anais nin
Flog to death or accept

This influence gives you the chance, with positive support from the quality of time, to start to look into or delve deeper into those areas of knowledge which try to give practical answers to human problems. These include not only all forms of healing but also psychology and astrology as well as areas such as sociology and education. This is a good time to go deeper into the theoretical, philosophical fundamentals of your subject. The danger of this influence lies in the intellectualization and "flogging to death" of experiences and situations which actually call for feeling or sympathy. On the wholly personal level, to do with you or someone close to you, such an approach hinders a compassionate understanding and effective acceptance of psychological realities.

The interpretation above is for your transit selected for today:
Mercury Square Chiron, , exact at 08:20
activity period from 18 March 2008 to 20 March 2008

Discussion Posting 5: Homophobia
anais nin

On Tuesday, February 26, 2008 5:44 am, Dr. Georg Vollweiler wrote...

Why do you think men are generally more homophobic than women? Why are men more often than women associated with gay bashing?

(Note: these questions are based on experimental research, national survey research, and U.S. crime statistics).

On Monday, March 3, 2008 7:44 pm, Mandy Buck replied...

I do not have much experience within bigoted environments and have chosen to keep myself separate from such intolerance. I never adopted this aversion to same sex coupling so it is hard for me to understand this type of bigotry, in the same way that it is hard for me to understand racism. I am having a hard time finding any hard-lined reasons why homophobia would be expressed by, and primarily associated with, men rather than women.

A few reasons could include a higher propensity towards physical violence due to hormones such as testosterone being higher in males makes them likely to express homophobic tendencies, but I think there is a lot more to it than that. I also believe that males are more evolutionarily wired to be competitive, and to achieve some rung on the ladder of social dominance. Although these forces do play a part, I do not think that they are the core motivators for such behavior and cognition -- neither of these explains it fully enough.

I see homophobia as being directly associated with Puritanical ideas that are still prevalent in our countries' groupthink. Ideas about sex such as "there is no holy expression of sex other than of a man for a woman for the purpose of procreation," are engrained within our society as normal and homosexuality would therefore be, "unholy." Whether aware of it or not, I do believe that a person's psyche is subjected to such compartmentalization of right and wrong, and homosexuality is likely to be seen as abnormal or sinful. I suppose one reaction would be that a person might want to harm or experience irrational fear of someone who appears to represent homosexual characteristics. If one were to believe that homosexuality was wrong as stated by "the word of God," then alternative sexual choices might represent the malady and evil of humankind.

I also believe that the same Puritanical ideas about the roles of men and women reinforce male fear and insecurity in relation to their own self-expression. If men are no longer head of household, no longer expected to see women as baby-makers (sexual devices), and are allowed to be gay, where does that leave them? With no acceptable role to fall into, fear and xenophobia are likely responses and are acted out in an aggressive fashion in an attempt to achieve some sort of balance in their worldview.

New Truths
anais nin
Taurus Horoscope for week of February 28, 2008   Rob Brezney --Free Will Astrology

taurus obbsessed Taurus (April 20-May 20)

People close to you have been transforming. Be alert for the possibility that they are not who they used to be. Your ability to shape reality creatively in the coming weeks depends on you being able to recognize that some of the old truths about them have been replaced with new ones. Now study this passage from T. S. Eliot's The Cocktail Party: "We die to each other daily. What we know of other people is only our memory of the moments during which we knew them. And they have changed since then. To pretend that they and we are the same is a useful and convenient social convention which must sometimes be broken. We must also remember that at every meeting we are meeting a stranger."

(no subject)
anais nin
Today:  I Hop on Clouds.

and lack the ability to  Focus .

I must be a train and believe in the satisfaction derived from menial tasks.

Age of Aquarius ahh ahh ahh
Personal Daily Horoscope of Friday, 22 February 2008 for Mandy Buck, born 30 April 1985    <3

Satisfying experience
Venus Trine Chiron, , exact at 18:36
activity period from 21 February 2008 to 23 February 2008

This influence can bring with it a deeply satisfying, liberating experience; perhaps you will simply enjoy yourself with more gusto and freedom than usual and take pleasure in life. There may be a very meaningful encounter during this time - with your partner, someone close to you, or someone whom you have never met before. This encounter will be so deep and personal that you will have the opportunity to perceive and possibly even discuss things about yourself that you have preferred to suppress up to now, and not reveal to anyone. Thus, you have the chance to behave differently and, for once, to act out of character and acknowledge your injury or sensitivity, without having to fear being hurt or rejected once more.
Personal Daily Horoscope of Thursday, 21 February 2008
On a pivot
Uranus Square Uranus, ,
activity period from beginning of April 2007 until beginning of March 2008

Valid during many months: The first time this influence occurs it signifies that you are no longer an adolescent and must take your position as an adult. It signifies rebellion against established standards, which is the reason so many young people go through a period of rejecting everything that they have been taught. It is necessary for you to experience your own individuality by asserting it against someone else's. There is nothing wrong in this, and the constant challenges of youth help keep society alive. It also helps you, because you need to be on your own and find your own ways of doing things, unhampered by the ways of the past, which may no longer be appropriate.

Even if you do not go through an especially rebellious phase, this will still be a time of intense and rapid change, when you go out into the world and pursue your own goals without the comfort and security of doing what your elders tell you. Doing what you are told may not always have been pleasant, but it did allow you to avoid responsibility, which you will have to take on now.
Personal Daily Horoscope of Thursday, 21 February 2008

Little rebel
Chiron Sextile Uranus, ,
activity period from 12 February 2008 until beginning of January 2009

Valid during many months: Any courageous and possibly rebellious attempts to stand up for what you believe in now have a better chance to succeed. Anyone who tries to persuade you to function "normally" could be in for a sharp rebuke. Even if this causes trouble you will still feel relieved, simply because you were more honest with yourself. Try not to become irritated if you discover that things which you previously found easy or rewarding start to bore you. This influence will help you to approach new ideas in a much more open and unbiased way.

By freeing yourself from any old emotional or material ballast you will be able to think and act independently without worrying about the consequences. Take a look round your flat, cellar or loft: what do you really need, and what is just lying around? This is the ideal time for a big clean out!

Personal Daily Horoscope of Thursday, 21 February 2008

High energy
Sun Square Mars, , exact at 22:08

activity period from 20 February 2008 to 22 February 2008

Your energy level will be high, perhaps too high if you are not careful. Watch for signs of irritable impatience with others whenever things do not go exactly as you planned. Be assertive only when the situation calls for it, not whenever you feel like it. Also watch out for baseless conflicts with others, which you may not necessarily instigate yourself. Today you should be particularly careful of conflicts with authorities. Voice your complaints if they are legitimate, but expect a certain amount of hostile reaction to them. Also be careful that the tone of your complaint does not aggravate this hostility. What you get is usually a function of the energies that you put out. On the physical level, try to find an outlet for your vigorous energies.


What Is Love?
anais nin

Topic 4: What Is Love?

On Monday, February 11, 2008 1:48 pm, Dr. Georg Vollweiler wrote...

What is love? Does love hurt? Is it possible to love more than one person at a time? Is jealousy a natural and healthy part of a love relationship?

On Monday, February 18, 2008 11:59 pm, Mandy Buck replied... 

This post has some words missing and possesses some grammatical errors. Will fix errs and expound on this topic later. Now nap before doctor's apt. -sleepy-

"What is Love?"

Ah, the long deliberated over essential human question. Love is not a battlefield—no but seriously. As the tenets of ancient philosophy were once written within the school of Massive Attack, "Love is a Verb, Love is a Doing Word."

There are many different types of Love: Romantic; Sexual; Platonic; Familial. I am choosing in this post to discuss primarily Romantic Love (Eros). Romantic Love can involve sexual and platonic Love – neither is mutually exclusive. All of these contain the same essential underlying thread of Love and connect to one another. Thoughts and intentions are what make them separate.

The ways in which we express these different types of Love is the process of enacting Love. Whether expression be through actions, communication, chemical reactions, thoughts that come about in expectation of (or because of) Love, the process of enacting these intentions is the thing that makes them different. Expressions of Love manifest themselves in physical actions, different forms of verbal or written communication, neurochemical reactions, and even the internal reality of an individual (intentions, imagination, forethought, etc.).

The initial neurochemical reaction of Love (infatuation) is due to an event or a thought that—as far as neurobiologists and psychologists have seen through their research—activates regions in the brain with the release of dopamine and serotonin. Eventually these chemical reactions lessen (but don't dissipate completely) and are followed by the release of oxytocin (fueling the bonding response).

Further, Love is an action, a creation and an emotion caused biologically for pair bonding purposes and the survival of the human race. And now I can't think where to put all these thoughts, so, a list…

  • Love is honest communication
  • Love is being honest with oneself
  • Love is improvement, positive personal growth
  • Love is accepting people, however they are
  • Love is nurturing growth, even if it is away from you
  • Love is self-affirming
  • Love is acceptance
  • Love is a strange loop

I believe that Love is present and the driving force of so many actions/experiences undertaken by individual people as well as the human race as a whole. Love is a thread that connects many events throughout human existence, and is primarily a creative gesture, expressed through communications of varying degrees of impact and methods. Some believe in the dichotomy that life is made of two forces: Love; or fear of the loss of Love. This seems too simple to me. In his book "The Politics of Experience", R.D. Laing explains a different dichotomy in the following quote:

"Personal action can either open out possibilities of enriched experience, or it can shut off possibilities. Personal action is either predominantly validating, confirming, encouraging, supportive, enhancing, or it is invalidating, denying, discouraging, undermining and constricting. It can be creative or destructive."

I think Love is a force, an act or an impression that creates a larger scope of perception and experience, and is an aid to widen the possibilities in life. It consists of small and large gestures, and is without deception. The quote "if you Love something set it free" applies here. But freedom can be experienced within a loving relationship, which doesn't mean Love goes away. The mind needs to be free in order to experience Love fully.

"Does Love hurt?"

I don't believe that Love in and of itself is something that can cause pain. I believe that attachment to Love or an object associated with Love can cause pain. The people involved need not thrust expectations on another that are limiting and/or destructive. The loss or lack of Love can hurt, cause pain, in the way that Buddhists explain attachment as the cause suffering, but Love in itself is not causing that pain. "You can't take the Effect and make it the Cause" (philosopher Jack White).

"Is it possible to Love more than one person at a time?"

I whole-heartedly believe that it is possible to Love more than one person at a time. Love is not finite; it is an always-full reservoir. I do believe that some people are more capable with accepting the responsibility of loving more than one person at a time. It takes a lot of time and effort to be communicative with yourself in a way that can help you tap this reservoir and to realize what actions are preformed out of Love or fear of loss of Love and so on.

"Is jealousy a natural and healthy part of a Love relationship?"

Jealousy is natural, but is not healthy. Anything people experience or feel is natural. It is a naturalistic fallacy to assume that anything that happens in this world, which is a natural entity, is in anyway unnatural. I absolutely do not believe that jealousy is healthy. It is rooted in insecurity and fear (which is so not love).

… and that's all I have to say about that.

meh Discussion Question 1/29/08 "Doin' it"
anais nin

Topic 3: Sexual Discussion verses Sexual Action

On Tuesday, January 29, 2008 2:51 am, Dr. Georg Vollweiler wrote...

Why do you think the majority of American college-aged couples find it easier to “do it” rather than to talk about “doing it”? Give examples.

On Monday, February 4, 2008 11:13 pm, Mandy Buck replied...

The main reasons why college-aged couples are more at ease engaging in sexual acts rather than talking about them are generally due to socio-cultural taboos and expectations, and an incomplete education in communicating about the subject.

I believe society has instilled within us a block when it comes to talking about the subject, especially when we are young. We know it is a part of normal human experience, yet we still feel there is a taboo attached to talking about sex. By observation of our peers and society, we learn that – while sex is a natural part of the human experience – it is inappropriate or bad manners to discuss such topics, especially in more formal communication settings (forbidden at the workplace, church potlucks, and so on).

If as children and young adults sexual-talk remains secret, if communication about sex is not taught to us by example, when are we expected to learn how and when to talk about it? The media is becoming more open about such topics, but sexuality is displayed most often as an act and expressed less often during conversation. (Thank you Dr. Ruth!) I believe that because of this lack of example the vocabulary of these “lovebirds” when talking about sex with one another is stunted and immature.

Sex was a very open topic for my classmates, but as far as partners, my inability to discuss sexual matters specific to our relationship was largely due to insecurities on both sides. In addition, it did not seem like there was a lot of time for discussion when finals were just around the corner – the deed itself seemed far quicker and more satisfying. There definitely seemed to be an interest in keeping most relationships casual.

In one of my college relationships, for example, our sexual discussion was kept very minimal and vague. I believe this was because of my hesitancy to generate feelings of insecurity. He was a virgin before me and I did not want to appear as though I was criticizing his performance by bringing attention to his “shortcomings.”

Sketch-ah buk
stolen art.
Some scans from my old sketchbooks.

Seen from Below--Right side view Seen from Below --Middle view
Seen from Below--Right side view

from 2006 - "seen from below"
Earth, Fertility, loss, urbanity, growth, world view. etc -

Composed of pen acrylic-some collage (on right side, the blue color is a cutout from a magazine) colored pencil, pen, charcoal? anything that worked really.
I'd like to expand on the idea of this into one larger piece. Perhaps a di or tryptich.

I dunno..It has potential.the idea/composition need some fine tuning as well as the execution/skill. Plans Plans
Seen from Below --Middle view

Seen from Below -- Left side View sketch lady head
Seen from Below -- Left side View

sketch lady head

from mid 2006 sketchbook - primarily acrylic - some colored pencil, & pen.
Current status: unfinished and currently Lost (tear- hopefully it's just packed away in boxes.)

Tags: ,

(no subject)
anais nin
A pic of me drawn by le brent <3
Tags: , ,

(no subject)
anais nin

Topic 2: Gender

On Wednesday, January 23, 2008 4:15 am, Dr. Georg Vollweiler wrote...

Do you interact with men and women differently? If yes, how so? Do you think people interact with you differently because of your gender? Why or why not?
On Monday, January 28, 2008 10:17 pm, Mandy Buck replied...

I would like to believe that I interact with people essentially the same regardless of their gender, but I recognize that there are some situations where this is not the case. In general, I tend to accommodate peoples' personalities in order to find a balance where we are both at the same comfort level.

At work, I cannot escape the well-engrained Southern, Good Ol' Boy gender roles. Women are primarily hired into support roles for men. This isn't to say that they are blatantly sexist; people are respectful of one another. Most likely this is just due to social tradition.

I would say that I am more likely to communicate with men and women in a similar (if not equal) manner once my exchanges with a person progress past the first superficial stages. I take the opportunity when first meeting people to test reactions, feel out, and judge the comfort level of the situation. In these initial, sometimes wary meetings with others, I am often unsure whether the other person is engaged or receptive to my cues.

I like to be aware of the other person's intentions when engaging in conversation. Since I am more likely to assume that a man might be attracted to me sexually, I look for cues to indicate whether this is the case. If the conversation is a meaningful one, I prefer there to be no ulterior motive. In my personal experience, men seem to be a little more upfront with their motives. Sometimes motives are expressed verbally and, most times, the more fundamental, innate styles of communication are being utilized. I think that we all give off subtle cues that indicate whether we see a person as a potential mate (perhaps through pheromones, or a tiny smirk, or flip of the hair). I would say that I am more likely to perceive and send these signals with men, rendering my interactions with men very different.

I do not assume women are looking at me in a sexual way (unless obvious). My experience with women is that they tend to be less open with their judgments or observations of people they're interacting with, and I usually reciprocate. Again, this is accommodating their persona, but this does not always apply. Women seem to interact with me differently overall, but once I am comfortable with them, these gender-based interactions tend to dissipate.


Log in

No account? Create an account