In this introduction I explain the two areas that I will draw from to provide context for my ideas. I will be using this method of presenting examples in order to use an already existing framework that you will be familiar with before presenting an alternative way of seeing.

To get you in the right frame of mind for a set of ideas that will be based in an unfamiliar framework, I’d like to start off with one of my heroes, Richard Feynman explaining the difficulties of answering apparently simple questions concerning ‘how’ or ‘why’ something happens.


Please note two things. Firstly the apparent irritation of the interviewer, whose attitude implies that Mr Feynman is being a bit cute by not answering directly. Mr Feynman is not trying to irritate the interviewer and likewise I also am not intending to be smug even though I understand that my wholesale disregard for current thinking can be annoying for those who find it difficult to judge knowledge based on what it has to say rather than who is saying it. But let’s be clear on one thing, current expert thinking is not solving any current problems.

Secondly, while Mr Feynman’s subject matter is the arcane world of particle physics and quantum objects, my subject matter deals with the ordinary experiences of life that everyone will be familiar with. However these experiences will be placed in a new framework in order to better understand their mechanism. This is analogous to gravity being taken out of it’s framework of Newtonian physics and placed within the framework of general relativity. Gravity hasn’t changed, only our understanding of it.

The micro analyses and angles with which I approach common situations will not be familiar. Nevertheless, even though I may bring up unexpected juxtapositions highlighting how seemingly simple yet vexing situations are connected, the line of thinking will always be in simple logical steps that are easily understood.

Therefore you do not need any special training or academic credentials. All you need to follow this work is a basic ability for logical deductive reasoning.

Situations that are taken for granted, like angry arguments or sexual problems that appear to be universal in nature and consequently are accepted as a part of life, will be seen with fresh eyes. I will be particularly concentrating on the area of private thoughts because this is the very source of all human problems, from sexual fantasies to simple self judgements.

The first two pieces of analyses will be the Stanley Kubrick movie, Eyes Wide Shut, and a moderated discussion on the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s program Q and A, which in this case has iconic feminist professor Germaine Greer, journalist and self appointed sex education expert Benjamin Law, and a hip American pastor, Craig Gross, talking about sex education in schools and their views on internet pornography.

These two examples, one a documentary or news based program and the other a piece of fiction with some basis in reality, will be the two types of examples that I will be constantly drawing on in order to highlight the current thinking in the topics that I discuss.

I will show similar threads that goes through everything I analyse and by doing this I hope to highlight that my work and way of looking at these problems is indeed the paradigm shift that I say it is. This will be accomplished by explaining the inherent flaws and false assumptions that are taken for granted in current attitudes.

My work deals with all the common relationship issues, however the most urgent focus of my work is in the area of sex education in schools because it is the current generation of young people who have been most let down by the supposed experts who are responsible for advising the government about this very subject matter.

Governments all over the world recognise the problems but appear to be at the mercy of those whose job it is to do the analysis that I have done. The so called experts in this field are unable to, because while they may have more degrees than a thermometer, they nevertheless have been unable to solve these problems in their own life. And, there is the rub. These are the most personal matters relating to the sexual side of a person and if one has not solved these problems in ones own life, then as far as I can tell, one is simply not qualified to pontificate, much less to pretend to have solutions.

The qualification to speak about solutions to sexual problems is none other than having solved these problems in one’s own life, this is the reason that I appear to be very annoying to self professed experts, I’m calling their bluff. I will be pointing the finger at the Ben Laws and the Craig Grosses of this world and asking some very pointed and uncomfortable questions that they dare not ask each other because they do not understand their subject matter. Anyone who postures as an expert is fair game for satire if what they are saying is plainly nonsense.

It should be no wonder that we have heads of state involved in disgraceful compromising sexual scandals, pedophile priests, journalists and public prosecutors convicted of child pornography and the general population utterly bewildered at these public displays of ineptitude.

I remind the reader to simply examine my words, the connections I make and the conclusions I draw, with an open mind, in order to judge what I say, not how I say it.


© copyright 2012 Andrew Brahm