welcome guest
login or register

Max and Min

OK, I'd better be doing some other stuff, but instead I cook myself some more coffee and write a sequel to the story Jon and His Car. Just because I happen to have one more hour of free time before they day's work. The characters in this story are based on many real people, myself included.

Min had just finidhed his meal when he received a phone call. It was Max, his good old friend. Max was upset:
- Did you read Erkka's blog? This time he has just gone too far - the story is absolutely outrageous!
- Um, sorry, I was eating and didnt' check the internet, so I know nothing about the case. What it is?
- It is some sort of cartoon-like story which is supposed to be both funny and educational. But it is nothing but idiotic, retarded and all biased! That guy things he is somehow better than us, and he kindly offers us a piece of advice! And not only that, he is portraying us men as stupid and irrational, and women as perfect. This is dangerous! If women read that story, they think that it is right for them to nag about all kind of obscure "inner needs", blaming the man for not understanding "their essential basic needs". It simple doesn't go like that! Women are not perfect, a lot of time they are whining on something completely irrelevant little things which surely aren't as fundamental as motor oil is for car engine.
- Huh! Please wait a minute, I'll take a quick look at the story.
- I can't understand it. Erkka is a man, but he attacks men and defends women. He must be a gay who hates men!
- [reads the story] Umm... Well, Max, I understand that you are upset, but I still think you might be over-reacting.
- How come? You mean you are also taking sides, defending women and blaming men for failing to understand some obscure irrational stuff which is falsely portrayed as "essential basic needs"?
- Let's take it easy and go step by step. First of all; it is just a story, written in a simple way to illustrate a point. You don't have to take it so gender-seriously.
- But anyone can see that the car is a metaphor for a woman, and Jon is a man, so it is all gender spesific and nothing else. It is biased and wrong. It should mention that so many times the situation is actually the other way around - a woman fails to understand basic needs of man, ignoring the inner workings of male psyche, and then blaming the man for being unfair!
- Sure thing. Does it say in the story that it claims to be some sort of universal truth?
- Yes, it is written in such a way.
- No, that is just in your mind. If Erkka says that he once saw a white raven, he doesn't mean that every raven is white. If anyone says that "if X fails to understand the basic needs of Y, then Y is likely to feel ignored, and problems will arise." it doesn't mean that always and every time X is a man and Y is a woman. For the sake of a story it is easier to write in a simple manner, but in real life things are far more complicated. Usually it is so that both sides fail to understand each other, and layers of misunderstanding get entangled in a bloody mess.
- Then why doesn't he write about it? Why does he put all the blame on the man? It is biased and unfair, unfair and biased, and it hurts my personal feelings because I'm a man!
- I'd guess Erkka supposes that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between a metaphor and reality. And rational enough to figure out that there are different ways of applying the metaphor, that the written story displays just one version and it is left up to the reader to think further.
- Now you are telling me that I'm not intelligent enough to understand Erkka's story? You are taking sides with him, and attacking me - you belive that you are some sort of superioir beings, looking down at us inferioir stupids.
- You just have a strong habit of seeing everything in terms of "superior / inferior", and that's your problem. If you read that kind of interpretation to my sentences or to Erkka's story, then there's nothing I can do about it. I only ask you to take it easy and to think calm. But if you prefer to stay with your own pre-learned first-hand emotional reactions, then just go on. But you should be aware that by doing that you are making the discussion far more harder than it would otherwise be.
- Enough of that blaming! Why is everybody always putting the blame on men! I'm tired of hearing stuff like "Men make things harder than they are" - it simply is not true. Men think simple, women make it complicated as they invent all kinds of obscure "inner feelings".
- Now it seems that you are yourself trying to make another biased story, portraying men as "perfect", and putting all the blame on women. Just a while ago you said that you don't like biased stories.
- I don't like when all the blame is put on men, when in REALITY it is so that women fail to understand men. Women demand that men be like women, emotional and all that - but it going to lead to problems. We men are born with warrior genitals, we are biologically pre-wired to fight and to hunt, and females are pre-wired to be the care-takers. That's why women are good at social skills, and why emotions matter so much for them. There is nothing wrong with that. It all goes wrong when women fail to understand that men, by their nature, are not so emotional - we men are straightforward warriors and builders. If we are forced to abandon our tools and weapons, and told to wear the apron, it is nothing but opression! Men should be accepted and respected as warriors, instead of being forced to become soft, emotional and weak!
- And you think that is a rational way of thinking?
- Sure it is! Genes and biology are cold hard scientific facts, and female imagination can't change that. Women always get upset when the outer reality doesn't match their ideals, they fail to accept the things the way they are. And the fact is that we men are biologically programmed to be good at fighting - that is what makes man a real man, it should be enough, we don't need to know anything about the obscure inner workings of the weak and emotional female soul.
- Listen, Max. If you have a car which is slowly leaking motor oil, and you never fill the oil, then what happens?
- The engine will overheat and break down.
- Is that fair?
- Yes, that is the way things are. Pure laws of mechanics and physics.
- So, the engine breaking down is not any kind of arbitrary punishment for you?
- What, are you kidding? Of course not. It is nothing but a natural consequence of running out of motor oil. Once again it is this stupid female stuff trying to portray the car engine as if it had emotions and intentions. It is nothing but a mahcine made of steel.
- OK. And you think that if a woman fails to respect your biological pre-wired psychological build, then it is just a natural consequence that you run into problems?
- Now you understand! Women are stupid and wrong, as they fail to respect us men as warriors!
- Well, I see. But what makes it so that should be OK for you to fail to understand the basic emotional needs of any human being?
- It is not "any human being!" It is biased female stuff. We men don't have that kind of emotions. We understand pride, adrenaline, sexual lust and things like that. That should be enough.
- But you say you feel personally hurt as you feel that Erkka is putting all the blame on men.
- Sure I do! It hurts my pride, and Erkka as a man should understand it. But he is a gay with no pride!
- Huzzah. He is a straight heterosexual and we both know that. Don't you see that your reaction is exactly the same that you say of women? You say that it is wrong and stupid for women to feel hurt when men fail to understand obscure needs the women are just inveting as a traps for men. But you do exactly the same, exactly the same.
- I'm not inventing anything. Pride is a basic male need, programmed in our genes.
- You say that because you feel like that. But guess what - the way you feel might not be any kind of universal truth, and not even biologically pre-wired. You just like to believe in that kind of theory because it justifies your own obscure emotions, portraying them as "natural", and all the other ways of reacting as "twisted".
- You are twisted!
- So you say. But I'm a man like you, and I understand the feeling you are describing - it is only that I think that the whole picture is bit more broaded than that. Also, I think you are making so much noise about your pride because you are insecure and afraid of being rejected. With bit more of confidence you wouldn't need to worry so much about your pride, as you would just unproblematically feel yourself as OK, fine and accepted.
- How can I feel fine and accepted when you and Erkka are taking sides with women and putting all the blame on men!
- No we are not. You just feel that way because that kind of hurt emotion is so strong inside you, and you easily experience everything according to that. If you get you inner wound healed, you'll experience your life in a new way.
- You idiot! All that stuff about "inner wounds" is aimed to emasculation of warrior men! You try to say that there is something wrong with me, that my psyche is twisted and wounded, that I'm not accepted the way I am, and that I should be something else instead, I should surrender my masculine strength and adopt the weak female emotional attitude! And only then would you whiners accept me to join your idiotic playground. But I'm not interested in your childish stuff, I'll go do the men things with other real males.
- Oh, OK. Have a good time!
- Again you are trying to insult me! That's wrong.
- No, I said "have a good time", it is not an insult.
- You said it in an insulting tone, and mean't that you are superior and I'm inferior.
- I guess you aren't even trying to listen to me.
- I'm not interested in listening to your insults anymore.
- OK. And what was your name?
- Max. I'm Max the Great Warrior.
- Just to make it sure, we are fictional characters too. And once again, all of this story could be read in another light, changing the genders and social roles, and it would still make sense.
- Hey, you say we are Erkka's fiction? Once again that stupid idiot is writing a biased story, where one side is all good and the other side is all stupid.
- He does that to illustrate the point - namely to show that in real life things aren't that simple. Instead of asking "who is right and who is wrong", I'd guess we'd better all reflect on our own emotional, cognitive and behavioral patterns, to better understand how we deal with one another.
- Again that foolery about "understanding"! I have had enough, I go to meet a group of people who think like me, and then we group together and talk about how we are right and the others don't understand us and that is why things get complicated.
- Sure thing, go ahead. Sorry for disturbing you.
- I'm not disturbed! You are!
- Well, I'd say something clever and nasty, but just now Erkka ran out of words. And soon he has to leave for days work. So I'm forced to say "good bye, it was nice chatting with you!"

tags: 
fictional
humorous
philosophy
up
246 users have voted.

Comments

Nice Fiction, something like that i would had need back in School! ^^

Pages

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
Please reply with a single word.
Fill in the blank.