The Posture: Hands on Waist with Elbows up And Pointed out.

Spaniard with Tambourine (1909) Henri Matisse

Spaniard with Tambourine (1909) Henri Matisse

It may be attributable to my latent prosopagnosia, but because I cannot read too much from facial expressions, I’m quite good at deciphering body language. When I recently came across a picture of a friend I was fascinated by the mere posture, so I decided to do some research on the matter.

Where does this affection for women in that posture came from. I remembered I had seen this posture many times on paintings because obviously painters —like me—have been always impressed by women in that posture. When I actually browsed my archive, though, I found only few examples, but what amazed me most was some regularity.

38-gestures-of-body-language-26-728

Any body language dictionary says this posture signals readiness and sometimes even aggression. I cannot agree with aggression, but would rather call it decisiveness or a resolute stance. This—I imagine—would be the perfect welcome posture of a wife for her boozy husband. The gesture has something of authority, self-confidence, and dignity.

This posture obviously is understood in all parts of the world, so we find it in sculptures from India as well as from Pre-Columbian America.

Seven seasons of a women (1544) Hans Baldung Grien

Seven seasons of a women (1544) Hans Baldung Grien

It probably also has something to do with age. In this picture from a German painter that illustrates the seasons of a female, only women in her fecund ages show this posture. Maybe this is the genuine meaning of readiness which also conveys attractiveness and sex-appeal.

Young Lady - La Bella (1536) Tizian

Young Lady – La Bella (1536) Tizian

However there is more about paintings of women in that posture than just luring men’s attentions. It is remarkable that in Europe those paintings appear not before the 18th century. Italy is an exception which was more advanced that time as are some parts of Germany, in particular those that border to the Netherlands. Still we have to admit that in Tizian’s painting as in Baldung’s before the posture is rather hidden.

A typical painter of that posture was Goya. From Feuchtwanger’s book, we know his affection for strong women. With all his Maja portraits he just indulged in his love affair with the Duchess of Alba one of the most preeminent women of her time.

Portrait of a voluntary officer (1812) unknown Russian artist

Portrait of a voluntary officer (1812) unknown Russian artist

In Russia this development was a bit delayed, so the earliest painting I could found was a feeble attempt. The painting shows a portrait of a young person with a delicate face and clear complexion typical of a women wearing a uniform typical of a man. The title of the picture Portrait of A Voluntary Officer reminds of Jean d’Arc.

Detail of A Family Portrait Polowzew and Tatistschew (about 1840) unknown Russian artist

Detail of A Family Portrait Polowzew and Tatistschew (about 1840) unknown Russian artist

Next it were but aristocrats painted in that posture which seems reasonable as Russian society was still dominated by aristocrats at that time.

Interestingly, though, in Russian art is the early appearance of women members of the working class in that posture.

Mariana (1870) Dante Gabriel Rossetti

Mariana (1870) Dante Gabriel Rossetti

At the beginning of the 20th century those pictures with women in that posture disappeared. As we witness is Rossetti’s picture painted at the end of the 19th century, he already felt a uncomfortable with that posture. Matisse’s Spaniard with Tambourine is the last one that I found of that kind, with only one single exception.

After World War 2, in East Germany, and for a very short period of time, female representation in such a posture was seen in some paintings. Interestingly, these women appear only in groups that they seem to dominate. Ever since those portraits disappeared, so it is refreshing finding them in personal profiles sometimes.

A German poet once said that artists act like thermometers sensitive to social tensions, and they subconsciously express these tensions in their work. They don’t rationalize social movements but they are able to feel and express these feelings with their specific techniques.

 

Posted in Art, Culture, Ideology, Media, Political, Psychology | Tagged | Leave a comment

What they don’t tell you about garage startups

There is more about successful garage startups than just the founder’s ingenuity and hard working. Most articles perpetually regurgitated by monopolistic media and various blog posts try to convince you that exactly only hard working and ingenuity is necessary to create a multibillion international company. I purposely refrain from listing examples, but they are so abundant that they can easily be googled. Even a facebook meme circulates probably repeatedly refreshed by Zuckerman’s robots.

Why however most of these garage startups are located in North America though ingenious and hard working people can be found everywhere in the world? A quick and shallow answer is white supremacy, but more subtle analysis quickly reveals that this cannot be the answer. There are thousands maybe even millions of startups worldwide but only a dozen became multinationals. In Europe those startups are easily out-competed or swallowed by existing monopolies. In Asia almost all of these companies stay at the garage level for ever while in Africa and South America most of of ingenious entrepreneurs encounter difficulties even to create or maintain a garage business.

Some of the reasons have been thoroughly analyzed in blog post by Ivan Raszl that I’m happy to link here. He points out the importance of a social environment that provides wealth, education and security.

It is the affluence that enabled a few geniuses to excel. Millions of people use their garage exclusively to park their car and their spare time to travel. Only a few motivated geniuses abuse their garage for experimenting in their spare time. I think the lack of proper space and time is the most prominent hurdle for successful startups in Africa and South America.

The next hurdle is crime or the lack of protection from it. While it is simple rubbery of typical criminals in Africa and South America, it works less openly in Europe and Asia though rubbery it is. It is rubbery taken to a new dimension which may be called organized crime. What I mean by that is not only the Mafia type found in Southern Italy, but also the various governmental organizations whose bureaucracy is stealing much of the success. And of course these governmental parasites effectively cooperate with existing monopolies that not only fear competition by want to receive their share by a non-friendly takeover. The existence of this rubber schemes in Europe and Asia is why startups are endorsed there but rarely reach international momentous.

As we learned so far in North America only, optimal conditions for startups to thrive seem to exist. Still this begs the question why did only so few recent startups in the United States make it to the wold’s top. Again there are a simple answer and a more thorough one. The simple answer is at the top there is space enough only for a small number of companies. That’s true but if we assume a fair competition in which only these few were the ultimate winners, we would still expect a lot more not so prominent winners. In fact we would expect a pyramid of winners with gentle slopes easy to climb up for newcomers, but what we see is exactly the opposite. The slopes are so steep that it is absolutely impossible for someone new in the field to compete with Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, or Google.

This leads to the logical conclusion that the remarkable success of these companies was not accidental and cannot ascribed to an outstanding ingenuity, and the second answer is that the unique success of these companies was rather a strategic decision meticulously planned and executed.

For instance, Google’s supremacy is the results of a dot-com bubble burst. Before that Gooogle had many competitors, and it was a vibrant market every bright idea made it to a new search engine, algorithm were quickly copied improved and implimented, all in all a market far from being monopolized. Then bankers entered the scene. They began to hype dot-com stocks. Not only did they encouraged investors to buy such overpriced stocks but also they encouraged founders to create new Internet businesses and sometimes those businesses became rich literally overnight for almost nothing but a shady business plan. Then they let the bubble burst and the marked was purged as only Google mysteriously survived.

Great losses were also seen with Google and the question why they still survived is at least partially answered by Edward Snowden when he revealed the NSA connection of many such big dot-com companies that survived the crash.

Now that we logically proved that the garage startup is just a myth, the question remains why this myth is so resistant and so strenuously perpetuated? The answer is that in fact those statups produce a great share of our wealth and even more important is their share in achieving progress. They are desperately needed even by the parasites who feed on them, and the purpose of my post was not to discourage, but rather to encourage to keep the eyes open to the best conditions for those enterprises worldwide and to fight poverty and parasites that still are the greatest threat to human progress.

Posted in Ideology, Manipulation, Media, Political, Rationality | Leave a comment

Copenhagen

This gallery contains 13 photos.

   

Gallery | Leave a comment

Aggressive Always the Others Are

Image | Posted on by | Leave a comment

Berlin Pictures in Spring

This gallery contains 15 photos.

Gallery | Leave a comment

Picked-up Quote on Love

At a reading at the Leipzig Book Fair, Ipicked up the following quote today.

Falling in love is just like handing over to someone the power to seriously harm you, but only those who don’t abuse deserve it.

Quote | Posted on by | Leave a comment

What a firework to celebrate peace.

March 23rd a massive explosion occurred in an ammunition depot near Kharkiv. Roughly 150 tons of ammunition were blown up. This is a video published on youtube. This is good news actually.

The best thing you can do with weapons is blowing them up without killing people or destroying infrastructure.

BTW the international weapon industry is happy too, and that’s for several reasons.

  1. The most obvious reason is that they can make fresh profits by selling new weapons now.
  2. Their products, weapons and ammunition, are consumed without actually having to stir up conflicts. Stirring up conflicts is a cumbersome, time consuming, and costly endeavor, so it definitely reduces net profit. Simply blowing up the stuff in a firework is much more moneymaking.
  3. Even for the military industry killing people and destroying infrastructure is a drawback in every war because the weapons are paid by the people. People can pay for weapons only if they are alive and their infrastructure functioning. People have to earn money by peaceful working before they can buy new weapons. If infrastructure is destroyed they cannot earn enough.
  4. Finally killing people and destroying infrastructure also ruins social life. People’s desire to keep social life intact is astoundingly strong. People miraculously cling to their social connections more than to anything else. If they learn from own experience, killed relatives and friends for instance, how harmful war is to their social life, they give a shit about buying new weapons and that would be the ultimate blow to the weapon industry.

Thus this firework made all happy pacifists and war mongers alike.

A few month ago I published an article “What the Ukrainians Can Learn from the Swiss“. I’m glad to learn that Ukrainians are smarter than I previously thought. Thumbs up keep learning.

Posted in Democracy, Ideology, Manipulation, Media, Political, Rationality, Research, War, Weapons | Leave a comment

The rise of necrophilia

In an IKEA ad at youtube (“IKEA Werbung: TV Spot “Gekommen um zu Bleiben” (30 Sek)”).  This women that already passed her prime time long ago complains that her husband misses his virility and it sounds as if a women can blame a man for not being sexually attracted to her.

My dear old girl, please take this message: “Nobody, absolutely nobody is attracted to you any more except maybe a necrophiliac.”

Posted in Dating, Feminism, Ideology, Mating, Psychology | Leave a comment

Convey Stupidity

wordiness

If you want to promote an irrational argument cloak it in wordiness.

Or even better create a movie.

Source: https://www.opendemocracy.net/fatima-bhutto/cinema-can-be-powerful-and-inspiring-but-it-is-never-innocent

Quote | Posted on by | Leave a comment

Why donkeys considered stupid and dogs the preferred pet of dictators?

donkey

The answer lays with psychology, human psychology. I found this remarkable quote in an Nature article that gives us the clue.

“Dogs are the only naturally occurring models of psychiatric [anxiety-]disorders.”[1]

During human evolution two kinds of animals were domesticated.

  1. Animal that grow resources, meet, milk, eggs, fleece, and feathers in particular.
  2. Animals that are exploited, that have to take on daunting tasks.

In human culture, the former group is considered inferior so you can easily kill them, fleece them, and steal their eggs. The human culture needs this perspective of inferiority to not feel guilt when eating their meat for instance.

The other group of animals is rarely eaten. Though there exist some cultures that eat horse beef, in central Asia for instance, this habit is rather uncommon in Western culture. Also the exploitation animals are mostly flight animals. That is a horse is forced to plow by a whip and a dog into obedience by punishment. Dogs can fast learn to avoid punishment by simply complying to threats and commands (that are conditioned threats). Therefore we call dogs intelligent.

Donkeys are an exception they are not a flight animals. They cannot be taught by a whip. Therefore they are considered stupid.

Dogs, on the contrary, during their domestication were made even more fearful. According to the ruling opinion breeders believed they made them more intelligent, they made them more compliant though.

Similar to dogs humans were domesticated. By the rulers of all ages the breeding of the most fearful variety of humans was favored. It was not a question of intelligence. On the contrary, those more fearful humans showed even less creativity, but nevertheless they were easier to force into obedience.

kimmy-with-live-dog

In summary dogs and humans share the same burden of domestication which results in the same anxiety disorders, and as the publication says the same drugs seem to help [1]. Dogs are therefore an excellent model organism to test antidepressants (the article claims), and for dictators dogs are the perfect role model to train their skills of oppression.


1. Cyranoski D. Genetics: Pet project. Nature News. 2010;466(7310):1036-1038. doi:10.1038/4661036a.

Posted in Allgemein, Culture, Democracy, Ideology, Manipulation, Political, Psychology, Rationality | Leave a comment