the choice
-
It's not a thing to understand, to wit: When I was a very young lad, I could not understand what was attractive about a woman's ass. After the onset of puberty, I still didn't know . . . . but the endorphins flowed nonetheless. Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns; hips, etc., because it implies a higher probability of successful birth for both mother and child. Legs - one of the signals, as they reform from 'little girl' to 'woman' about being of breeding age. Although manifested consciously, it is really much deeper. Part of our animal nature that can and should be embraced. Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize that an important factor would be perceived strength to supply adequate food while the woman is tending the newborns; possibly protection. Part of the beauty in all of this is that the actual manifestation of these characteristics and what one finds attractive varies throughout our species - survival at its best. All of these enhanced by the delightful blessing of having a companion and partner.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
I would respond, bur I think you already used all the possible cliches :wtf:
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
-
I would respond, bur I think you already used all the possible cliches :wtf:
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
In case I gave a bad impression, I was trying to put forth that it's not really 'free choice'. Perverted, perhaps, by modern (and ever changing) "morals", "beauty", and the ever-famous "look what I can see!". Our breeding instincts have been maligned, and as a consequence, targets of perversion. Consider that only humans feel the need to hide while mating, creating the later 'perversion' of exhibitionism. What should be a universal source of joy. The problem is not the instincts, but us.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
In case I gave a bad impression, I was trying to put forth that it's not really 'free choice'. Perverted, perhaps, by modern (and ever changing) "morals", "beauty", and the ever-famous "look what I can see!". Our breeding instincts have been maligned, and as a consequence, targets of perversion. Consider that only humans feel the need to hide while mating, creating the later 'perversion' of exhibitionism. What should be a universal source of joy. The problem is not the instincts, but us.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos wrote:
In case I gave a bad impression,
Not to worry, you have never made an impression on me.
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
-
It's not a thing to understand, to wit: When I was a very young lad, I could not understand what was attractive about a woman's ass. After the onset of puberty, I still didn't know . . . . but the endorphins flowed nonetheless. Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns; hips, etc., because it implies a higher probability of successful birth for both mother and child. Legs - one of the signals, as they reform from 'little girl' to 'woman' about being of breeding age. Although manifested consciously, it is really much deeper. Part of our animal nature that can and should be embraced. Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize that an important factor would be perceived strength to supply adequate food while the woman is tending the newborns; possibly protection. Part of the beauty in all of this is that the actual manifestation of these characteristics and what one finds attractive varies throughout our species - survival at its best. All of these enhanced by the delightful blessing of having a companion and partner.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns
Not me. I prefer women with the ability to walk upright, as it implies at least some intelligence. :-)
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize...
That's simple. It's the thickness of your wallet and your social status. Appearance and even your body odor are secondary two these two perfumes. Lose them and you are instantly as attractive as a monkey, appearance again totally irrelevant.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
-
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns
Not me. I prefer women with the ability to walk upright, as it implies at least some intelligence. :-)
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize...
That's simple. It's the thickness of your wallet and your social status. Appearance and even your body odor are secondary two these two perfumes. Lose them and you are instantly as attractive as a monkey, appearance again totally irrelevant.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
Really - you begged for this reply!
CodeWraith wrote:
Not me. I prefer women with the ability to walk upright,
Implying you'll take the others as availability dictates. Also, implies, having a preference, that you've tried both variants.* * Are you absolutely sure both variants were female homo sapiens? Do neighborhood pets give you a wide berth, lately?
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Really - you begged for this reply!
CodeWraith wrote:
Not me. I prefer women with the ability to walk upright,
Implying you'll take the others as availability dictates. Also, implies, having a preference, that you've tried both variants.* * Are you absolutely sure both variants were female homo sapiens? Do neighborhood pets give you a wide berth, lately?
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Are you absolutely sure both variants were female homo sapiens? Do neighborhood pets give you a wide berth, lately?
I'm not from Wales. :-)
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Implying you'll take the others as availability dictates.
Only if you assume that this is the only criterium, which it is not, and the empty set is not a valid solution.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
-
This is so straight! :) Married to a lovely woman. Have two beautiful daughters. Works as a SD.
The cruelty of denying someone a life-partner; condemning them to loneliness; is unthinkable. That being said, I am disregarding social pressures and politics. We, like all other creatures that require male+female to reproduce, have evolved the overwhelming need to reproduce effectively. this as an imperative (viz-a-viz, extinction). Thus, it makes sense in evolutionary terms to be attracted to characteristics that optimize breeding success. Whether one casts this as 'so straight', 'mainstream', or whatever is irrelevant: nature doesn't really give a damn. If I recall correctly, the part of the brain wherein lies one's libido is only less carefully protected, by location, then that part which tell your lungs to breathe and heart to beat. Accept your animal self and be liberated from sociopolitical tyranny. Howl at the full moon and be free. Here's further grist for your mill: attraction for an 'exotic' other is quite common. Genetic advantages to this are obvious (dilute those nasty recessive genes!).
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns
Not me. I prefer women with the ability to walk upright, as it implies at least some intelligence. :-)
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize...
That's simple. It's the thickness of your wallet and your social status. Appearance and even your body odor are secondary two these two perfumes. Lose them and you are instantly as attractive as a monkey, appearance again totally irrelevant.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
Certainly a man with his proverbial feces together is attractive, but is attractive enough to cancel BO? Not to me. It's just what I find attractive in a man generally starts behind the eyes. But that doesn't mean I like a man to stink. In fact scent and touch are probably as important to me as visual cues are to the typical man. A byproduct of my brand of gayness i think. I have physical preferences sure. I like hairy guys, and guys that are taller than me. But those things are secondary. I think most straight men are really visual when it comes to what attracts them - maybe even primarily, although scent can elicit powerful responses in any animal, even us, generally.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
It's not a thing to understand, to wit: When I was a very young lad, I could not understand what was attractive about a woman's ass. After the onset of puberty, I still didn't know . . . . but the endorphins flowed nonetheless. Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns; hips, etc., because it implies a higher probability of successful birth for both mother and child. Legs - one of the signals, as they reform from 'little girl' to 'woman' about being of breeding age. Although manifested consciously, it is really much deeper. Part of our animal nature that can and should be embraced. Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize that an important factor would be perceived strength to supply adequate food while the woman is tending the newborns; possibly protection. Part of the beauty in all of this is that the actual manifestation of these characteristics and what one finds attractive varies throughout our species - survival at its best. All of these enhanced by the delightful blessing of having a companion and partner.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos wrote:
this stuff...
To what "stuff" do you refer?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
-
It's not a thing to understand, to wit: When I was a very young lad, I could not understand what was attractive about a woman's ass. After the onset of puberty, I still didn't know . . . . but the endorphins flowed nonetheless. Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns; hips, etc., because it implies a higher probability of successful birth for both mother and child. Legs - one of the signals, as they reform from 'little girl' to 'woman' about being of breeding age. Although manifested consciously, it is really much deeper. Part of our animal nature that can and should be embraced. Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize that an important factor would be perceived strength to supply adequate food while the woman is tending the newborns; possibly protection. Part of the beauty in all of this is that the actual manifestation of these characteristics and what one finds attractive varies throughout our species - survival at its best. All of these enhanced by the delightful blessing of having a companion and partner.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
This is so straight! :) Married to a lovely woman. Have two beautiful daughters. Works as a SD.
-
W∴ Balboos wrote:
this stuff...
To what "stuff" do you refer?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
All the varieties of 'stuff' that attract our attention, most specifically, at a primal breeding level. Note that there are variations in this 'stuff' as to extent and order of dominance - which I would suppose enhances a combination of genetic variations and "someone for everyone".
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Certainly a man with his proverbial feces together is attractive, but is attractive enough to cancel BO? Not to me. It's just what I find attractive in a man generally starts behind the eyes. But that doesn't mean I like a man to stink. In fact scent and touch are probably as important to me as visual cues are to the typical man. A byproduct of my brand of gayness i think. I have physical preferences sure. I like hairy guys, and guys that are taller than me. But those things are secondary. I think most straight men are really visual when it comes to what attracts them - maybe even primarily, although scent can elicit powerful responses in any animal, even us, generally.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
honey the monster, codewitch wrote:
I think most straight men are really visual when it comes to what attracts them
If by visual you mean the eyes: oh yes !
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
-
i have written code since i was very young. I wound up at microsoft at 18, and back then i thought it was amazing that i would get paid what i thought was loads of money for doing what i would have basically done anyway. Still, eventually, I found out that if you do what you love for long enough, you'll no longer love what you do. I finally decided I liked being a software developer more than I liked working in software. Not sure how many people left the fold feeling how I did, but there it is. I still love the craft, just not the job.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
honey the monster, codewitch wrote:
if you do what you love for long enough, you'll no longer love what you do.
That's the risk with making a career out of a hobby. I was okay with maybe the first two decades of working in the field. Then it's started to look more and more like "a job". Eventually I lost interest in working on my own little pet projects during evenings and weekends - it used to be that I could hardly wait until I was done with my workday to immediately get back into my own code, and my weekends were pretty much all dedicated to it. Now it can take me 6 months of trying to convince myself to fix even the smallest bugs. But then, it's not necessarily that I don't like it anymore - rather, after my workday, I just feel exhausted and don't have the energy anymore to dive into anything new. Age and getting out of shape also aren't helping.
-
honey the monster, codewitch wrote:
if you do what you love for long enough, you'll no longer love what you do.
That's the risk with making a career out of a hobby. I was okay with maybe the first two decades of working in the field. Then it's started to look more and more like "a job". Eventually I lost interest in working on my own little pet projects during evenings and weekends - it used to be that I could hardly wait until I was done with my workday to immediately get back into my own code, and my weekends were pretty much all dedicated to it. Now it can take me 6 months of trying to convince myself to fix even the smallest bugs. But then, it's not necessarily that I don't like it anymore - rather, after my workday, I just feel exhausted and don't have the energy anymore to dive into anything new. Age and getting out of shape also aren't helping.
I can relate to that, and also I think I was able to treat my code more like an artist would and less like a functionary would when I wasn't doing it for money. I engaged a whole different part of my brain i only got to employ occasionally at work. But that also made coding a deeply personal, even emotional experience for me, and it's hard to just "give it away" to someone else. Money hardly seems adequate compensation for delivering pieces of myself for someone to package and sell. But maybe I'm just overly attached.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
It's not a thing to understand, to wit: When I was a very young lad, I could not understand what was attractive about a woman's ass. After the onset of puberty, I still didn't know . . . . but the endorphins flowed nonetheless. Evolution has built this stuff in for the purpose of breeding. Forget about what's fashionable. A male would look for 'substantial' breasts as it implies food for the newborns; hips, etc., because it implies a higher probability of successful birth for both mother and child. Legs - one of the signals, as they reform from 'little girl' to 'woman' about being of breeding age. Although manifested consciously, it is really much deeper. Part of our animal nature that can and should be embraced. Not knowing quite what's attractive in males, I would hypothesize that an important factor would be perceived strength to supply adequate food while the woman is tending the newborns; possibly protection. Part of the beauty in all of this is that the actual manifestation of these characteristics and what one finds attractive varies throughout our species - survival at its best. All of these enhanced by the delightful blessing of having a companion and partner.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos wrote:
A male would look for 'substantial' breasts
I really don't like big boobs. They're fine when covered with clothing and supported by metal wiring harnesses, but seeing a beautiful lady laying down with one boob under her armpit and the other over her shoulder is not something that pushes my buttons. Obligatory song (youtube)[^]
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
i have written code since i was very young. I wound up at microsoft at 18, and back then i thought it was amazing that i would get paid what i thought was loads of money for doing what i would have basically done anyway. Still, eventually, I found out that if you do what you love for long enough, you'll no longer love what you do. I finally decided I liked being a software developer more than I liked working in software. Not sure how many people left the fold feeling how I did, but there it is. I still love the craft, just not the job.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
So what's the choice? To code as a job or to ditch the job and code as a hobby? What if the hobby grows to become the job? What if it's not the job but the tasks within the job that suck? Maybe a different job? Different group or environment or technology or just a different challenge?
cheers Chris Maunder
-
So what's the choice? To code as a job or to ditch the job and code as a hobby? What if the hobby grows to become the job? What if it's not the job but the tasks within the job that suck? Maybe a different job? Different group or environment or technology or just a different challenge?
cheers Chris Maunder
Chris Maunder wrote:
So what's the choice? To code as a job or to ditch the job and code as a hobby?
Pretty much, at least for me.
Chris Maunder wrote:
What if the hobby grows to become the job?
That's how I wound up in the field in the first place. =)
Chris Maunder wrote:
What if it's not the job but the tasks within the job that suck? Maybe a different job? Different group or environment or technology or just a different challenge?
A good question. For me the answer came by way of experience. I had done a lot of different kinds of work and I found the kind of work I used to enjoy, I didn't anymore. I tried after that to go 100% telecommute (change of pace and environment) and worked in a few different areas. It wasn't really the technology. I replied somewhere else on this thread that part of it was the creative process for me is very emotional, personal, and artistic, so it's hard I think, for me to keep selling off pieces of myself, especially when it's being used for things that are well, banal. I've explained the concept to artist friends of mine and they get it. With other people it has been hit or miss. My work is very personal to me. It's part of me. I don't know if that's weird to look at software that way - at least at that level - but there it is. That's a big part i think of the reason I don't do it anymore for money - absent my madness, which is another issue
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
So what's the choice? To code as a job or to ditch the job and code as a hobby?
Pretty much, at least for me.
Chris Maunder wrote:
What if the hobby grows to become the job?
That's how I wound up in the field in the first place. =)
Chris Maunder wrote:
What if it's not the job but the tasks within the job that suck? Maybe a different job? Different group or environment or technology or just a different challenge?
A good question. For me the answer came by way of experience. I had done a lot of different kinds of work and I found the kind of work I used to enjoy, I didn't anymore. I tried after that to go 100% telecommute (change of pace and environment) and worked in a few different areas. It wasn't really the technology. I replied somewhere else on this thread that part of it was the creative process for me is very emotional, personal, and artistic, so it's hard I think, for me to keep selling off pieces of myself, especially when it's being used for things that are well, banal. I've explained the concept to artist friends of mine and they get it. With other people it has been hit or miss. My work is very personal to me. It's part of me. I don't know if that's weird to look at software that way - at least at that level - but there it is. That's a big part i think of the reason I don't do it anymore for money - absent my madness, which is another issue
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
honey the monster, codewitch wrote:
the creative process for me is very emotional, personal, and artistic
It's interesting you say that. I speak to a lot of companies about how to talk to software developers and at a basic level many have no idea what a developer looks like (not that there's "a" developer mould we all fit into). I talk a lot about how software development isn't a science, it's an art. We're often creating bespoke pieces of code just like old furniture makers would: each leg of the chair, each knob on the drawer is often custom made, hand sanded, polished up carefully and checked by eye-balling it. We're a doomed profession, no doubt about it, but while it lasts it's one of the most creative outlets I can think of. And yet no one else understands this.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
honey the monster, codewitch wrote:
the creative process for me is very emotional, personal, and artistic
It's interesting you say that. I speak to a lot of companies about how to talk to software developers and at a basic level many have no idea what a developer looks like (not that there's "a" developer mould we all fit into). I talk a lot about how software development isn't a science, it's an art. We're often creating bespoke pieces of code just like old furniture makers would: each leg of the chair, each knob on the drawer is often custom made, hand sanded, polished up carefully and checked by eye-balling it. We're a doomed profession, no doubt about it, but while it lasts it's one of the most creative outlets I can think of. And yet no one else understands this.
cheers Chris Maunder
And we are truly the architects of our obsolescence. Just wait 'til I get some code generators wired up to these AI projects I see on here all the time. :laugh:
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
And we are truly the architects of our obsolescence. Just wait 'til I get some code generators wired up to these AI projects I see on here all the time. :laugh:
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
Please don't... ;)
cheers Chris Maunder