Punitive Psychology

Can anyone help me explain this? The video in question begins with the sudden appearance of a baby's head with a star-mole nose for eyes, then it abruptly cuts to a gory carousel made of out of meat; it seems to be alive and singing a distorted happy sounding song. Afterwards we get glimpses of a girl standing in front of what seems to be a tenement and her parents. The girl is now standing in front of a mirror and pops a zit from which a worm seems to come out, the worm splits open revealing some sort of phallic organism. She looks to her parents for help but they dismiss her. Terrified she runs outside, but the world is now a hostile hellscape where everything is made out of flesh and sexual organs. I have a vague notion that it is about going through puberty from a feminine perspective, newfound awareness to world of sex and the loss of innocence. I'd like to hear what other Lainanons think.

>going through puberty from a feminine perspective, newfound awareness to world of sex and the loss of innocence. sounds about right! I think there's definitely an element of chaos for chaos' sake, but all the sexual imagery gave me that impression as well. very beautiful piece, at first I thought it was by this japense artist Norihino Sekitani - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDwOu1t-L6I

The gory carousel is too contextual for a japanese artist, even if he was a sovietboo, which I doubt. It is intro from Soyuzmultfilm's Happy Carousel animation series: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Весёлая_карусель

>>2211 You could've at least post the video, you know: https://vimeo.com/113171079

>>2214 I figured if people wanted to see it they would look for it.

>>2224 Lol k

>>2213 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3_0Yrvn3PM

>>2224 (under the assumption that you are OP) Whether you figured right or not, YOU brought this topic up, YOU are responsible providing the sources. Why? consider these situations: 1: You provide a pointer to the source, which you, being familiar with the resource, would already have (unless you gefickt the whole process, e.g by not saving to your database a copy of, at least a pointer to, it). We are certain that this is exactly what you are talking about. 2: Someone else (Thank you >>2214 for trying to help the thread along by doing this) provides a pointer to what may or may not be the resource (everyone other than you have an increased uncertainty about whether this is what what you are talking about), repeating the work that you have done to find the resource, possibly doing even more work than what you have done to find the resource. 3: Nobody provides any pointer to any such resource, causing everybody who wants to familiarize himself with the resource to repeat the process of finding the resource (which, as mentioned above, may require them to spend even more work than you spent on finding the resource). Which of these 3 exhaustive options requires the least work? SPOILER ALERT: It's the 1st one, so thank you for your flippant disregard for efficiency. There is the case in which no-one is interested in familiarizing themselves with the resources, in which there is no extra work done by anyone to find the resource, because nobody cares. This option is negligible when posting, because, [TL;DR]the cost of pasting a pointer is tiny[/TL;DR], You are proposing to discuss a resource. If you did not care at all about discussing this resource, you should have remained silent (so as to not waste your (especially your, if you have any self-respect), or my (especially my, according to me) or anyone elses (especially someone elses, according to that someone else) time). Since you composed a message and published it, you should have had some good reason to post, which, this being an informatic system, a system in which the only things that occur are data transmission, the only reason you could possibly have would be that you think you would get some benefit from having the data you post be at the place to where you posted the data. It is possible that you could have seen some benefit returned outside this system, but this is unlikely. one such benefit, which is fairly common, and more likely, is that you might receive some data (returned via this system) in response to the data you sent (via this system), and that that data would be pertinent, perhaps even germane, to you. Since the only thing that the audience of your data has to work with is the data you sent, they will only use the data that you sent in responding to you (they may use other data, but the part that is derived from other data is not to you, but perhaps will be are 'copied in' to the response. If they respond to you using anything else that they can be reasonable expected to have avaiable to them, they will not much better than an arbitrary, or random, guess at what you might find relevant. It increases the relevance, the pertinence (probabilistically) of the that data you receive if the data you send is as informative as possible. the tiny cost of pasting a pointer is almost negligible, and the informativity of the data provided is increased to almost 1 (1 = %100. using %'s is ugly, as specifying an interval of real numbers bounded by two 'simple-to-describe' real numbers (e.g. rational numbers, algebraic numbers,,), in which the fractional number is, is more exact (more precise, more accurate), thus more powerful, so I eschew their (%'s) use, and recommend that you also eschew their use), as there is (usually) little more informative than the original resource. It's usually more informative to also say something about that resource, but you did do that, so thanks for that, at least. Of course, nobody here is obligated to do anything. There may be agreements, but agreements may be broken at any time. It's just that it's more efficient if you had posted the resource. if X and Y provide the same result, but X is more efficient than Y, then X is better, because X uses less labor than Y. The labor difference may be used to do something else productive, or to just relax..