Images by Kev and Tumisu from Pixabay, my graphics
The ‘peeping Tom’ for generations has described aptly what I am about to deal with here: The secretly watching male, who’s too dumb for a vivid imagination and too cheap for spending money on the ‘real thing’:
The male (and female?) person who watches others using any kind of device, in the analogue days telescopes or binoculars, to catch at least glimpses of those others in ‘private states’:
Any stage of undress, close encounters of the private and loving kind they miss out on themselves so sadly…
Perhaps it is no coincidence that ‘a Tom’ is also short for a roving male cat…
It is sometimes sad, sometimes rather annoying, when you realize them being about – and often just plain ridiculous and proof of very small minds.
They are not using the – especially these days – ample means and opportunities that often are even sold cheap online; not using the human imagination based perhaps on tales or books or even movies to make their own ‘reality’…
Woody Allen let one of his characters put it nicely in his comedy “Bullets over Broadway”: ‘reality is for those who cannot make their own.’
These days I presume, with so-called – in this respect – equality of the sexes around – women might be ‘peeping’ too; but that is a guess.
Just as in former centuries (married) men used to boast about their ‘adventures’, the nice term ‘swaggering’ makes it even clearer; while women were the ‘true gentlemen’, who relished in silence, even though from necessity rather than want…
To this day, the statistics in these matters especially are hard to determine and not easily published. Not all that is loudest is the most of any kind – nor right….
The right to privacy is a human right and apart from an invasion into the privacy of those that are watched, it’s a punishable offence…
Still, to put not too fine a point to it… all those who read this and start thinking: Perhaps new ways can be found, anyway:
There are those that seem to be the natural counterpart of peeping Toms or Marys: the exhibitionists…
Knowing your fellow man – or woman. In theory it is easy: Just talk to them – or look at them and you know. Right?
Wrong.
We only understand and really recognize what we have seen before. Of course, there are universal truths. Yet, there are also differences in detail.
They depend on experience. On discretion someone may have learned in the course of a lifetime…
I for one for example have learnt to be very careful with what – or whom – I talk about. Usually, that is.
So easily people actually jump to conclusions.
In those conclusions there are just as much ‘wish(es) father to the thought’ as the quote from Shakespeare goes; as well as ideas based on often culturally or individually dependent views and perspectives involved.
So, a wolf would expect a wolf to behave like one. Yet, when there’s a sheep inside – or a fox maybe, or a hare, or a squirrel, or a bear… or a bit of all of them:
What is the conclusion then?
When we want to know about people the first order is: Patience!
Although many of us conclude about basics of another human being inside of seconds, we still should keep an open mind:
The New York Times won a Pulitzer Prize for it: The reporting on contacts between Trump and Putin all those years ago, when he first ran for office: The election of 2016 already had been influenced on a broad scale by Russian hackers.
Additionally, the contacts between other members of the Trump-family, such as his nephew, to Russia and Putin or his ‘entourage’, have been proven.
Not so long ago Trump could be seen practically worshipping Putin when meeting him.
Trump seems to have stated publicly even that he envied Putin his status: To be able to have people to ‘jump through hoops’ basically at his command. Something Trump has been craving and is as yet denied by the constitution of the USA.
What is going on?
I think it is safe to suppose that all this threatening scenery has been moved just as on a stage: Make us believe in the threat – and invest: In weapons and the weapons’ industry.
In return, Putin at some point will ‘get’ Ukraine. And no more NATO in front of his territory.
Which sounds alright.
Otherwise: It seems a huge campaign in order to get Trump raised NATO-members’ annual in weapons. To 5% from 3% originally. Do the maths: Depending on the gross national product, per year. That’s billions of dollars the US-way. Weapons that are produced mainly in the US. Weapons that most of the other NATO members will order from there.
Add the raised tariffs and you have your threatening setup and deals-closing all complete.
By a man whose whole history is about making huge amounts of money; who did not care a hoot about anyone, when going bankrupt on purpose in the 1960s, hurting thousands of small stakeholders and sinking them.
Who promises yet never really comes through with bettering living conditions, employment rates, for those at the bottom of society’s ladder.
Who praised himself for being that kind of deal-closer: Threaten them and be done with it. Who has done so – or at least tried – repeatedly.
North Korea comes to mind, a couple of years ago. Some threats and fears raised of actual military action in the seas close to Korea. And suddenly:
– Silence. Shaking of hands and alleviation of said threats…
At the time it seemed too good to be true already. It does so even now. Looking at all the other examples, mentioned. At Gaza. At Ukraine.
Putin and Trump: Meet the ‘family’.
Note: There are facts. There are interpretations. Most of what I cite here, is fact and can be verified.
Self-confidence: It’s sometimes also called ‘coolness’, unfortunately. To my mind these two concepts do not have the least bit in common. Self-confidence, if it is real, knows about the good – and the bad – and therefore does not need to hide the latter.
Nobody is perfect.
‘Coolness’ very often comes with boasting and pretence…
To know about drawbacks and the small weaknesses of life can make us feel insecure: Did I do right? Was it ok? What did they think about it?
In business very often the adage is to always show your strengths, not a weakness. There is even a saying about it: “Fake it till you make it.”
Men and women often deal very differently with the whole question of feeling and appearing strong and confident – or insecure.
As a tendency in many cultures and regions of the world, especially in business, showing off, pretending, is seen to be a manly thing.
Perhaps because men are supposed, since patriarchy ‘started’, to be the ones to always be cool, calm and collected – and in a fight, in war, be the ones to even give up their own life.
It makes me very sad every so often, this strange idea of war and fighting being inevitable and therefore needing to be prepared…
Reactions to that kind of feeling are different and very much according to outlook, perspective and background as well as experience.
That adage about faking it, though, can do as much damage, almost. Because people push and shove, if needs seems to be, to stay esteemed, a good worker, a good colleague and a knowledgeable person.
With it fear can start: Apart from existential fears of losing a job, or a loved person, or a friend – or our life, there is a fear of losing ‘face’, the prestige, the estimation of others.
Dealing with that kind of emotion can be a challenge, especially when we didn’t learn at some time to acknowledge it as part of human life.
Because feeling insecure, with the advent of adolescence, becomes a natural part of life.
What can help, is experience. And – in business – learning about standards:
Once we know what the average or good standard is supposed to be we can stand on that ground more easily. And, from there, get a grip on details – and a view and new perspective on the inevitable –
and the many, many good things besides!
That’s why lots of experience and training, with good breaks in between, will teach you – self-confidence, and understanding of the human side of life. In ourselves as well as others.
Screenshot of NATO member states, current, taken at 21-01-2025_06-16-46 at https://www.nato-pa.int/content/membership-map
Yet once more Russia attacks Ukraine. Ukraine will answer in time… The news are often just a short glimmer of the actual blunt truth behind it all:
Just as in everyday conflicts, very often war is about power, about position, about prestige, about reputation – and about money as well.
What makes it a pattern too, is the way the opponents treat each other in frontline ‘reports’: It’s always the other party that is to be blamed. It’s always the others that didn’t make enough allowances or offered the real bargain to finally reach a truce.
And eventually an agreement to be observed by all.
Does anyone remember how this first got started? The idea had been that NATO after WWII would not extend into the East of Europe beyond a certain realm. In order to let the actual feeling of danger or threats be allayed in regard to Russia.
I still have to think of that little story I made up the other day about that situation:
A man lives in his house by himself, calmly attending to his (rather turbulent) internal affairs.
One day he opens the door and finds a huge, smiling hulk of a yet young, blonde, clean-shaven man with close-cropped haircut standing there – kindly looking at him, feet on his porch, legs wide, chewing gum – holding a machine gun. Telling him, with a broad smile that the man need not worry: He and his mates were just having a good time of it, doing nothing. Just brought their guns and tanks too…
Seriously, looking at maps, what would you think…?
There is no question about Russia’s internal affairs, i.e. its president Putin, being a cruel leader and dictator internally.
But this conflict did not start 3 years ago. It started long before that. And as long as greed and selfishness on all sides won’t make room for real negotiations, this will go on…
“Zum Golde drängt, am Golde hängt doch alles
ach, wir Armen.”
“Towards gold all push, all is suspended by,
oi, wey our souls.” (Gretchen, Goethe, Faust I, my translation).
It’s the quintessential phrase in regard to many people’s image of their own value, their idea of their self-esteem: “The more money I get, the higher salary I receive, the better person I am.”
I feel lucky personally not to have been raised by such standards: Our parents from early on made clear that things are like this in a system that is based on ‘capital’:
That due to the human phenomenon of a system pervading the whole of life over time, many people feel like that:
More money = more self-esteem.
But, perspective is key: If we get the chance to ask further and develop our thoughts we can rise above that rather cheap concept – and find ourselves more than the sum of our parts – or the money.
The only thing remaining and rather important, alas, is to watch out for all those that don’t – or haven’t realized this. At times I pity them for the emptiness their life must present.
But looking after ourselves and protecting us from greed and selfishness where present is still the order of the day – too.
All the happier I am when I meet with the good ones…
Image by Grand Ath Thariq Kusmara Gustav from Pixabay
“You just don’t understand!” – That’s the title of a book by a famous social sciences researcher. She writes in a manner everyone can understand about the difficulties that can arise when men and women talk to each other. It’s focused on the US-American, that is, to some extend Western society and culture.
Most of us know how different and thus difficult to understand the approaches and outlook on life can be between the sexes.
Even more so, when there are similar ideas around, living and working together, where expectations are yet different in detail.
The outlook, the perspective on life, and other people can be a crucial key to understanding each other.
There are people with a quiet and withdrawn everyday behaviour. Who think for themselves, take longer to finally speak about their thoughts; or exchange ideas.
Others rather like to talk soon to someone of like mind.
‘Like mind’: Wonderful words, in some ways.
The person who understands us without any drama or long discussions. Makes us feel welcome and at ease. Accepted. Because we understand each other easily, due to similar outlooks. Like minds.
There is yet another very interesting and yet basic difference in communication between so called high-context and low-context cultures:
“High-context” means not so much a measure of better quality – it means that in order to properly understand what is said you have to know body language.
The non-verbal messages that come with the words, the talk.
“Low-context” too, is not a measure of lower quality – it means that almost exclusively words are regarded as the whole ‘message’ of the speaker. Facial expression or gestures are almost not taken into account. At least, not knowingly.
I have seen both: People who register every tone of voice or the lifting of an eyebrow in order to ‘decode’ the message.
And those who don’t. At all.
I also know how easily we all are mistaken in judging others: The famous story of the man with the hammer by Paul Watzlawick, a leading figure in communication studies, in his even more famous book: “The situation is hopeless but not serious” is ample proof of that way we all have at times to interpret others – willy nilly:
The man decides he needs to lend a hammer from his neighbour, thinks a while, remembers all kinds of apparent recent snides and strange looks, concluding a grudge, the other is harbouring against him – when he eventually reaches the door of the neighbour’s house, rings and the neighbour opens, screams to his face: “You can well keep your hammer to yourself!”
Things can become more subtle than that, though: When we live in a close-knit community with some strict ideas on how to behave – it can happen that we become intolerant towards others.
A wonderful concept that can help a lot to more peace and peaceful coexistence:
“Tolerance”: “willingness to accept behaviour and beliefs that are different from your own, although you might not agree with or approve of them” (Cambridge Dict., online version)
What can make tolerance so difficult is the fact that we so often are raised with the silent premise of: “if you are not for you are against me” – The unspoken effect inside being even a (temporarily) shaky self-confidence: We look for someone to confirm our uneasiness, or our hurt feelings. To feel we are not wrong. But right, in feeling insulted or even hurt.
This ‘comes with the territory’: Many of us get a basic idea of ‘right and wrong’, sometimes strict parents or elders raising us with those ideas. And no explanations of – or more subtle views on – the how and the why.
Or the even less-easy-to-grab concept of being right – and the other person being right too… in their view of a situation.
That we will not lose a point or our position, our dignity, ‘face’, when we acknowledge the other’s perspective to be understandable.
But, that is the starting point of more peace and understanding:
Practicing tolerance.
Starting to learn about perspectives and (apart from legal or ethical considerations) about diversity of beliefs, outlooks – points of view.
