If you try too much to change the outside, that shows that you are still attached. If a man tries to be detached, it shows attachment. Why bother about detachment if you are not attached? If a man escapes from women, it shows that sex is still the obsession. Otherwise, why escape from women if you are not obsessed?
Transcendence or detachment, leaving the body, pure love, lack of jealousy-that's the vision we are given in our culture, generally, when we think of the highest thing. . . . Another way to look at it is that the aim of the person is not to be detached, but to be more attached-to be attached to working; to be attached to making chairs or something that helps everyone; to be attached to beauty; to be attached to music.
Most of the network television audience now is primarily women, but I think that's because the shows are developed to appeal to women. I don't know that there are too many shows that appeal to guys anymore. I'm not sure why that is, but I think that it may have something to do with the fact that most development staffs are women.
To be unattached is not to renounce the world. If you renounce the world you are attached to the world; otherwise why should you renounce it? What is the point in renouncing it if you are not attached to it? Only attachment renounces. If you are really non-attached there is no question of any renunciation.
My guilty pleasure is competitive cooking reality shows. I don't like cooking shows when it's just about cooking. It has to be competitive - they're fighting and yelling at each other. I am obsessed with those shows, and I have no idea why.
I've always wanted to do stuff to help encourage more women to play, whether it's booking women on my shows at home, even when I was just playing DIY shows, or booking benefit shows and having all women play.
There are very few shows that show women talking like strong, sassy women. Do you know what I mean? 'Sex and the City' started doing that, and that was why that was such a huge hit.
I think that still, for the most part, even in 2010, the vast majority of museum shows and gallery shows and gallerists are pretty much dominated by men. So having a sense of what women are up to, for me, frankly, is very, very important.
I still play solo shows. And some of those shows are still some of the best, most gratifying shows.
I used to put flyers on cars in parking lots, anything to get people to come to my shows. I was always having to think outside the box, and even to this day, I still try and come up with creative ways to market my shows.
The makers love to show women being oppressed, and the audience also loves watching these stories. I'm sorry to say, but a large portion of the audience that watches these shows are women. They make women cry and abuse in the shows and women audiences are glued to such plots. I don't understand this syndrome.
Fiction is like a spider's web, attached ever so slightly perhaps, but still attached to life at all four corners. Often the attachment is scarcely perceptible.
Suffering only shows where you are attached. That is why, to those on the path, suffering is grace.
There's always women of many different races on my shows, and there are always women who look many different ways, but there is still a size thing in this industry. It's hard. I mean to have to say, 'I want a larger woman to be an actor on my shows.' Or, 'Find me a larger woman,' is almost insulting to me.
The stuff that I find really intriguing is always how do ordinary people behave in extraordinary circumstances. And that's why we have a lot of cop shows and lawyer shows and medical shows is that you're looking for situations that just always heighten the stakes.
The perfection of yoga is to become detached. And the perfection of detachment is to become completely attached, attached to God.
At male strip shows, it is still the women that we watch, the audience of women and their eager faces. They are more obscene than if they were dancing naked themselves.