«
»

19 Jun

Mary Sean Young : “there is an alien agenda”

Posted June 19, 2014 by Julian O'Dea in Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , .

Sean Young the actress discusses some of her movies, including Blade Runner, as well as more esoteric matters such as symbolism, conspiracy theories and aliens. Here. I really feel this is a woman who needed better mental guidance.

The whole page is here. My blog post on the sexual politics of Blade Runner is included at the site.

14 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by slumlord on June 19, 2014 at 11:02 pm

    You know Julian, one of the things which continually surprises me is the failure of the promise of a woman’s beauty to correlate with her intellect or personality.

    I’ve met impossibly beautiful women who are either bat-shit crazy, morons or psychologically disturbed.

    I think it is a peculiar weakness in men to conflate the beautiful with the good.

    This is why I think Chastity is so important in the conception of masculinity.

    When a man relates to a woman as a sexual being he effectively “thinks with his dick” and tends to be prone to this conflation error. On the other hand, when he “desexualises” a woman by being chaste, he effectively has to relate to her on the other aspects of her personality and being. In other words, once you get out of the attitude of “I want to get into her pants” you have to ask yourself, “Why am I actually spending time with her?”

    Is it because of her great personality? Her knowledge, charm or wit? Good cook?

    It’s an interesting exercise. Strip a woman of her sexuality and many of them have nothing else to offer.

    Women should be grateful that men think with their dicks otherwise many of them would remain single for life.

    Reply

    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on June 20, 2014 at 2:09 am

      Yes, I knew that poor Sean Young was a bit dippy, but she has bought the whole conspiracy line, including the aliens. It is really a Gnostic idea, that we are ruled by an evil elite and secret knowledge will save you.

      She is thoughtful, but no-one has guided her thoughts. She had a husband, but he has gone. No man can tell her not to be silly. So she ends up believing the usual kookiness. It is not even original kookiness.

      About the only man with any power over a top actress is a director or producer. If you take the time to listen to the entire interview, you will not only hear the once-beautiful woman say “fucking” a couple of times, but also that she was influenced by David Lynch. I know it is a constant theme of my blog that it really matters what men a woman lets influence her, but here again we see a woman getting ideas from a very peculiar man.

      Men dislike correcting women, especially these days, and especially beautiful women. Beautiful women have no need, as you say, to actually learn anything about the world. They are genetic royalty.

      A good-looking woman basically has a meal ticket for life. It must be strange to be like that.

      I don’t resent gorgeous girls. I have always been a one-woman man, and I am happy with what I got, but the bitter resentment of such women in the Manosphere is striking. Too many “nuclear rejections” I suppose.

      I have known very attractive girls who are also intelligent and of good character. But they are not numerous. I once knew a very academically gifted young postulant nun who was very attractive as well, but she eventually did not proceed in the religious life and some of her expressed opinions and later life choices struck me as astoundingly dumb. I think she had fine sensibilities but no real sense.

      I really have come to understand why spiritual authority usually rests with men in most of the world’s religions. A pretty girl in a dog collar is a pretty girl first and foremost, and any sacerdotal qualities she might project will be secondary at best. And left to themselves women are heresiarchs of genius, or simply go New Age, or worse still, end up like Sean Young.

      I think it is good for a girl to be presentable and pretty enough. But great beauty is a great responsibility and is not always used well. In the specific case of Mary Sean Young, I think she was a beautiful and distinctive woman, although I dislike brown eyes on women, and her figure, especially her breasts, was not up to the standard set by her face.

      Reply

    • Posted by MarcusD on June 21, 2014 at 1:49 am

      I’ve read a few studies (e.g. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289610001315) that seem to find a correlation between attractiveness and intelligence.

      Of course, there’s something to be said for one’s potential (intellectually) and one’s actual behaviour in the realm of intelligence.

      Reply

      • Posted by Julian O'Dea on June 21, 2014 at 3:45 am

        Yes, I think that was one of Leta Hollingworth and Lewis Terman’s findings, that high IQ people are generally physically attractive. The ugly nerd stereotype may not be correct. And Lombroso probably had a point, in that syndromes producing low IQ correlate with unattractive appearance and criminality.

        As for effective intelligence, any woman over 100IQ tends to get educated to be a feminist these days, which will not help her life outcomes as a rule.

        However, at the very high mathematical ability level, various syndromes involving hypermasculinisation of foetuses (left-handedness and so on) may come into effect and make for less attractive phenotypes perhaps. And, oddly, there seems to be a correlation between high IQ and myopia, so the spectacle-wearing stereotype might have some some validity.

    • Posted by katmandutu on June 21, 2014 at 5:20 am

      “Women should be grateful that men think with their dicks otherwise many of them would remain single for life”

      And the corollary, would be, Doc…..

      Wait for it. 😉

      Men should be grateful that women suffer from baby rabies otherwise many of them would remain single for life. 😀

      Reply

      • Posted by slumlord on June 21, 2014 at 9:28 pm

        Agree Kat.

        I think if people were purely rational and didn’t act on their instincts the world population would collapse.

        Lots of men can be thankful for baby rabies and lots of women should be grateful that men are only “after just one thing!”.

      • Posted by Julian O'Dea on June 22, 2014 at 12:40 am

        I suspect that one reason “progressive” human groups will not compete demographically with more traditional and religious groups is that near-perfect contraception and the use of abortion by progressives can be used to override any irrational moments leading to babies being born. If it were not for “accidents”, the human race would have died out.

  2. Posted by MarcusD on June 23, 2014 at 4:53 pm

    What do you make of: http://asr.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/05/29/0003122414536391.abstract

    Using Add Health seems like a particularly short-sighted thing to do.

    Reply

    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on June 24, 2014 at 7:26 am

      Yes, I think the results are interesting, although I only have the abstract, and I would agree that it looks like the author has included dating, cohabiting and married couples in her study. At best, this will have reduced her sample of, say, married couples. At worst, it implies that she has mixed the three kinds of relationships. It is possible for example that male attractiveness is more important to women in dating, and less so in choosing whom they actually marry. Also, if the name of the sample source implies that she is only looking at young couples, she may lose effects that come into play once a couple have been married for some time. In my personal experience, sex roles and expectations tend to become sharper and more urgent once babies come and the wife, usually, exits the workforce for a time. (It would be interesting to see what effect attractiveness and economic status have on divorce rates. It would not be surprising to find, for example, that a relationship in which the woman has lost her looks, or the man his job, are more divorce-prone).

      I do think she has a point about assortative mating. As we were just discussing, IQ and attractiveness may be positively correlated. In any case it is likely that a pretty, smart girl will want a handsome, smart boy. Personally, appearance certainly mattered to me, but I suspect most men are like me in wanting to marry a girl who is tolerably intelligent and capable of holding down a decent job.

      Another point is that with girls getting better jobs these days, the need for the man to have a top earning job may be less. It is possible that a moderate-earning girl might be interested in a man with an interesting personality but a vocation that pays less. I imagine that quite a few female teachers might be supporting wannabe writers, artists and musicians these days.

      A further point is that these days, with better nutrition and healthcare, more men and women are physically attractive, at least when young. The effect of male selection of beauty might be less evident if practically all the women are presentable.

      A final point. This study suffers from what one might call having “unlikely priors”, I think the expression is. If a study purports to overturn what most people instinctively feel is true, it risks being rejected as simply unlikely. To be facetious, I am sure if you did enough studies, you might find one that finds that Norwegians are more emotionally expressive than Italians.

      Reply

    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on June 25, 2014 at 5:57 pm

      The findings on online dating reported in Freakonomics by Levitt and Dubner were that “For men, a woman’s looks are of paramount importance. For women, a man’s income is terribly important”.

      So that seems to conflict with the study by McClintock.

      Reply

  3. Posted by Butterfly Flower on July 4, 2014 at 5:24 pm

    Its actually surprisingly common for Americans to believe such nonsense. I mean, the tv show “Ancient Aliens” is one of the highest rated shows on cable.

    I suspect the silly Alien theories are the result of decades of non-existent STEM education (and powerful teachers unions who refuse to alter their curriculum). People with no concept of engineering, will be at a loss to explain the creation of large structures. They are easily fooled into believing vague alien magic built the pyramids.

    Reply

    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 5, 2014 at 1:13 am

      I think it is a modern form of Gnosticism. Poorly-educated people are ready to believe that someone is hiding a great truth from them, and are ripe to be used as suckers by alternative media figures. We have two magazines on sale in newsagents here in Australia, New Dawn and Nexus, which have elements of this kind of thinking, although they also carry some quite good material, if you know how to read critically (for example, I first found out about the potential problem with mercury amalgam in teeth fillings in one of those magazines).

      Sean Young is a reflective woman, but she went into modelling and Hollywood quite young (she was only 23 when she appeared in Blade Runner, if I recall). Surrounded by strange sets and strange people, and becoming famous and admired so young, no doubt went to her head. Later, she drank a lot and had career and I suppose romantic disappointments. She was ripe for conversion to some strange beliefs.

      Reply

Leave a comment