Oxytocin, can we be serious…?

Hey, hi, it’s Wednesday, how exciting, it’s Hump Day already : )

Recently, I read a link on the bottom of one of Ed’s e-mail’s re: oxytocin. A male doctor preformed some experiments re: oxytocin and ‘love chemistry.’ Hmmm, yes, as if studying the usage of oxytocin (and/or pheromones, is that the next experiment?) on prairie dogs or some such rodent he chose has the weird and wonderful human elements of sexual attraction and love all sewed up. Methinks not…

I let the whole ’study’ go bc of course, looking to itty bitty animals for clues into human sexual behavior seems absurd. I mean…you’re kidding me, right?…we’re a lot like baboons also, would and should a doctor study their love and mating rituals and compare them with humans, too?

I’m sorry, Ed, no offense, it’s just blog talk and you’re allowed to bitch me out if you feel the need.

I think I’ll play the female ‘love doctor’ for a moment…I did better research…and it was this simple…

I read a brief article about the chemistry of ‘love’ – the only good part, the ONLY gem in that article, (to me: that’s my disclaimer) is just below…

Read it, think on it and I’ll catch you on the flip side: ‘…romance is about relationships and getting to know another person. It is about the discovery of your own beauty through the eyes of another. Parts of what makes it feel good, of what keeps you open to receiving, is your recognition of qualities that are the same and/or complimentary to each other…’

There was more written but I chose this small segment for a reason, and the part that spoke to me is in bold, all that ‘Men are from Mars/Women Venus’ stuff notwithstanding…to me that one sentence sums up what the essence of any relationship (but especially in the love department) is all about: assisting each other in seeing our own beauty and growing that exponentially by trying regularly to bring out the best in each other, if you and your partner are not doing that, you’ve both (or one of you) has fallen down on the job : ) and oh, that’s such a bummer, yes it is…

It’s not like you have to have meaningful dialogue all day everyday, like I said it’s the essence and if you get the feeling that who you’re with is on your side in this way, then: good deal. Someone who’s ready, willing and able to point out your beauty to you when maybe you’ve simply overlooked it or cannot not see it that day…that’s it, all other garbage aside.

OK, it’s not ‘garbage’ but you don’t need to hear blah blah blah blah blah blah blah when simply blah blah will do, do you?

Do you agree with the above or is there actually much more to it??

Listen, I am sooo NOT an authority on this subject : )

Help me out here, give me your ‘two’ on the matter…Tell me here or privately @ Lmdevin@att.net

So hey, Happy Hump Day : ) may you recieve exactly what you hope for today ; ) and if you’re not, you may want to ask yourself why not? I’m just trying to help you get lucky, that’s all…please don’t be offended by the q.

**As a nod to a male friend, oh kjo/tt hahaha, who asked me to blog an entry re: ‘women and helping around the house’ well, I’ve thought about it and bc I just don’t want the female hate mail, I’ll just give my two cents and leave you with a quote: Ok, ladies, uh, you don’t get whining rights if you insist that whatever it is you ask your man to do gets done exactly YOUR way, (uh-oh I can see the hate mail now)

…and here’s the quote: ‘praise loudly, blame softly’ (that includes all that critiquing also) I know it’s a drag sometimes bc you really wanted that tomato chopped smaller but if it must be smaller, do it yourself, if it really doesn’t matter, take the opportunity to just shut the f**k up. You can cut the s**t smaller when it’s on your own plate.

Try to think: would I talk to my best girlfriend this way? I’m not equating your man with your girls but men are sensitive beings, too, and they will never cop to that (don’t be stupid and ask them either).

Hey, it’s not always easy, I know, I had a live-in long ago who folded towels really bad (sooo bad), but he was sweet (and good looking…) as they come and he looked so damn happy (and hunky…) to be helping, so, hahaha, we (I) just lived with it, so I’m asking you to just release the urge to control the ‘domain’ you share, it’s just a thought, do what you will : )

Yeah, about that Patriot Act…& um, relationships (Ed, you out there?)

Yes, I know how to Google, too, Anonz : ) hahaha…so let’s talk about that Patriot Act and it’s revisions. It’s gotten so much press I just had to comment : ) tough for me to keep quiet I’m afraid…

(Ed googles ‘relationship’ issues. Also mentioned that he’s an internet dater, not sure I know what that means exactly: e-mail/texting? Is there ever any actual ‘live’ contact?! A good deep voice on the phone line, for starters, would work for me…a date implies an actual meeting still doesn’t it??) 

Back to my entry now…

The Patriot Act: the matters’ crux and the ensuing uproar comes down to this: some revisions to the Patriot Act are dramatic and others are not, so much…so let’s do dramatic…

Yes, there are now parts of the act that regulate government conduct that was going, oh um, unregulated? Yes, and that’s a good change I suppose.

Now, on the other hand, some parts of this act totally expand government powers almost exponentially and allow it to spy on ordinary citizens, like me (hmmpht, I prefer to think of myself as extraordinary), in a whole new way. The scary part is the lack of governmental openness in describing its and implementation, not to mention the worst part: no disclosure!

Oh, that is unless you find yourself being hauled off to jail one day…then you’ll know and hopefully you’ll have a good attorney waiting in the wings : )

But, should you be concerned, you might ask, I mean if you have nothing to hide, who cares, right? Hmmm, let’s take a closer look, you decide…

A quickie outline of the revisions in the Patriot Act:

Section 215 deals with private records. 215 extends the FBI the power to conduct essentially warrantless records searches, especially on people who are not themselves terror suspects, with little or no judicial oversight. The government sees this as an ‘incremental’ change in the law, but the lack of meaningful oversight and the ever expanding scope of possible suspects is pretty dramatic. You used to need a ‘warrant and reasonable suspicion,’ hmm, not a bad idea one would think…

Section 218 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act – ‘sneak and peek’ warrants, at the time, 1978, the changes were minor and the usual standard requirement for a police search – yeah – that’d be ‘probable cause to believe a criminal act had occurred’ and a warrant, it seemed minor bc it would only be unnecessary in a ‘teensie’ number of cases, famous last words, those. The teensie number just had mega-growth so now ‘secret’ searches are now authorized by a ‘secret’ court without your knowledge or justice dept accountability, now that’s ’secret’ and here’s the caveat: the government claims there’s an ‘alleged’ basis for said ’search,’ but what might the ‘alleged basis’ be if it’s all done so secretly?  Answer: it’s a secret : )

Section 214 deals with “Pen registers” or acquiring phone numbers dialed from a ‘suspect’s’ telephone, that and ‘trap and trace” devices monitor the source of all incoming calls. Neither one reveals the communication content. Patriot removes the warrant requirement for these taps so long as the government can certify that the information likely to be obtained is “relevant” to an ongoing investigation against international terrorism. Lots of loosely used terms being thrown around here, all sounds pretty ambiguous yet  all encompassing to me…

Section 206 authorizes ‘roving’ wiretaps: taps specific to no single phone or computer but to every phone or computer the ‘target’ may use. This part doesn’t get as much attention as it should. If the government decides to tap a computer at the Berkeley library, every communication by every user can theoretically be intercepted. That’s big…the use of ‘warrant power,’ troubling.

 

Section 505 authorizes the use of what’s essentially an administrative subpoena of personal records. The subpoenas require ‘no probable cause or judicial oversight,’ oh nice and nobody argued about all this open freedom and abuse of power? Oh wait, that’s right we’re in a ‘war on terror’ but who are the ‘terrorists’ we’re really talking about here??

And where did ‘probable cause’ disappear to? Of couse, the Dept of Justice site will dispel the ‘myths’ of the Patriot Act and make you ask yourself this: wouldn’t I rather agree to this and spare us all from a terrorist attack in it’s early stages? Or no…?  

That’s it from your resident loud-mouth, me, and your thoughts…?

Anonz, just had to respond to your comments…

First a q: do you believe 9/11 was plotted and executed by the US powers that be and Osama Bin Laden or?? I’ve seen a film that infers that there were explosives in the lower levels of the building, etc…

I think you are correct, if you weren’t FOR the Iraqi invasion the perception was that you were unpatriotic. Hey, I was convinced that Clinton ground intel budget cut was the culprit, and that ground spies left in place may have prevented a lot of things…but that’s all old news now, isn’t it…

Repub men are notoriously bigoted, homophobic, and misogynistic not to mention insufferable control freaks with their women in the name of religion or whatever else they can get away with calling it. Repub women are weak-minded male followers, why do you think I’ve been a registered Indie for the past twenty years?? Hahaha…

After he introduced himself and chatted briefly, I asked a handsome man who approached me last friday if he was a republican. He laughed and said, ‘yes, is that a problem?’ I said, ‘only if we’re talking politics.’ Bwahahaha…I told him I was an Indie, didn’t seem to scare him so I’m guessing he’s a liberated sort, he was also young, young men don’t mind strong-minded women.

I don’t get it though, why control women at all, I mean, what’s the point?? We bear the children, you’d think we’d be revered…and treasured just for that. Without us, men are screwed. Is the male ego that incredibly fragile? If it is, why not just cop to it all the while praying you get a good woman that won’t hold that info against you. Just a thought…

Republican women are weak-minded, oh yes, and father knows best types, too. And the ‘father’ part has been deeply indoctrinated at home and at Sunday school, these chicks never stood a chance, kind of sad…air-head’s from birth… 

Cheney’s daughter is a woman who is between a rock and a hard place; love of father (and those infamous family values!) and wanting to live her own life, something I’m sure her loving father gave lip service to in private – as long as she supported and campaigned for the party – how her partner put up with that shit I will never know, must be true love : ) the kind worth nurturing, maintaining and making some serious compromises for, I can’t totally berate either of them there, you don’t find that kind of love very often.   

The religious right think they’re always right, the pope should’ve had all Catholic priests prosecuted years ago for the amount of child molestation that takes place, but  no, people want something to believe in so bad they’d rather risk their kids and let the church save face; totally pathetic in this woman’s opinion.

Hey sweet pea, I’m not stupid and I know BS when I hear it, even if it’s delivered with high-minded platitudes by some TDH, which I admit can be a bit distracting : ) I’m weak at times, but not totally weak ; )