Jimmeh

Fed up.

Mon, 20 Feb 2012 07:03:13 GMT

I wrote this back in February and never published it. Since this is how I feel right now and it's how I've felt since them, I'll publish it.

It's these times when I feel most vulnerable that I am totally alone...when I don't know what to think or to feel when I can't trust my gut because the motherfucker has lied to me so many times. All I can do is grin, bear it, and wait, while the people that I've wronged cherish the moment because they know they have me over a barrel. They'll get theirs just as well as I'll get mine. They're no better than me.

I fucking hate this.

One thing is for sure, I'm done. I'm finished with all those years of honestly believing I deserved whatever bad thing came my way.

Fuck that shit. I'm not a bad person. I have never been a bad person. Yeah, I've fucked up. I know. I admitted it. I paid my dues. I fixed it. I'm not perfect by any means, but I do the best I can. If that doesn't work for you...fuck off and leave me alone. I didn't ask for any of this. All I did is make stupid mistakes. I'm imperfect just like the rest of you and don't deserve to pay for that imperfection any more than any one else.

Enough is fucking enough. I try my goddamned best...just like anyone else. I don't need this shit. I'm tired of being in the same logical traps, losing my temper at the same stupid shit that people do and letting others steer how I think, how I talk, how I write, and how I view myself.

I'll determine who I am. I don't need your validation. Not any more. If you don't like me, that's fine. Grow a pair, come out, and goddamn say it, but remember this...from this moment on, your perception of me is now YOUR problem, not mine.. Think I'm being insolent? Tough shit. I'm too busy living my life and trying to do what is right to give a fuck.

I will no longer wait for anyone's forgiveness. I'll just try my best not to screw things up...which, once again, is what everyone tries to do, I figure.

That being said, I feel I deserve just as much respect and due diligence as anyone else around me, and am officially done walking around like I'm paying a penance. If karma is coming to get me, let the motherfucker come get me. He knows where I live. I am no longer afraid. For those of you wishing it upon me, FUCK YOU, and mind your own business. You, too, have skeletons in your judgemental, self-righteous ass closets.

In the meantime, keep your snide comments to yourselves. Before you decide to judge me, look in the goddamn mirror.

Jim. OUT.

Dear Alcohol, I QUIT.

Tue, 13 Sep 2011 01:43:18 GMT

http://wp.me/p1yko1-yf

I'm really proud of this post.

Sun, 07 Aug 2011 19:09:05 GMT

Check it out: http://wp.me/p1yko1-wr. :-)

hmmm

Tue, 10 May 2011 00:42:17 GMT

I'm thinking about getting into serious blogging, as a segue to maybe a little freelancing for...anyone who'll let me freelance for them. I'm one opinionated dude and feel I have a good enough grasp of my native language to express myself in a pretty entertaining way.

I dunno. Just playing with the idea...done! http://jimbo702.wordpress.com/about :-)

Laura Bush comes out...SO WHAT?

Sun, 08 May 2011 19:46:33 GMT

I got a hold this video from the Facebook community Being Liberal:

Like Cindy McCain did before her, Laura Bush came out on Larry King Live in favor of gay marriage and reproductive choice. My immediate reaction was, "Cool! Another conservative's wife has come over to the Dark Side." That is until I found out she has always had this stance. cris_nicewelts (I love you, dear) made a good point about this...WHERE WERE FOLKS LIKE LAURA BUSH AND CINDY MCCAIN WHEN THEIR HUSBANDS WERE IN THE SPOTLIGHT????

As you've probably surmised, this post has nothing to do with gay marriage or reproductive choice. It has to do with a human being's right to her own goddamn opinion.

I used to disparagingly refer to Laura Bush as Doormat In Chief due to her conspicuous silence on almost all issues during her husband's tenure in the Oval Office as compared to her predecessors - Hillary Clinton and Eleanor Roosevelt come to mind. Laura Bush isn't alone, though. I have a couple of theories as to why the inevitable, even if only occasional, disagreements that all married couples have to face are conspicuously absent from the President/First Lady dynamic - or that of any prominent man and his spouse.

First of all, society is uncomfortable with their leaders and idols being too connected with reality. We hold our prominent politicians, celebrities, and other public figures to a ridiculous standard, as if they're superhuman. Reality TV and tabloid shows are so popular because we have an obsession with watching those figures fall from grace and show a human side - as if there is some shock value to seeing a human being behave like her/is own species. It's a fascinating dichotomy. Still, the most idealistic part of us is disappointed to see the fall. That's probably why so many people who are in the spotlight are so private. I don't know how well we could handle knowing that Barack and Michelle got into a marital spat, but we all know damn will it happens to any couple that stays together long enough. There will invariably be disagreements and mis-communications between two human beings living close to each other. We need to accept that and apply it universally - and stop being so shocked by it - because it really isn't that big of a deal. We'll save ourselves a lot of disappointment in the long run, and we'll put the purveyors of reality TV out of business.

Secondly, our patriarchal society cannot cope with women having their own opinions in the first place, let alone the wife of as prominent a politician as a U.S. President having opinions that are not in lockstep with her husband's. Something tells me that the First Husband wouldn't have to deal with bullshit like this. I mean, it is 2011 and all. When do we stop pretending that women don't have minds of their own? Think about how much grief did Hillary Clinton get when she presented her health plan back in the early 1990's. She was vilified and presented as this ball-buster wife with whom Dirty Willy just couldn't cope in the wake of the Lewinsky scandal. All this for daring to have an opinion. The reality is nothing was wrong with the now very dashing and Presidential Secretary of State. She wasn't a ball-busting nag. She was, and still is, a competent adult (link). Many of her male counterparts find that threatening. I say if their manhood and egos are that fragile, perhaps they should spend less time criticizing Clinton and more time looking in the mirror.

While it's good that Laura Bush and Cindy McCain are speaking out now - it's too little, too late. Society needs to get a damn grip and accept that women have their own opinions and ideas and that sometimes...*GASP* they may not only differ from those of their husbands but may even be completely independent of them. We need to accept that couples, even those in the spotlight, will not always agree.

F&^%$NG Neo-Confederates.

Wed, 13 Apr 2011 13:39:43 GMT

I'm gonna post some quotes here. Apparently, a southern transplant here in Nevada took issue with a seasoned newscaster talking about the Civil War and ad-libbing a reminder that the North won.

That's right. The North won. Your detestable cause lost. Shut the fuck up, put your big boy pants on, and deal with it. On with the post...

MY comment reads:

"I'm southern - Georgian, to be exact. I don't subscribe to the god concept, but I'M GLAD THE NORTH WON. It acted as a catalyst to free millions of human beings from bondage.

More importantly, I'm American. The South fought for a detestable cause, plain and simple. Spin the facts all you want. Call it 'heritage not hate.' We're not buying it. The CSA is a former enemy of the United States. As a former United States Marine, I TAKE OFFENSE TO SEEING THE FLAG OF A DISSOLVED ENEMY NATION FLOWN OVER MY OWN FATHER'S HOUSE. I feel about the Confederacy similarly to how your average German feels about the Third Reich. It is a shameful part of our history, as southerners, and should NOT be celebrated.

Also, how dare YOU tell another adult, not to mention a LEGEND in local journalism, they need any kind of "training?" Who the hell died and left you in charge?"

The Civil War ended nearly 140 years ago. The CSA lost. Get over it.

'Amusing Ourselves To Death'

Fri, 11 Mar 2011 01:56:05 GMT

VERY IMPORTANT comic under the cut because it is HUEG.

The Myth of Militant Atheism | Psychology Today - StumbleUpon

Sat, 19 Feb 2011 15:39:23 GMT

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/1Bi8OD/www.psychologytoday.com/em/55708 (via shareaholic)

ARCHIVING:

Nine bullets fired from close range ended the life of Salman Taseer last month, making the Pakistani governor the latest high-profile victim of religious violence. Taseer had the audacity to publicly question Pakistan's blasphemy laws, and for this transgression he paid with his life.

Taseer joins a list of numerous other high-profile victims of militant religion, such as Dr. George Tiller, the Kansas abortion doctor killed by a devout Christian assassin in 2009, and Theo Van Gogh, the Dutch filmaker whose provocative movie about Islam resulted in his being brutally murdered in 2004.

With this background, it is especially puzzling that the American media and public still perpetuate the cliché of so-called "militant atheism." We hear the disparaging term "militant atheist" used frequently, the unquestioned assumption being that militant atheists are of course roaming the streets of America.

In fact, however, while millions of atheists are indeed walking our streets, it would be difficult to find even one who could accurately be described as militant. In all of American history, it is doubtful that any person has ever been killed in the name of atheism. In fact, it would be difficult to find evidence that any American has ever even been harmed in the name of atheism. It just does not happen, because the notion of "militant atheism" is entirely fantasy.

When the media and others refer to a "militant atheist," the object of that slander is usually an atheist who had the nerve to openly question religious authority or vocally express his or her views about the existence of God. Conventional wisdom quickly tells us that such conduct is shameful or, at the very least, distasteful, and therefore the brazen atheist is labeled "militant."

But this reflects a double standard, because it seems to apply only to atheists. Religious individuals and groups frequently declare, sometimes subtly and sometimes not, that you are a sinner and that you will suffer in hell for eternity if you do not adopt their supernatural beliefs, but they will almost never be labeled "militant" by the media or the public. Instead, such individuals are called "devout" and such churches are called "evangelical."

The lesson here is clear. If you're an atheist, shut up about it. If you are open or vocal about your atheist worldview, you are a "militant atheist." Be silent, even though that same standard does not apply to those who passionately disagree with you.

This, to be sure, explains why so few Americans openly identify as atheist. The American Religious Identification Survey conducted by Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, indicates that only about 81 percent of Americans affirmatively believe in a god (about 69 percent believe in a personal God, while about 12 percent believe in some kind of "higher power"), meaning about 19 percent do not. Yet despite the fact that almost one in five Americans don't affirmatively believe, only a tiny fraction of those dare to identify openly as atheist.

Analyze those numbers all you want, but the inescapable conclusion is that millions of Americans are in the closet about their religious skepticism. This, in turn, only serves to validate and legitimize the religious right, because it suggests that there is something wrong with a secular worldview. By keeping atheists closeted, the religious right can claim the moral high ground and influence public policy more than it should.

Therefore, maybe it's time to end the myth of militant atheism?

About "Skins," Pr0n culture, and good old-fashioned American stupidity...

Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:55:42 GMT

Oh! Teens have sex! The HUMANITY!(via shareaholic)

But, why sell a show about it? It's just sex. It's like farting, only a lot more fun.
Okay... hold on a second:

The media does not educate my kids about sex before I get to them first. Cris and me are responsible parents in this respect. Our fifth and third graders can both explain, in precise anatomical terms, the mechanics of reproduction. They have a bullshit filter on at school when they hear kids whose parents haven't told them much of jack shit yammering on about every porn-based misconception known to humanity when it comes to sex. See, the problem is not so much teens having sex, is the inaccurate depiction of sex and all the responsibilities that come with it by the media - the wholesale misinformation of an entire culture. What's the result? Men who have no idea what a woman's clitoris is, how her anatomy works, and one who expects that every woman will fall to her knees on command and let him defile her face with his semen. Women who think their first and foremost contribution to humanity is their ability to incite erections. Scores of teens and young adults who know more about Call Of Duty or Gossip Girl than they know personal sexual protection. It's teens having sex who haven't the foggiest fuckin' idea what they're doing, how it works, or what responsibilities are attached to it. These are problems perpetuated by the media and the parents' lack of action in response to it - in case you've been living under a rock the last twenty years.

The headline is right to an extent: Sex is not as big a deal as the media makes it out to be. My argument is not so much that OMG THIS SHOW IS PERVERSE AND SHOULD NOT BE ON TV but that making a TV show, even remotely, about sex is akin to making a TV show, even remotely, about bowel movements. Why bother? Why waste the money and resources? Human beings reproduce sexually...it's a goddamned bodily function which is why it amuses me that we are so obsessed with it. Sure, it's fun. So what? It's just as natural as farting. What's the big deal? Teach kids about reproduction in health class, let them know to protect themselves from the risks if they insist on fucking, and get on with your life. It's a simple solution, were it not for puritanical morons who are under the delusion that evolutionarily programmed creatures are going to wait until they're under the auspices of a socially-constructed institution to do what they are evolutionarily programmed to do. Fuck it. Teach it anyway. The puritans will get over it, and their kids will be prepared rather than ignorant. It's programmed in our DNA to further the species, marriage or no marriage.

Furthermore, sex is something that is spiritual, intimate, delightfully satisfying and a very personal thing to me. I'm not cool with it being commodified like a pair of socks or the latest crop of Tupperware. Sex sells. What does that say about us as a species?

Evidence of right-wing violence and insurrective rhetoric.

Tue, 11 Jan 2011 02:10:59 GMT

Following is a list of evidence of right-wing rhetoric concerning armed-overthrow, killing of political opponents, and ACTUAL ACTS thereof.

I'm sick of seeing people I care about living in denial. The threat is real:

**#The rising tide of right-wing threats and insurrections - alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

** 10/22/2010 GOP congressional candidate states violent overthrow of government is on the table

** 3/24/2010 - Palin joins in a chant to "reload" Do you really think she's referring to ballot boxes?</a>

**http://blog.au.org/2009/08/18/holywar-fever-radical-rhetoric-stokes-flames-of-rightwing-paranoia/</a>

** A blogger implicates, WITH LINKS TO THEIR WORDS AND DEEDS, several right-wing figures in the Arizona massacre

The blogger goes on to list specific examples of violence fueled by said rhetoric. Go on, goddamn it! Read it! Read it all. Then come back and tell me right wing paranoia and violent rhetoric...and the very acts that follow them... are no threat. Try to tell me that I'm crazy to hold the Tea Party and their ilk responsible for the deadly and seditious rhetoric. Tell me I'm wrong for calling a spade a goddamned spade.

...and FINALLY, read this genius piece by a U.S. Navy Petty Officer about how we don't live in a vacuum, and tell me the shooter, and the shooter alone, is responsible for the violence. Tell me that he couldn't have *possibly* been encouraged by the Limbaughs and the Becks of the world.

Tell me all you want. Back-peddle, rationalize, get angry with me. One thing I assure you you'll never do is convince me that this isn't an issue that should be dealt with. You have the freedom to say what you wish, granted. I, likewise, have the freedom to hold your ass responsible for it. It's called discourse. Put on you big boy/girl pants and deal with it, because none of us are beyond reproach. The First Amendment has never - and will never - guarantee that.

So, rest assured, if you threaten to kill me - even metaphorically - I'm calling the fucking cops. Period.

The world is running out of gas.

Tue, 28 Dec 2010 14:42:47 GMT

Something y'all may want to note: HYDROCARBONS ARE A FINITE RESOURCE!

An ex-president of a major oil company is predicting $5/gallon gas by 2012. Okay, worth a look, but what if this doesn't happen until 2020? To that I say, so fuckin' what? The point of my little tirade here is that we will begin to run out of oil and that it will happen in my lifetime.

Oh, but we're American so we don't have to worry about it. We'll just go knock over another oil-producing country's regime in the name of "freedom," and take all their resources, amiright? It's worked since WWII, why wouldn't it work now?

Well, there's fatal flaw with this way of thinking.

Sure, we have the most powerful military in the world, but we're losing the economic and geopolitical influence to back our military might up, rendering it worthless. Our republic is circling the drain because we've spent the last seventy years pursuing war and overconsumption instead of progress and prudence. As a result, we'll have to compete just like everyone else.

The only solution to this problem will come too late. Brace yourselves. I'm only glad I have such a short commute to work.

Writer's Block: Wintertime is here

Sun, 05 Dec 2010 18:42:38 GMT

How do you feel about the winter holidays? Has your opinion changed over the years?

View 1413 Answers

I enjoy the allotted traditional time off to spend with my family in relaxation. I celebrate them without the religious and consumerist trappings.

The Singularity - a point at which all that we have known is rendered obsolete.

Sun, 05 Dec 2010 18:20:31 GMT

This is a subject for which I've been in deep thought.

"It is a point where our old models must be discarded and a new reality rules. As we move closer to this point, it will loom vaster and vaster over human affairs till the notion becomes a commonplace. Yet when it finally happens it may still be a great surprise and a greater unknown."

I would like to see a lot of our current values and systems discarded and replaced. Traditional gender roles, homophobia, our patriarchal society, religion, racism, war, unsustainable energy, and our monetary system are just a few examples of ideas and systems that have become useless to humanity at best, harmful to our species at worst. I think we're smart enough to find more effective alternatives, but that we're too intellectually lazy to see those alternatives come to fruition.

Yeah. Good luck with that. haha

Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:32:58 GMT

The repugnicans have the House. So effin' what? I don't see them getting anything they want through the Senate without a big hassle and across the President's desk without a big fat VETO.

We've still got this. We won't get jack squat done for at least the next two years - but NEITHER WILL THEY. :-D

Yeah, GOP, you've got the House. Good luck with that. haha

Ghosts and goblins and demons, oh my!

Sat, 09 Oct 2010 00:52:23 GMT

"A Rational Look At Ghosts: A Scientific Explanation For A Worldwide Paranormal Belief"

Therein:

"This survival of alert and suspicious ancestors, and death of those that didn't notice a danger until it was too late, has given today's population the tendency to see and hear things that are simply not there.

Young children desperately tell sleep-deprived parents about the monster outside the window. Grown adults stare towards the corner of the room, convinced they've just seen something in the corner of their eye.

The human brain sees and hears things that are not there, because they have evolved to be over-cautious. With this in mind, stories of ghostly apparitions, foot-steps in the middle of the night, objects that change position, and whispering voices in a deserted churchyard suddenly have a rational, psychological explanation.

Add to this mix a culture of scary Hollywood movies, a wide-spread belief in the paranormal, and various religious sensibilities that assume the existence of ghosts and spirits, and the result is a population with a natural tendency to sense things that aren't there, coupled with an enormous amount of fuel for the imagination."

I must explain my end of this. I don't believe ghosts exist. I'm not the guy who will point at a believer, laugh, and say "You're full of shit! HAHAHAHA!!!" No. Perhaps folks who have "encountered paranormal activities" really do encounter what they encounter. Just like our ancestors encountered lightning and thunder and attributed it to the mythological entities and other paranormal odds and ends, even developing entire stories to support their theories, folks who encounter modern "paranormal" events are, in all probability, encountering natural phenomena. I don't agree with the stance the article takes, per se. I don't think that all people who believe they encounter "paranormal" phenomena are delusional (though some really are and are in need of professional psychiatric intervention). I think we're taught to label certain things we encounter a certain way as youngsters and that if such encounters indeed occur that the way we're taught to label these encounters is, at best, inaccurate.

The article touches on the human brain's fight-or-flight response which I think makes a pretty solid theory, but this does not account for the stories of people who are convinced they saw/felt/smelled what they encountered. The human brain is a tricky organ. We know less about our own minds than we do about outer space. Human perception is very easy to manipulate. Couple that with the ease at which human beings can be influenced to do or believe just about anything. Alas, we have scientology, the Jim Jones cult, and various military experiments to prove that. With that in mind, how can a reasonable person say that we cannot be influenced by our culture to believe things that aren't true or to incorrectly attribute what are likely perfectly natural phenomena? This leads to my theory about ghosts, demons, etc...

Knowing that the brain and human thought processes are so easy to manipulate by many different entities, I speculate that the human mind that perceives a "paranormal" phenomenon could be under the influence of any number of forces. Barring the influences of mind-altering substances, legitimate psychiatric illness, and human-induced brainwashing, one can only assume it's natural phenomena.

Let me explain:

The human brain conducts electricity. The magnetic fields of the earth and the moon are known to influence animal behavior. Solar flares and severe weather can wreak havoc on any electronic device in their path. Seeing that the brain is actually a highly complex mass of neurons that are constantly conducting information in an infinite variety of patterns, my theory (I'm no scientist, by any stretch) is that one of these phenomena affect the brain in such a way that we perceive what is known in our collective consciousness as paranormal activity.

Remember the thunderstorm analogy? We're doing the same thing when it comes to the paranormal. We perceive something and give it a name, even though we haven't verified what it really is.

I'm okay with not knowing, and I certainly won't be losing any sleep worrying about if, when, or where I will encounter some anomaly. What if I do? I'll cross that bridge when I get to it, but expect me to approach it with a critical mind and a healthy amount of skepticism. If I hear voices or see weird shit, I'll promptly report to the men in the white coats. I'll worry about, and take the necessary precautions against, that meth head roaming the streets that just might invade my home or the fact that I just might get in an accident next time I drive to the supermarket. I will examine these concerns and their statistical probability and act appropriately, but I refuse to live in fear. The Dark Ages are gone.

Middle school... something I have no intention of reliving except for...

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:42:47 GMT

I dedicated Hole's "Rock Star" to my eighth grade class in a facebook post yesterday. Here is what it said, in full, for the purpose of archiving on lj so it'll be easier to find should I want to pull it up again:

"Truthfully, I feel a profound sense of spite toward some of the folks that shared classrooms with me during the 1990-1991 school year. I was ostracized, rejected, and loathed (perhaps that was some of my own doing, IDK). In spite of all tha...t went down, I turned out okay. But the unfounded rejection? Seriously, I kick the crap out of myself for ever spending a second on trying to fit in with anyone in that little fish barrel of a town. With some of those folks, though, I have made amends. Some people grow up and get a bit of sense about them.

Still, fuck it to hell, I am bitter - and for all the right reasons. There's no good reason for people to act like that. My kids are being raised to treat all human beings with respect, regardless of their last name, economic background, frequency of church attendance, or lack of conformity with mainstream regional culture. They will know more than two races, two possible lifestyles, and more than one religion, if any religion at all.

And they will never, ever know what it's like to have an open mind and be stuck in Albany, Georgia. Never. I wish that emotional horror on no one. The years that encompass my passage into full adolescence are a complete, socially awkward, hormonally-charged blur to me, for reasons that most of you will never understand. That's fine. Just figured I owed an explanation to those of you who were cool with me back in the period of my life to which, at the ripe-old age of thirty-three, I still insist on bidding a giant FUCK YOU. Some of you share my sentiment. Some of you are reading this and wonder what hit you.

Many folks say they wish they could be a kid again. I am not one of those people. 1986-1991 are all years that I've taken most of my adult life to put behind me. Why would I want to bring them back?"

Hey, I like what I write. Sue me. :-)

facebook

Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:06:24 GMT

A reminder for those of you who use facebook - I can be found here: facebook.com/jrmartin.lv

Writer's Block: High school musical

Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:47:52 GMT

If you had to choose a theme song for your middle or high school years, what would it be, and why?

View 1041 Answers

For middle school, I would choose "Olympia," by Hole. Middle school was a horrible experience for me. There was ALWAYS a group of white kids that got their rocks off by randomly ostracizing people. Of course, I was on their list, since I didn't fall in lock-step with their social order. I caught a lot of flack. I maintain my personal integrity to this day, though. I've perused some of their profiles on facebook and have found that a vast majority of them have maintained their ignorance.

For high school, I would choose "Ramble On," by Led Zeppelin. I was unwilling to leave such an accepting environment, but accepted the fact that it was time to move on. I still love all of them to pieces and can't wait until all our schedules and finances coincide for one, kick-ass 20-year class reunion. Anyone who is part of Monroe Comprehensive High School's class of 1995 knows what's up!

Police: Can't Truss 'Em

Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:38:18 GMT

This story really pisses me off. I'm very suspicious of cops. The ones here in the Vegas valley are opportunistic, lazy, reckless, thuggish, and sometimes just plain scary. Worst of all, they only seem to serve the portion of the community that most benefits them. My in-laws were stopped in MY CAR once because of "a broken tail light." I inspected the vehicle when they got home. None of my tail lights were out. Just so happens, I have a Citizenship Project license plate - one that uses an Aztec calendar in its motif.

And that wasn't the first time this sort of thing happened. I simply can't trust cops. Period. So, spare me the bleeding-hearted "they-lay-their-lives-on-the-line-every-day-for-you" rhetoric. Please. Spare me. They don't lay shit on the line for me, or mine. They do it for those from whom they benefit most.

How deep does this mistrust go? I found out today that this guy that works out at my gym is a cop. I already found him quite menacing anyway because he's a rather imposing figure who carried himself in that "I'm-an-authority-figure-so-my-shit-don't-stink" elitist sort of way. Now I know why. Perhaps he doesn't realize what he's doing. Perhaps he's a good guy. Admittedly, I have no intention of even speaking to the guy, let alone getting close enough to him to find out. Truthfully, I'm not sure why I still call 911 when I hear a domestic incident going down. What's going to happen, really? Usually, nothing. Nevada's laws do little or nothing to protect the victims of battering (another topic altogether), and the police usually won't lift a finger to investigate. In fact, if we ever have a break-in the only reason I could see us calling is for them to pick the unconscious intruder up off our sidewalk. We have lots of bats. And mace. Lots of mace. Two former Marines live in this house. Do the math.

Anyway, it's not that I think all cops are bad apples. A couple that I've encountered were actually quite professional and courteous. It's just that enough of them have crossed the line around here that I'm really leery of them and do everything I can to minimize my contact with them. Even though the guy in the article I linked was drunk, belligerent, and threatening, throwing a handcuffed man to the ground for calling you corrupt is bullshit - especially if it turns out you really are corrupt.

Police are getting out of control. They should answer to the community they claim to protect and serve, rather than terrorizing it. My two cents. Maybe you don't like it. I don't care.

I'm reacting to what I observe. If you haven't observed the same thing or are selectively blind to it, there's no use in debating this issue with me. Shut up and move on.

Men can benefit from feminism.

Fri, 11 Jun 2010 22:42:37 GMT

So says Gloria Steinem. A lot of the points she made at a talk during a gender studies conference at UT Dallas made sense to me. Peep the whole article.

Top 10 Ways that Men
Benefit from Feminism

Structured like a David Letterman countdown, Steinem’s list of benefits to men included the following:

10. Through feminism, men are liberated from stereotypes, too.

9. Women’s skills are required to raise children. But, men have them too.

8. Men have been shortchanged by being told to marry someone who can cook rather than someone who can be a companion. “I’m sure that men who have been trained essentially to marry their housekeepers were lonely,” Steinem said.

7. The women’s movement can increase a man’s life by an average of four years. Steinem said that if men were to eliminate causes of death typically attributed to masculine roles, including deaths from violence, speeding and tension-related disease, their life expectancy would almost equal women's.

6. Boys can remain close to their mothers.

5. If men aren’t hooked on dominance and hierarchy with other men, they are saved from the self-loathing that comes from the need for control.

4. Laughter can once again become commonplace, even in serious rituals. “In ancient cultures like Wilma’s, seriousness and laughter are not separate,” said Steinem.

3. Men can continue discovering talents, without being divorced from them.

2. Sex and race are intertwined. You can’t uproot one without the other. “There’s really no such thing as being a feminist without being an anti‑racist,” she said.

1. Eliminating the sexual caste system – the cult of femininity and masculinity – eliminates the root cause of almost all violence.

I'm down with that.

Priorities, people. Priorities.

Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:47:46 GMT

"Injustices survive, not merely because the rich exploit the poor but because, in their hearts, too many of the poor admire the rich."

This is why no matter how successful I am in life you'll never hear me brag about the things I have - or admiring the flashy, overpriced, fashionable, and utterly useless material garbage other people have. I am indifferent to these because I know what they represent - materialism. Materialism and conspicuous consumption are two things for which I have no use. I feel neither adoration nor envy for the "haves." Rather, I wonder why anyone should give a shit if this guy has a nice car, if this lady has a big house, or if that guy is a flashy dresser. Be advised folks: no matter what the obsessively competitive and the voraciously consumptive have to say about life and what our pursuits should be, MY PRIORITIES WILL ALWAYS BE DIFFERENT FROM THEIRS.

My pursuits are love, happiness, patience, fairness, justice, compassion and, finally, knowledge for knowledge's sake. So, please understand where I'm coming from when I let you know that I'm not impressed when you rave about "how nice the houses are in this area."

My sentiment comes not from a place of disdain or envy, but frustration with the fact that people refuse to accept my indifference and their blatant intolerance for folks with different priorities such as myself. "B-b-but all people want these things, amiright?"

No, they don't. Sorry you didn't get the memo.

If only this could be broadcast so every extrovert knows what's up.

Fri, 28 May 2010 22:33:47 GMT

This. A trillion, trillion times. This.

And while you're at it, read it again.

Homophobe PWNAGE

Wed, 26 May 2010 22:18:32 GMT

Courtesy of Glee.

Stop using the flag for your own selfish political ends. Pricks.

Wed, 26 May 2010 02:07:32 GMT

I wrote on the station's Facebook wall (which they deleted within seconds) and sent the same in an e-mail. The blockquoted version is what I've sent two other, more responsible stations that employ journalists who actually do their frickin' jobs (ups to George Knapp and John Huck).It concerns yet another jackass who thinks he's being sly by violating U.S. Code for his own selfish political ends:

Since KVBC was unwilling to take up this issue:

In reference to "Stan," a local man who has elected to desecrate our national ensign for his own selfish political ends - the man is in direct violation of U.S. Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Section 176 (a), which states:

"The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property."

No one is trying to kill Stan. Neither he, nor his property, are in extreme danger. He might have to pay a couple more percent in taxes. Maybe. If this is "dire distress" to him, I suggest he rethink his priorities, if not his sanity. "Stan" is in direct violation of U.S. Code, and should be ashamed of himself.

As an honorably discharged Marine, it really pisses me off to see someone disrespect the Colors like that for their own cynical ends.

Semper Fidelis.

Now, I have as much of a problem with this shit coming from the left as I do seeing it come from the right. Have your dissenting opinions - and engage in your discourse - but leave the National Ensign out of it. Got that? Outstanding. Too many people have sacrificed a lot for what the flag represents for people to be misappropriating it for their own political ends. The flag belongs to no party, no ideology, no belief system, and no creed.

The United States Flag represents all of us. Period.

As such, you have no business wrapping yourself in it - let alone inverting it - as if it's yours and yours only, Stan. You selfish prick.

Why, I no longer use pr0n (though I don't care if you do)

Mon, 24 May 2010 14:32:20 GMT

I have my reasons for not using porn. Not that anyone else shouldn't, because that's their business. I found an article on AlterNet today, wherein the author hits the nail on the head - for me - as to why I no longer use porn:

"...we now found it disturbing and distracting to the soul-stirring physical love we regularly enjoyed. The dialogue in porn didn't make us blush, but the interactions seemed increasingly humiliating and violent, with behaviors such as a man ejaculating on a woman's face becoming more common. Rather than inspire, pornography appeared to compromise one's private erotic imagination and values, blurring boundaries between fantasy and reality and lowering standards for sexual interaction."

Some folks I know argue that porn has been recommended by therapists to aid in sexual relationships - to add "spice." This article, however, advocates a contrary opinion. The author goes on to explain why she as a sex therapist could no longer prescribe porn to aid in relationships:

"The clearer I became about conditions necessary for experiencing healthy sexuality—consent, equality, respect, trust, safety—the more doubt I had about advocating pornography as a sexual-enhancement product. How can I support something that portrays sex as a commodity, people as objects, and violence, humiliation, and recklessness as exciting? What am I doing encouraging people to condition their arousal to self-centered, sensually blunted, loveless sex? Do I really want to be advocating a product that's associated with causing sexual harm and relationship problems?"

"My primary concern about porn wasn't that it was sexually graphic, explicit, or hot: it was that porn conveyed harmful ideas about sex and could lead to hurtful and ultimately unrewarding sexual behaviors."

She does offer an alternative that sounds great to me:

"One day, my concerns about pornography reached a tipping point. I grabbed the box of pornographic novels I'd kept in my office closet, marched outdoors, and tossed it into a trash bin. No regrets! From then on, I felt that personally and therapeutically it was best to avoid pornography. I made a commitment to obtain and clinically recommend only sexually explicit materials that educate and inspire while honoring respectful, responsible, and caring conditions for sexual interaction."

Yes. Because sex without intimacy sucks. It really does.

Read on.