Nadaism is not dead

Do you want to know if a person who passes all the time doing nothing would be able to live a normal and happy life?

... I will not work, I will not engage any activity in the long or even in the medium term - but I'll need help! Please check out the nadaist contract at the bottom of the page

... and there's other pointless investigations ongoing, just take a look to the bar on the right hand side

Monday, April 23, 2007

To differentiate

When people make generalizations they base themselves on their personal experiences, (which are necessarily limited, i.e. relatively limited), and besides on their values and believes, opinions, on the way they feel. If you ask them about the differences between both sexes, for example...

Some would use their religious background, which can be so varied depending on the religion itself, but essentially refer to procreation: that's for them the key to define the roles of men and women. I dare to say, with all due respect, it's a limited view.


Then there's science. Some might point out human beings are mammals at the end, which means they have a defined strategy for reproduction: females have just a few chances to have babies, they carry them for months on their bellies and the new-borns are weak and must be taken care of for years; in consequence, they select very carefully the men who will be faithful and stay with them throughout the process. Besides there's genetics, which means that males are supposed to spread their sperm as much as they can, while females have somehow to detect which males are healthier and more capable so that they can cross with them, giving more chances to their offspring. And that's a limited view, I dare to say.

Science would also study physiological differences between men and women, and will test some parameters of intelligence to that they make clear there are some various tasks which are done better by either one or another; e.g. men more capable when reading a map or in arithmetics, women better in geometry. So what?, I'd humbly ask.


There's even some half mystic standpoints, so that men and women would be different and complementary, and that's why their union makes so much sense. Polarity and attraction, the parts and the whole, etc. Well... to me, that's like any other believe.


Just look up the dictionary: to differentiate means to percieve there's a difference, but also to establish it, to make it different.

Monday, April 16, 2007

The obvious differences

Body shapes. Some internal organs. Hormones. "Those days of the month". And only women get pregnant. There are some phisological differences everybody could agree with.

There's cultural differences: men and women are not educated the same way, i.e. they are repressed in different ways. For instance, men should not cry, women should always look beautiful.

There's the common vague understanding that men are somewhat more rational, (in their behaviour and decisions), while women are somehow more connected to their emotions, (i.e. women manage their emotions in a better way, and use them).

And there's the mysterious way in which women know exactly how much more they feel like eating or drinking, and in consecuense at the end of the meal they just sip your glass or cut a portion of a precise weight from your plate - it's exactly the piece they miss.


Those above are the differences I will accept. For the rest, I'll try to prove that men and women think the same way.