Disturbing insights.

Got to admit. I am a "little" wired at the moment. I mentioned, casually, how chocolate interacts with my medical situation. In that it is needed. Because I wanted to make sure my digestion was OK. After stopping it for one day I decided I needed it to day so I had a LOT. A big bar of dark chocolate. The chemically best one to get I think. It is not clear whether I did or did not need that much. Now I am WIRED!

About 45 minutes ago, I wrote a FANTASTIC post on the subreddit for the Mentalist. I can't remember where I learned this, I think it was some random film youtube channel but also, another way, from Media Studies I did at A- level. But it is based on something I have observed over a lot of media. Partly helped by various youtube videos. What I am referring to is that shows put a lot of hints of upcoming events. It is something to do with making our subconscious accept things. 

One thing I think happens with Hollywood writers. Is that, they have talked over stories so much that they really do know the ins and outs of things. When we watch them, there is the implication that it is all a bit random. A kind of ongoing Dunning Kruger effect where the dim, or in this case inexperienced, (the audience) underestimate how complicated a thing is. 

The amount of conspiratorial things that can be found in shows is quite amazing. A basic one to start off with, that is confirmed. Is that in Breaking Bad, the pictures on Walters wall in his class room are meant to show ahead of time what happened with Jane. 

But it goes far deeper than that. OH does it go deeper. The back stories I have seen in Film Theory, especially on Wall- E and Shrek. Have shown really specific things put into stories that show very specific and sinister back stories. (Another more ridiculous one: Is Kevin from Home Alone the Saw Killer?)

So I put together one of the ones I have noticed about "The Mentalist". The Mentalist was a show that had a very exciting and "mythical" serial killer (called "Red John"). It is known as one of the best serial killers. But a problem with the show is that what SEEMED to happen. Is that the writers didn't appear to know what they were doing, and they said publicly they had not decided on who the serial killer was going to be even late into Season 5, when they had dropped a bunch of hints about who it was!

This literally gives people a bit of a bad experience since the events at the end of Season 3 seemed like a better way for Red John to go out, rather than the actual end of Red John in Season 6. 

Watching the show, I have seen very specific hints from Season 1 about who the killer was. Many absolutely direct ones. So I wrote a post about it. One of the hints I explored, which was related, was that one of the other serial killers followers, was Red Johns son. 

Then later, I went back to the post, realising another additional piece of the puzzle. The character in questions second name was Johnson... Literally John - son. Going back to those hints I mention. I said I consider that a correct theory. 

It is pretty cool to uncover something like this. BUT, it has shown something about human nature to me. 

REDDIT. I have made another similar insight into Breaking Bad. A similar insight into Walters motivation and hints in the show of why things went down as they did. It was good. It was marked down. 

I had mentioned the Todd Johnson connection on reddit before before I had put together the clue of John - son. 

It is early days. My post was marked down to zero; someone disliked it, now it is back to 1. But my best posts on this website. A stargate one (where one of the show runners asked for ideas and I dropped several paragraphs, I was the only one to and it was disliked a few times!), the Breaking Bad ones with that theory, and this one. Have all got a lukewarm or negative reception. 

It feels as though people see these responses. And mark them down because they are intelligent and these people resent them! 

This is all I have to say. It is... not a good or comfortable theory on human nature to hold. Because it includes a certain level of what feels like "narcissism". "People are not nice to me because they resent my intelligence". My intelligence is fairly high. I have had it tested at Mensa and I will not give the number. I will say two things. A) It was not high enough to get into Mensa B) It was outside a standard deviation on the high side. So if someone has an IQ score a standard deviation lower than mine, they would still be higher than the upper average of intelligence. 

Which means I basically can't communicate with women outside a statistical minority, making it harder to get laid! Since there are less high IQ women than men, women cluster around the mean far more, and you can't have meaningful communication more than one SD apart. I do quite ruthlessly discern a womans intelligence when I meet her. 

It is an uncomfortable. Very uncomfortable theory for my life. I am someone that has been beaten down a lot. Unwell, unemployed, chronically single, no friends. As we all have in this society in truth. Or at least most of us. So it is not comfortable to put this forward as a theory. But it does fit. 

I remember when I started getting really into right wing politics. People absolutely lost their minds. It was around the same time that I was getting involved in videos on narcissism and suddenly reflecting on my past as well. 

It was a weird moment. Because two things seemed true at the same time. My "friends" and family had suddenly lost their minds over inconvenient, political opinions. But also, at the same time as this, I was having deeper insights into my past and the fact that I had been ostracised, both now, and in said past. Sometimes in almost identical situations (Me learning about the transit of Jupiter, these happened 12 years apart!)

The only theory that fits is that it was not actually the right wing politics. It seemed more that people chose the right wing politics as their issue. But it reflected something else. And perhaps that is intelligence. They ostracised me in my late teens and 20's for intelligence. They also ostracised me in my early 30's for intelligence, but they stuck a convenient label of "right wing" on it the second time.