I don’t quite buy into capitalistic America, because it really blinds individuals over generations [see religion also]; basically it tends to create individuals who rely on certain predispositions they trust, but may not be what they personally feel upon further investigation. I’m not talking about capitalism in general, simply the idea of “success” we have in America.

Where does the alpha-male fit? The alpha-male does not like that which challenges his meaning of existence… in this case gay individuals in love, who are quite possibly more content than said alpha-males. I suppose this in it self is a sort of C.D. but one seemingly easy to take defense upon. But how can the alpha-male, the epitome of success (respective to a group) be challenged by these things which society has not deemed “valuable”. I believe it to be the inner self seeing that something is valuable, and seemingly more valuable than current values, thus creating a dissonance, and in turn, a threat. [do alpha-males feel empty yet]

Ideas which are threatening…. interesting.

In short, I contrast with Thorough on the lines of conformity. We shall do, what we do, but assessing our level of conformity is meaningless and unnecessary. Purposely not conforming, why? It just feels like causeless rebellion, and I’m sure almost every 20 year old has been down that path.

I’ll walk this road, but I care not what that road means to others.

I guess it’s because I don’t always give a shit about what other people think about me, so I don’t feel the need to find some value that ‘the world’ agrees on, or to proof that value was had from the experience.

Anyways, Mike asked me once again to comment on his latest post, and while doing so, I ended up having a lot more to say than I expected, as can be seen above and below. More specifically, this one line really caught my attention after a re-read:
……

Good point. But for me there is no visible value in simply writing that post. I wanted something palpable, and so I ’sold’ it.

@Lelangir

I’m somewhat also traipsing both sides. I do look into the practicality of things, but I also enjoy some things even with their apparent lack of worth. I actually purchased that book because I liked its form, just like what I did about a year ago with a book on writing proper e-mails. lol

Most of the time I’m just into content, because I wouldn’t have bought second-hand novels if I was that into form.

@Baka-Raptor

The machismo of America is much more outstanding than it is here in the Philippines. A good number of people in this country are homosexual, and there’s actually little wrong in watching a critically-acclaimed movie. It’s not as if adults will emulate what happened between (P)Ennis and the other guy, but it is a film that has its own merits: it’s among the honest explorations of society as a limitation to love.

The same can be said regarding Lust, Caution. Supposedly, people watch it only because of its NC-17 (or X) rating. I can watch pornography; Lust, Caution, is so much more. The sex scenes, visceral as they can be, represent a significant part of the story (from resistance to submission, and finally to love, if you looked closely) and only builds up the majestic tragedy. People here are less judgmental, but I guess that’s because Philippines in and of itself is a melting-pot of a lot of different cultures.

That’s a premature assessment, because although homosexual people enjoy the film, intelligent and unbiased people do, too. It’s the whole lot of mediocrities and retards who look upon the film as some sort of gay parade. (I know you’re joking, and I full well know you’re intelligent, but just saying.)

Ryan:

As I’ve said, there’s a lot of hindrances with regard to the men’s need for machismo, to become some sort of alpha-male as Baka-Raptor discusses in his recent
post. I’m not the typical man, and I’ve no need to prove it. If the payment of rebellion is eccentricity, then so be it.

I missed the last post ^^

“The singular viewer, the individual, is the one who will give meaning to what he watches.” Meaning-as-experience? Well I guess you know my views on experience and analysis.

I had no tremblings of cognitive dissonance when I watched HC, Fruits Basket, Ai Yori Aoshi, etc. etc.

I like the whole external force trying to legitimize the internality of things. I guess I would have looked at this as a form vs. content thing as usual; all forms of knowledge are equal – ontologically – and so in this case the epistemology is irrelevant.

While in that sense everything is equal, you can still take a content-based or pragmatic perspective and say that anything that sucks is worthless. I’m kind of on both sides.

Now, a question: couldn’t you have let the previous post itself be justification for the original purchase? It gave, after all, a small dose of entertainment and a venue to embark upon this concept like a pirate ship with ninja in sight?