Engineering a perception?

Eggs Dipped in Toilet Water

My interpretation of a perception being, how one views and responds to an observed individual.
Actual characteristics and qualities obviously cannot be altered within an immediate time frame.
Attitude and intentions can, however.

If we engineered an ideal attitude and set of intentions, which are obviously not naturally occurring, but would be consciously adopted and implemented by an individual, could we in theory transcend social boundaries that exist for the majority of us?

For example, the one that (hopefully) springs to mind for most of us (the men at least)...

Females are almost naturally in command of partner selection, at least more so than males.
Not to necessarily super seed them in this regard, but level the playing field at least.
Have it so that perhaps strength of attraction would not be based on gender so much as personal qualities and strengths of character - at least more so.

This is my hypothesized set of perceptions, hopefully explained in a manner that's reasonably comprehensible.

Any feed back would be cool.
Still sort of preliminary at this stage, so don't slate/ban me

***

Firstly, I'd like to pre-phase by saying that this mentality pertains pretty much directly to sexuality, and I personally speculate (as I don't have referable sources) that to a large degree, irrespective of gender, human interaction depends hugely on sexual perception.

Although, as oppose to my previous belief that it was linear - a guy is an "alpha" or a guy is a "beta - it's actually multifaceted, and must encapsulate an approach from a variety of angles.

So firstly, I'll outline my hypothesized mentality, and then explain my logic behind it.


If we can imagine a sphere representing said mentality.
Inside the sphere, is contained the intention of the mentality, which an observant would feel, or perceive instinctively, whilst the outside or the surface of the sphere, is what an observant would perceive consciously, or on a human level.

So if we examine the analogy in a very straight forward manner; an observant see's a sphere, and they can feel an energy radiating from within it, but on the surface, it just looks like any random passing sphere...

Okay, well, that's my poor attempt to figuratively portray this hypothesis.


So firstly, to refer to the "inside" of the sphere.

This pertains to the phenomenon that I referred to earlier.
As regards the nature of sex (so you can see why it's the core of the issue ).
If we're familiar to any degree with American sitcoms, we'll probably be familiar with the expression, "animal sex".
It's generally referenced in positive light.

Jennifer Anniston off the cast of "Friends": "The guy was total bastard, but he made up for it in the bedroom. It was totally animal sex".

In the animal kingdom, consensual sex is basically unheard of (based on the information I've perceived).
Perhaps there are exceptions to this, I don't know, but by en-large, it's effectively the male taking control, and forcing "carnal knowledge", if you will, upon the female.

Rape, effectively.

Examining certain species that exemplify this: Dolphins.
Male Dolphins can spend a lifetime, sometimes searching in packs, for a female, who they will isolate, and "rape" over and over - sometimes, as a gang.

This is one example among many.
Not only among mammals, but insects, reptiles etc.

This would lead me to hypothesize, that fundamental nature, the fundamental approach toward sex that occurs on an animal level, i.e. "animal sex", is actually rape.

That's point 1.



Point 2.
The perception of behavior.

That which is most aesthetically appeasing.
That which alludes to the act itself.
That which imbues and inspires thoughts of coitus, and projects an image of self affirmation.

To be, sexy.

Whether we are or not, is a different story.
But, contained within this hypothesis, this is the nature or direction our behavior would go.

Of course being "sexy" would encapsulate a number of other facets - being composed, collected, cool etc.
I guess these in combination with the bodily allusion to sex, is what produces or defines the perception of "sexy"...? (sort or irrelevant speculation )


Point 1 and point 2 effectively relate to what are encapsulated "inside" the sphere, as regards the analogy.


Point 3, as regards the sphere surface.
This is the human perception. The conscious perception.

Certainly as regards point 1, referred to the nature of the coitus - rape - it is certainly dehumanizing. Which is it's intent (animal sex).
As regards the perception of ones behavior, if they were to allude to this, it would be a very repelling perception.

As regards testosterone, it's sometimes referred to as the hormone that imbues the will to "fight and.... fornicate", shall we say.

That is to say, the strong conscious perception of sexuality can often be perceived plainly as aggression.
I think on a day to day level, the stereotypical "alpha male" embodies this.
The imposing nature of that aggression, even if that aggression is not aimed directly at one individual - can often be perceived as uncivilized.

So the sphere surface, should be - DECEPTION.

Deception as regards sexual intent.

That intent being - there is no intent.
There is no conscious perception of any sexual desire on the part of an observer, and therefore, no aggression.
On a conscious level, the male is entirely human, not at all animal like.

This lends itself to "human" interaction.

The whole "alpha/beta" school of thought goes such that the male "takes control".
He doesn't make conversation, he doesn't ask questions, he just takes.
Again, behavior which is ultimately very dehumanizing.

I refer again to sexual perception defining to a large degree human interaction: this is likely the type of behavior that would, if adopted by society in general, would lead to general uproar.
One can only imagine...

The ultimate affect of the sphere surface, the deception, on ones overall behavior, is to "humanize" it, our actions, our thoughts become lucid and composed, not imposing and wild, like that of an animal.
Yet the animal nature and energy is ever present, "within" the sphere.

Sexuality does not suffer, yet our actions and behavior gravitate toward humanity.

Note: This "deception" can also serve to eliminate egotism, as unfortunately occurs on the part of some females, as it eliminates their "leverage", in a sense, that our unwitting conveyance of sexual desire can often give them.

Just an added plus I guess


As far as the affect of this mentality, I've always been of the opinion that when a behavior trait or characteristic is to manifest, as regards where to initiate it?
What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

IMO - the thought comes first. The mentality comes first.

For the overall manifestation of a mentality and it's embodiments, with such positive outcomes (in theory, being on a level playing field with women as regards partner selection), it would take lifestyle concessions and accordance's of various natures (again, speculating), perhaps varying according to each specific individual?

But suffice to say that adopting a mentality alone would be a crucial beginning, but ultimately a guide to behavior and self improvement, not an entire manifestation of it.