something like “But I actually like small boobs!” and “But I actually like my women on the heavier side, if you know what I mean!” They don’t realize that their individual opinion on women’s appearance doesn’t matter in this context, and that while it might be reassuring for some women to know that there are indeed men who find them fuckable, that’s not the point of the discussion. Women, too, have been socialized to believe that the ultimate arbiters of their appearance are men, that anything they do with their appearance is or should be “for men.” That’s why women’s magazines trip over themselves to offer up advice on “what he wants to see you wearing” and “what men think of these current fashion trends” and “wow him with these new hairstyles.” While women can and do judge each other’s appearance harshly, many of us grew up being told by mothers, sisters, and female strangers that we’ll never “get a man” or “keep a man” unless we do X or lose some fat from Y, unless we moisturize//trim/shave/push up/hide/show/”flatter”/paint/dye/exfoliate/pierce/surgically alter this or that.
That’s also why when a woman wears revealing clothes, it’s okay, in our society, to assume that she’s “looking for attention” or that she’s a slut and wants to sleep with a bunch of guys. Because why else would a woman wear revealing clothes if not for the benefit of men and to communicate her sexual availability to them, right? It can’t possibly have anything to do with the fact that it’s hot out or it’s more comfortable or she likes how she looks in it or everything else is in the laundry or she wants to get a tan or maybe she likes women and wants attention from them, not from men?
The result of all this is that many men, even kind and well-meaning men, believe, however subconsciously, that women’s bodies are for them. They are for them to look at, for them to pass judgment on, for them to bless with a compliment if they deign to do so. They are not for women to enjoy, take pride in, love, accept, explore, show off, or hide as they please. They are for men and their pleasure.”
What? Another way to delude ourselves? Yes blog friends, there seems to be a new way each and every day.
One hour of your time, one hour to appreciate an alternate point of view of how the world works.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…