Miscellaneous Feeds

Body Language

The Rational Man - Thu, 09/27/2018 - 01:15

I have a feeling I’m going to get myself in trouble with this post. One thing I’ve learned from sixteen years of writing in the manosphere is that people take the issue of Looks are very personally. I think there’s something engrained in how our minds evolved to make us aware of where we fit in as far as image is concerned. I think maybe that’s the root of where we get the idea of leagues with respect to sexual market value. I’ve mentioned before that it’s my belief that everyone is keenly aware of their personal conditions on some level of consciousness and how we look to others is part of that awareness.

My friend Tanner Guzy wrote a great book this year titled The Appearance of Power and I learned quite a bit from it with respect to the, often derided, subconscious choices we make in how we present ourselves to others. A lot goes into what we think is the very simple task of dressing ourselves each day and the message we’re conveying to other men, women, our families, our coworkers, our church, etc. We all have at least a peripheral awareness of what we’re communicating with our clothes, our behaviors and our speech.

Another great book I’m presently reading is the new title from Joe Navarro, The Dictionary of Body Language. Joe was one of the speakers at last year’s 21 Convention and I had the pleasure of talking with him for a bit there. For 25 years he worked as an FBI special agent in the area of counterintelligence and behavioral assessment. Today he is one of the world’s leading experts on nonverbal communications and this book is a very good resource for a lot of reasons. I’m not sure Joe likes being affiliated with the manosphere, but there’s no doubt that what he’s studied and written about for so long can be an invaluable tool for reading the sub-communications of women in Game applications. 

Way back in 2011 I wrote a brief essay called Learn to Read. At that time my focus was on emphasizing the need to be aware of the information a guy could glean from his surroundings, understanding the social environment and also the sub-communications a woman might be relaying to him in that moment. We tend to take it for granted, but there is a lot of information our brains need to process in social settings. For the most part our subconscious minds push out the background noise and less important information to our peripheral awareness so our conscious minds can focus on what we think is most important. Sometimes the part we take for granted, the information that our subconscious processes can be at least as important as what our consciousness is sorting out.

I’m calling attention to this process (as well as Joe’s work) because I want to stress the importance our Instinctual Process plays in interpreting what we see with respect to social interactions, but more importantly for our purposes, when we see men and women interact with one another. For the past 12 years my career in the liquor and gaming industries has put me in the unique position of being able to people-watch and study the unspoken communications that goes on between men and women in settings where they’re primed to apply their interpersonal skills (or lack of). However, it wasn’t until I started contrasting what I was seeing with what I understood about behavioral psychology, evo-psych and the sexual strategies men and women evolved for.

And this, this is the part where I get myself in trouble. In that time I think I’ve developed a pretty good ability to read what men and women are communicating with their clothing, expressions, posture, physical positioning, etc. and interpreting it with a Red Pill Lens. I get in trouble with this because, like I said, people tend to take my reading into things very personally. Even if I’m reading the photograph of a couple they know nothing about they associate something in the image that with how they perceive themselves.

Most of us were taught from an early age never to “judge a book by its cover.” We were taught it’s wrong to be judgmental and it’s what’s on the inside that counts. This has never really sat well with me, but you run the risk of sounding catty when you judge a person by their looks or whatever it is they’re doing in a picture. They say you sound like a gossipy woman, or else it’s supposedly some indication that you’re projecting your own insecurities onto whoever it is you might be critical of. This is unfortunate because our Instinctual interpretive process makes judgment calls all the time in our peripheral awareness. We all make comparisons in our hindbrains, it’s just impolite to give voice to them. This does nothing to help us objectively assess what sub-communications are taking place.

So, fair warning, I’m going to make some reads on some pictures here and if what I interpret seems a little self-serving or judgmental just know that I’m doing my best to stay objective.

For the past 3 months I’ve gotten into the habit of reading the images of various couples that guys on Twitter have been sending me. If you want a brief primer for this I talked about it with Tim Wenger last August here. For the most part these guys wanted me to determine what they were seeing were Alpha Tells or Beta Tells in the body language between the couple. In the majority of these shots, the Beta male body language was fairly evident even to the untrained eye. What was less evident was what the woman’s sub-communications were conveying.

Leaning In

Of the more than a hundred shots I read, the number one most common position for men was the lean in. This posture is something Roissy once called attention to as the hallmark of a Beta subconsciously manifesting his mindset in his body language:

The lean-in is easily identifiable, and while I don’t think it is alwaysBeta Tell (depends on context) it’s certainly the starting point for other manifestations of men with a necessitous subconscious. What I mean by that is that the lean-in is a physical display that illustrates how a man’s subconscious has decided that his woman’s Frame is the dominant one in the relationship. He feels the compulsion to put himself into her space as his natural impulse.

It’s also important to bear in mind that when we are photographed with others, in this case women, we are, or would like to be intimate with, there is a subconscious recognition that anyone viewing the image will infer a relationship context. More on this later, but for now keep in mind that some of these inferences will be related to mate guarding behaviors.

The reflexive critique of this lean-in is usually “Well, that’s just that one shot” or “The photographer told him to lean in” to which I can only say that the predominance of couples shots, candid and staged alike, most consistently pose a man as the leaner.

Lean out

The counter to this leaning-in is a woman leaning out or away from the man. It’s almost as if there is an unspoken conflict of hindbrains going on. A (Beta) man leans in to find inclusion and acceptance in a woman’s Frame while her own hindbrain instinctively reacts and attempts to lessen any inference of intimate acceptance to a larger audience.

Above are some examples of the lean-out. In some of these the latent message the woman’s hindbrain is conveying is almost “Get him offa me!”, but with a smile so as not to be too obvious. Also notice the positioning of the free hand in most of these pictures. We’d like to rationalize this as a gesture of affection after the fact, but in the context of these shots the unspoken message is a defensive one against the man’s lean-in. Again, this is one more manifestation of a war playing out between the couple’s subconscious.

The Eyes Have It

I also want to draw attention to the facial expressions of these women. Notice the commonalities in gaze direction and the message their eyes and expressions are sub-communicating. Women are keenly aware of the permanency of an image and what that image communicates. I’ve pointed out in many a prior essay that women’s brains evolved to give them a much fuller capacity for communication and a sensitivity to nuances than men. Men prioritize the content (information) of communication while women prioritize context (feeling) of communication. This is a truth we have to consider when we analyze the expressions and physical communication of women in photos.

I joked with the guy who sent me the second image here that she looks like she wants to bang me, not the guy doting on her. There’s more than a bit of truth in that assessment. Women today are hyperaware of how an image can be used to facilitate or handicap their sexual strategy. It’s no accident or casual glance when a woman directs her attention towards the viewer. It’s not a person behind the camera that she has in mind when she knows she being photographed, it’s the potential audience – an audience that’s grown exponentially in the age of social media. 

In all these shots the woman’s attention is on how she will be perceived by any viewer of the shot. In some other images I was sent the woman’s focus was on anything other than the men whose only focus was her. In advertising there’s a presumption that when two or more people appear in an ad the one with the presumed dominance is always the one looking away or out at the viewer. The submissive party was the one whose attention is directed at the dominant person. The dominant person is the one telling the story in the ad. A common complaint among feminists about magazine ads in the 60s through the 80s was that it was women who were always disempowered as a result of being posed in subservient positions where they focused on a male in the ad image. The only exception to this was in what feminists still refer to as the Male Gaze wherein the dominance a woman was afforded was limited to her sexual viability and her capacity to hold the attention of any men in the ad and men viewing the ad. 

These concepts are an interesting contrast to the millions upon millions of photos girls and women post of themselves on social media every day. Think of the gender power dynamics in all these shots. It may seem like I’m splitting hairs here, but the reflexive impulse a majority of women default to is one of advertising themselves for potentially better options in the sexual marketplace.

Whether or not this is a practiced or unconscious tact, the latent purpose of women’s responses to their men’s Beta Tells is to advertise their sexual availability to the audience. Some guys have said that women default to these expressions as a means of ego aggrandizement and I’m willing to accept that there’s undoubtedly an element of egoism (certainly solipsism) involved. No doubt women often enjoy the envious attentions of other women on Instagram in the right context. However, these ‘ego shots’ almost universally center on the woman in the power dynamic. In each of these images the power belongs to the woman.

Mate Guarding

Another common Beta Tell is the death grip pose many men will opt for in their couple’s photos. This is a position where the man locks an arm around his woman or drapes an interposing forearm barrier between the viewer and the woman who is trying to coyly escape his mate guarding message. 

In a lot of these the woman often has her hand on his hand as if trying to pry him off to release her. It seems like a reciprocation of affection – similar to the hand on the chest pushing him away – but this is afterthought rationalization. Death grip is a clingy positioning, but again the battle between his and her subconscious centers on the guy mate guarding and her own subconscious desire to broadcast her sexual availability in spite of him.

I Love Mommy

In almost all of these images the male is focused intently on the woman. From a Red Pill perspective, I see this as a manifestation of how these men have been Blue Pill conditioned to make their women their Mental Point of Origin.  Even in the images where the man is looking at the camera his sub-communication is one of clear abasement to, or guarding of, his most important priority.

However, the most disturbing trend I’ve seen in couple’s photos is what I’ve dubbed the I Love Mommy pose. Maybe it’s my instinctual interpretation of it or maybe its’ an obvious Freudian connotation, but in these shots the Beta assumes and almost childlike position of kissing on his woman. 

Okay, so the last one is a press shot, but you get the idea. You can see the I Love Mommy positioning in a few of the prior photos above as well.  I could probably dedicate an entire essay to all of the psychological implications of this phenomenon. I had one critic on Twitter ask me if I genuinely thought this tendency was due to unresolved issues these men had with their mothers; it wasn’t until later he admitted he had a tendency to do the same and was honestly concerned. 

I’m sure the possibility exists, but more importantly I think this habit is due to men internalizing the myth that vulnerability is endearing to women. There’s this persistent lie that accompanies the vulnerability myth. That’s the lie that men can let their guard down and ‘relax’ around the woman they feel securely paired with. As a result they mentally revert to the boy who didn’t need to qualify himself for his mother’s love and they regress to a subconscious comfort in that vulnerability they believe will endear them to their woman. They sub-communicate all this in the I Love Mommy position.

I’ll have to return to this Mother Issues concept in a future essay, but for now, how do you suppose a woman’s hindbrain imperative for Hypergamy will perceive this habit, particularly in light of how image conscious women are in the Instagram generation? My first impression is that it would be one of revulsion, apprehension and resistance. Nothing turns off a woman more than a man indicating that he’d rather be her child than her lover or husband.

Alpha Tells

So, if all of this reads like the overly-critical projection and nitpicking I told you most critics will accuse me of earlier, maybe I can assuage your own judgment by presenting some Alpha sub-communications examples here. Finding these examples can be a tall order in an age where any man photographed in a position not entirely focused on his woman runs the risk of being called ‘toxically’ masculine. Today, men who are confident enough to default to body language that communicates they are their own mental point of origin get accused of ‘abuse’ or at least being self-centered. But as you’ll see this isn’t such a bad thing.

The best example of Alpha Tells in couples photos focus on the man being the center of importance in the shot. Yes, this is Vincent Cassel (51) and his wife Tina Kunakey (21). I have no doubt some hater will come up with some reason in the comments why Vince doesn’t align with whatever their interpretation of Alpha is, but for our purposes these images illustrate the opposite of a lot of the Beta sub-communications we just went through. So try to look past the celebrity and see what’s being displayed here.

First off, notice how Tina’s focus of attention is always on Vince. Women who hold genuine admiration for their men consistently make them the story in photos. Even in the shot where they look at each other her focus is on him. It’s not difficult to assess the power dynamic in their relationship, but you can also feel a genuine desire emanating from Tina.

Also, women who genuinely admire their men are unconcerned that their actions in a shot might be read as subservient or ego-abasing by women’s audience. I’d go so far as to suggest that the attention a woman receives from a man her Hypergamous hindbrain confirms as Alpha is far more valuable to her ego than any lower quality attention she might temporarily enjoy by appeasing her audience. Much of this observation is rooted in the Desire Dynamic. Hypergamy cannot afford to have a high SMV man be confused about her desire or motives. A woman who is proud of the association with man she’s paired with is less concerned about the perception other women might have of her actions – in fact, she’ll convert any disparaging opinion of them into a point of pride, if that man is above her own sexual market value.

When a little girl thought a little boy on the playground was cute her reflexive response to him was not something she had learned to consciously control at that age. That response is often reflected in the expressions of adult women when when their peripheral awareness of an attractive man connects with their Hypergamous hindbrain. The biting of the lip, the beaming admiration, the laser eye focus and the hopeful smile followed by a coy embarrassment of what she’s doing when she regains her composure are all the physical cues of a woman whose primary concern is the man she’s with.

Now, contrast these images with the earlier ones in which the men are clearly the hangers-on of the women in those photos. I’ve mentioned before that a natural Alpha man is almost never aware of his own Alphaness and that’s what really stands out in these photos – the men aren’t trying to evoke the reflexive responses of the women. They fluidly (almost Zen-like) prompt these reaction in women. There is no pretense or the obvious mugging for the audience that you see in shots where the Frame is clearly being directed by the woman while the hapless Beta tries to prove how in love he is by kissing on her while she finds something more interesting to occupy herself with. When a woman admires her man he is literally all she can think about.

In closing here I want to reiterate that I’m aware that all of this is going to come off as self-serving or catty. It’s impossible to objectively interpret body language without someone resorting to point & sputter insults about how they think you’re just being petty or you’re jealous of some celebrity’s life. Be that as it may the discouraging of anyone attempting to understand sub-communications only serves the the party that has the most to gain from a larger ignorance of them. So I hope this breakdown has provided at least some useful references to consider your own, or your woman’s, default behavior when the cell phone cams come out at a party.

But if you learn nothing else from this post, and you need one take-home message, please, whatever you do, don’t be this guy in your next couples shot.

Categories: Miscellaneous Blogs

[EHM 2018-09-26] Training Camp Days 3-7

Furiously Eclectic People - Wed, 09/26/2018 - 17:30

Nothing super eventful despite a scrimmage and a few exhibition games. Zenko and Georgiyev have showed up to vie for a positions in nets. Three of the six defense positions are now up for grabs with Weber, Alzner and Green holding theirs but Juulsen and Mete being completely outplayed by other postential candidates leaving Sergechev in the middle.

Rychel has been ruling the camp and seems to be riding his success from last year and still trying to take his game to a higher level. Zach Hyman has been a bit of a surprise. He was invited to camp at the last minute as there was some space simply to gear him up for IceCaps camp however he's shown some chemistry with Thornton and picked up the best scrimmage ratings on the team; all while nursing a groin injury.

tweetbutton: 
Categories: Miscellaneous Blogs

[EHM 2018-09-25] Training Camp Day 2

Furiously Eclectic People - Tue, 09/25/2018 - 23:45

With Zenko really turning heads in nets, Dawes, Reway, McCormick and DiSimone also had a good day with Ranger, Juulsen, Bourque and Haugen looking quite poor.

McCormick has his work cut out for him to beat out favourites Sergechev and Mete although there are rumours that Sergechev is secretly on the trade block. Zenko is making it look like Lindgren AND Haugen will be playing in the AHL but the coaching staff will also have to decide where Zenko will develop best. Ranger and Bourque not shining is no real surprise. Bourque turned heads at his first camp, but almost wasn't invited to this, his third camp. Once a promising prospect, he's pretty much labeled a middle AHL or top ECHL defenseman for his career. Ranger was brought in simply to see if it will give him some jump at the IceCaps camp in a couple weeks. Juulsen is surprising everyone by not shining.

image_blog: tweetbutton: 
Categories: Miscellaneous Blogs

[EHM 2018-09-24] Training Camp 1

Furiously Eclectic People - Mon, 09/24/2018 - 16:52

Day 1

No surprise out of the gates that Price and Weber were cheered by the peanut gallery while Broll and McNiven were derided. In the first scrimmage, Yamamoto suffered an injury that pretty much ruined his chances at making the team this year. A promising prospect that will have to prove himself this year in the WHL or he might get buried.

Shipachyov, Hyman, Byron, Rychel, Green and Suzuki all looked good in those first scrimmages while Pezzetta, Matveyev and Luukkonen seemed like cold fish out of water.

With Yamamoto out, there are now only 6 players vying for 3 contested spots with 5 outliers that could possibly spoil someone.

On the side, Beast veteran centreman Castonuguay was injured for the length of training camp in an exhibition match probably due to a lack of players currently available for the Beast to ice.

image_blog: tweetbutton: 
Categories: Miscellaneous Blogs

[2018-09-22] EHM 2018 Leadup to Camp

Furiously Eclectic People - Sat, 09/22/2018 - 15:29

Leading up to 2018 Training Camp:

While Price is barring injury or trade, his backup is likely between Lars Haugen and Charlie Lindgren. Drafted prospects Zenko and especially Georgiyev have been impressive in training leading up to camp though so time will tell. McNiven is also at camp but projects to start with the Beast again this year and Luukkonen is playing in an international tournament missing a couple days of camp.

On defense we expect Weber to stay with the most minutes but his partner is up for grabs. It's expected Alzner will either play with Green or Juulsen with Sergechev taking whichever spot Alzner doesn't have. With Weber the favourite is Mete. Bereglazov and Honka will be fighting for the reserve D spot while Kindschi, McCormick, Ouellet, Wolf, Brook, Hicketts, Nother, Tuukanen (also missing a couple days for a European tournament) and Valiev are just here for the experience. Hicketts has been impressive in the lead-up training.

The expected lineup on foreward has changed dramatically with Thornton's ability declining so much in the off-season. While his experience is invaluable, consultants list him as unworthy for a spot on the team. Hishier has also not developed as much as expected despite winning the Calder and may lose his place on the top line.

Shipachyov-Rychel/Byron-Dadanov
Hischier-Dawes/Lehkonen-Gallagher
Koivu-Tatar-Reaves/McCarron/Yamamoto
Thornton-Domi-Drouin
Danault-Deslauriers/Aeschlimann/Goulet-Baun

That gives you an idea going in where player's may slide in however Lehkonen has shown he can play either wing and Dawes seems to only play well on the top two lines. Byron is good but Rychel looks better so far. Many other forwards are here for the experience but I wouldn't count out Hudon, Matveyev or Suzuki. Suzuki has already shown some chemistry with Rychel and Dadanov. Hudon is desperate for a spot after playing in Europe for a few years but is projected to play with the IceCaps. Matveyev looks good on paper but I haven't seen him play with the big boys yet. Kotkaniemi does not look ready for camp. A few players are also here to work on skills before the AHL/ECHL camps like Alexandre Ranger, Alexis Loiseau and David Broll.

tweetbutton: 
Categories: Miscellaneous Blogs

[2018-09-21] EHM Off Season 2018 Retrospective

Furiously Eclectic People - Fri, 09/21/2018 - 20:50

It's a new season for Kersus' EHM Montreal Canadiens. Some things look the same and others look different.

Price still sits as the undisputed goalie however everything after him is very much disputed.

This is Kersus third year at the helm. His first year was a disaster and he attempted a huge rebuild while losing a battle out of the basement. With some maneuvering at the draft he was able to snag Nico Hischier. Some good Free Agency acquisitions saw the Habs shock everyone to top the league and win the Cup in his second year. Now expectations are high for a repeat.
The Cup winning lineup was as follows:

C-LW-RW
Hischier-Pacioretty-Gallagher
Thornton-Rychel-Dadanov
Shipachyov-Galchenyuk-Dawes
Drouin-Byron-Raffl
LD-RD
Taormina-Weber
Daley-Klein
Alzner-Davidson
G
Price
Fucale (sometimes McNiven in the playoffs)
Scratches - Marleau, Kozun, Lehkonen (all switched in and out with the third or fourth line) however Dawes only came in during the playoffs as that was when his previous contract ended.

While the defense remained basically the same people, Weber was the only player to consistently play the same spot. All five other defensemen moved around him. Daley was a bit of a disappointment (brought in mid-January in exchange for Condon and Benn who went to the Penguins) but still played well. Alzner was a steadying influence if nothing spectacular. Davidson filled a hole well on the second line but was outplayed by another as time wore on. Taormina periodically performed like a star and other times like he belonged in the AHL but overall exceeded expectations. Klein as well exceeded expectations; starting in the AHL he came up later in the season to not only claim a spot on the pro roster (from Jerabek) but to cement himself as a second behind Weber despite Kersus positioning him as an extra. This caused a rift between Klein and Kersus where at the end of the season, Klein was willing to remain unsigned instead of even talk with Kersus about a new contract.

As for forwards, Shipachyov started as RW on the top line and ended up centering the 3rd or 4th line. This may sound like a demotion for Ship however he struggled to Centre his own line all season and only in the end and during the playoffs did he show he could fill a needed Centre position while Gallagher went from 4th line to 1st; finally gelling with Pacioretty again as no one else really could. Drouin was a disappointment all season and even winning the Cup he was a fringe player. Thornton was a key player and helped Rychel step up his game and even reclaimed Dadanov as a premiere player. While Weber wore the C, Thornton was sensational.

Lehkonen continued to improve despite often having his minutes limited. Marleau may have brought some leadership to the dressing room however he never found a place that fit on the ice - performing poorly all season. To some degree that was also Galchenyuk's problem. Not that he had any leadership but he couldn't gel with the other players and floundered from position to position. Michael Raffl was a late claim off waivers who took over for poor Teddy Purcell. Purcell was a solid reserve forward however when Raffl became available there was no longer any space for Purcell who didn't get claimed off waivers and didn't even get play-time on the farm. There were a lot of sad feelings about that situation however Raffl was a good pickup and able to perform better than Purcell. Kozun was a solid fourth liner who played the bulk of the games during the season. Byron may have played the final game where the Habs won the cup but he spent most of the season with the Brampton Beast and then the St. John's IceCaps in the playoffs.

Price did okay and Fucale was admirable as a young backup. Poulin, McNiven, Lindgren and MacIntyre all played between the AHL and ECHL. Other temporary goalies like Kuhn and Caron came in when injuries occurred. Poulin was admirable and solid, McNiven probably played a little above himself because of the good players around him however his own abilities seem stunted. Lindgren showed that he has the talent however he would get tired, injured and make poor decisions later in a game. MacIntyre played the season with the Beast (ECHL) on a tryout contract and impressed all observers despite getting few games behind McNiven. He was offered ridiculous amounts of money to have a shot with the Habs but perhaps the offers came too late and he went to Switzerland.

The Habs AHL affiliate lost the league finals in game seven to the Checkers and Nikolai Goldobin was the fan-favourite player.

In the ECHL the Brampton Beast absolutely dominated the Alaska Aces to win the Kelly Cup. Chase Nieuwendyk, a try-out player, was the fan-favourite; Baker was the defenseman of the year and held the +/- record; Addison won the sportsmanship award and all-star MVP; Boni as coach of the year (two years running); D'Agostini was the playoff MVP.

Max Pacioretty was the fan-favourite with the Habs and made the first all star team. Hischier and Lehkonen making the rookie all-star team with the former taking the Calder. Drouin ballet hopped to the Lady Byng and Bob Hartley, for good reason, won the Jack Adams. Price took the Conn Smythe with Shipachyov on his heels.

Ship started slow and took all season to find his way in the North American game, but once he did... Wow.

I don't think enough can be said on how Rychel flourished while playing with Big Joe Thornton and Flashy Dadanov. This line got better and better, taking an AHL player and making him into the star of many games. This isn't to take away from Rychel's potential however he's now an example of how to develop a player properly. This stands out with a franchise that's blown many prospects from poor development.

Off-Season
F Shumakov was traded to Detroit for D Ouellet.
The rights to G Skinner, 3rd and 5th picks to Philly for the rights to Cody Ceci.
Prospect C Mattila to Tampa for prospect C Suzuki.
F Pacioretty to Detroit along with a 7th pick 2023 for F Tatar, D Hickets, 1st and 2nd picks 2019.
F Raffl and F Friberg to Vancouver for D Cederholm.
D Ceci to Dallas for D Honka and 2nd pick 2019.
C Bradley to Capitals for C Kotkaniemi
C Galchenyuk to Phoenix for LW Domi
Prospect Staum with 5th and 6th picks to Blue Jackets for prospect Kindschi and 7th pick.
FA Signings: Reaves, Koivu, Green, Bereglazov, Haugen
Released: Davidson, Klein, Taormina, Daley, Fucale, Poulin, Greening, Redmond, Martinsen, Purcell, Marleau, Kozun, Hrabarenka

tweetbutton: 
Categories: Miscellaneous Blogs

The Golden Ticket

The Rational Man - Sun, 09/16/2018 - 21:40

Imagine, if you will, that you buy a lottery ticket and you win. After taxes the payoff is $2 million. Not an exorbitant amount by today’s standards, but still quite a lot of money for the average paycheck to paycheck person. For some it may be what could be described as Fuck You Money, easily enough for most people to retire on very comfortably.

How would this newfound fortune change your life? How would it change your family and your friend’s dealing with you? Would they be happy for you? Maybe jealous? Would you be able to manage the changes in your daily routine? If you were accustomed to one lifestyle and then switched to a more affluent lifestyle would it be a good change? Or would you become someone else?

Now lets say you could possibly win $100 million if you made an almost certain bet. There were still some risks involved, but nothing that would threaten your life in the short term. How would winning this kind of money reflect on your daily routine? Would it be different than your winning $2 million? Money would cease to be an object for you for the rest of your life and likely the lives of your children, maybe even grandchildren and all you really had to do was make a smart bet that you believed would pay off.

What if you only won $1 million or $500,000, but you were only making $36,000 a year and scraping by the best you could? Again, all you have to do is look for the best opportunity to make a short term sacrifice and the money would be yours. Would you compromise your ‘principles’ (assuming you have any) temporarily to change your life in the long term more significantly?

Imagine you had a Golden Ticket that had a potential to win you $70,000 per year or if you played things right it had the potential to earn you $10 million per year if you were wise enough to capitalize on it. How would that change your outlook on life?

What rationales would that prompt you to in order to reconcile that other people might not have the same potential for cashing in –without really earning it – that you do?

Here’s your Ticket

Okay, got that in your head now? Good. Now imagine that you’re given this Golden Ticket at the tender age of 12 years old. It’s handed to you and you’re told, “Keep this ticket with you forever. You can redeem it for more money while you’re young, but the longer you hold on to it the less it will be worth. Even still, it should be valuable for most of your life if you can manage to hold on to it.” And even after you’ve cashed the ticket in you can still retain it for a time, because some people have been able to trade one prize for a larger one by taking the ticket back and redeeming it for a better prize later.

Now you begin to believe that you deserve the biggest prize because, well, you’ve been deprived of things. You’re special; special enough to know you deserve the very best after having been deprived of these things as one of a long line of people who’ve also been deprived of things – the best things – or so they’ve told you.

You could always earn some money and get the things you and your people have never been able to reliably get, at least, again, that’s what they’ve told you. You have a lot of personal potential, you’re independent, you have a lot of respectable strengths, so you know you could always merit the things you deserve. But you still have this Golden Ticket in your hand, why wouldn’t you use it? You could earn some money, maybe a lot, but it will never be as reliable or as much as the money the Golden Ticket could net you – if you know just when to redeem it.

Stipulations

All that said, there are going to be a few stipulations to this lottery, but still, they’re not as steep when you compare them to having to actually earn a similar prize.

The first stipulation: You must stay physically fit. In fact, the better you look the better your potential prize could be. As you age this potential decays, but even still, you occasionally see some people cash out their ticket for great prizes despite their age. They just had to apply themselves more in the gym to get it.

The second stipulation: You must be agreeable, accommodating, even a bit flirty. You must put forward the impression that you are someone who genuinely deserves the best prize that the ticket might offer to a special person like you. You must give the perception that the experience of you deserves the highest potential prize imaginable.

The third stipulation: You must position yourself in social situations where the potential for the biggest payout for your ticket can be maximized. Sometimes, not always, but often these settings might make you uncomfortable, but hey, you wanted to make the most of the ticket, right? This stipulation really isn’t all that discomforting when you realize that once you have cashed in your ticket you’ll be the one deciding where you live and who you’ll choose to associate with anyway. At least that’s what the lottery organizers would have you believe.

There are a few more minor stipulations, but, for all of this, you still deserve the biggest prize that opportunity might bring your way. So, while the best thing would be for you to stay in shape and be ready for a big prize, the people playing the same lottery as you – most with the same potential – will tell you none of this really matters. They insist that you just being you is enough for you to win a big prize. Or it should be.

It’s almost as if they want you to believe that you can dismiss all the stipulations and still make out pretty good. In fact they praise you for going against the stipulations. They complain about how unfair these rules are and that for people as deprived as themselves, and for as long as they and their predecessors have been deprived, they should simply be given the highest, best and most secure forms of the prize – all irrespective of the very minimal stipulations as they are.

This is the Golden Ticket! How dare anyone place prerequisites on us to get the prizes we so thoroughly deserve. How dare anyone make us earn our birthright. But for all this discontent, the rules of the game still apply, and the people who embrace and master the stipulations largely seem to get the biggest and best prizes. And the ones complaining about the stipulations only seem to drag down the people with the same Golden Ticket, and their prizes are usually nothing compared to the people who take the stipulations to heart.

The Agreement

Finally, and maybe most importantly, there is one last detail of this lottery to consider. In order to keep the biggest and best prizes you have to sign a very loose and totally non-binding contract that only benefits you and ensures you will continue to be paid dividends should you decide to renege on the agreement and take your ticket back to use it again. The contract can be broken by you at any time, and even when you do you’ll still receive a substantial percentage of your original prize in monthly installments and usually for the rest of of your life.

Still, your signing this contract will limit your capacity to play this lottery in the future. If you see the potential for a better prize after you’ve signed the contract of limitations you’ll be less able to capitalize on it. However, the way that the contract is written it doesn’t necessarily exclude you from winning and even bigger prize should the opportunity arise. Your ticket reserves the right to be redeemed for other prizes if you make some wise bets.

So, at the end here, we get to the larger point of this metaphor; how would this ticket change the way you live your life? How would it influence your future decisions? How would the ticket affect your personal relationships with your best friends, some of whom have tickets themselves? How would the subconscious knowledge of the ticket alter your dealings with a husband, a wife, the children you may have or your immediate family?

Would the ticket define who you will become in life?

Categories: Miscellaneous Blogs

Pages

Subscribe to Furiously Eclectic People aggregator - Miscellaneous Blogs