Sunday, December 23, 2012

Sandy Hook

And yes, another school shooting, and the gun nuts are out in full force with their standard responses "Guns don't kill people, people do" Really? they do? you mean the guns don't just jump into people's hands and yank their fingers onto the trigger? What a revelation! I guess all efforts to make sure everyone doesn't have 100 guns flying out of each of their asses are useless, because hey people kill people, not guns, and all we have to do is fix people right! Idiots. What would it take to convince these people? a pre school shot up? how about a maternity ward, bullets riddled through a group of newborns maybe? But thats all well known. Let's talk bout another aspect, hypermasculinity and being humiliated as a cause for this kind of action. If Im being honest, were there kids in high school I wish I could inflict horrible pain on because of being bullied by them? HELL YEA. What are schools doing to curb that? If schools instead of stationing armed guards, had hot girls come and have sex with us geeks at that age, I think a huge part of the problem would be solved. We don't need armed guards, we need big tittied hotties, at every school. If the shooter had gotten some poontang, would he have done what he did? Who knows. maybe, but less likely I think. Here is another great article

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Legitimate Grape

Listen, while this statement is one of vile ignorance, there is something that everyone is missing.

While it's politically correct to lump all rape into the same act, unfortunately, in reality we know there are differences between a college girl that gets drunk and flirts heavily with a jock fratboy that ultimately ends up raping her, and a woman walking down the street, kidnapped at gunpoint, taken to a remote building, raped, and then thrown back on the street.

The analogy is this. Lets say, I have a million dollars, and I'm walking down the street, someone comes up to me, points a gun at me, and says, lets go to your bank and you will withdraw your million and give it to me. That is one kind of robbery.

Now lets say, I paste the money all over me, walk down the street and boast how rich I am, and flaunt it, of course I HAVE THE RIGHT to do it, and it doesn't JUSTIFY being robbed... but if I was robbed, whats the first thing that ANYONE in their logical mind would ask me: "Uhh why did you paste it on your body and walk around boasting it?"

Rape, Robbery, Assault, Murder, Arson, are all CRIMES. And no one is ever justified in doing them, thats why our legal system labels them as CRIMES. in all cases though, there are certain steps one can take to mitigate those from happening. Akin was likely alluding to those cases in which all mitigating steps were taken, and there is no way of interpreting any kind of invitation (not to get raped of course, but of any kind of sexual interest at all).

Now before the people clamor "how dare you? boo! blame the victim" just check out one of the geniuses of our time:

click here

Louis CK is a special person, however, I don't think he just happened to run into the ONLY woman in the entire world who thinks this way.

So, while it's PC to look at this in a clear black and white lens, lets try and expand our thinking, even if the person who's causing us to do so is a complete fool that doesn't know how to pick the right words when he speaks.

Thursday, August 2, 2012

HMF is back BABY

I've decided to come out of hibernation for something very important. I'm going to say something that's on everyone's mind, but no one will actually say out loud. It's been on my mind, and it involves something surrounding the Aurora Dark Knight Rises shooting. But in particular this story: Let me be the first to say, I thought this event was horrible, and if it doesn't make the lawmakers in this country think about changing the gun and ammunition laws to make it harder for nutcases like this to amount arsenals strong enough to take Cleveland in a weekend, then they are the true heartless among us. No, the question I'm asking is: Is female life more precious than male life? Understand, I have NO problem with anyone jumping in front of anyone to save their life, what any of us would do in a situation where we have fractions of seconds to decide is a difficult thing to "project" we will just act without thinking. But - story after story about how these heroic boyfriends jumped in front of their girlfriends to save them, leads me to ask - is this what women subconsciously want from the guys they are with? That if push came to shove, they would put their woman's life above their own? We've all heard stories of "women and children" being saved first on the Titanic, or how about when news reports talk about people being killed in a tragedy and then tack on, "including 15 women and children" I'm asking a serious question here about our society and the media that shoots information directly into our consciousness: Is a male's life worth less than a woman's? And the underlying takeaway, from this incident I get is clear: if you're a male, your life is not as valuable as a woman's. Now, some may say, "Well, women have the capacity to give birth, so their value is clearly higher" Last I checked though, a woman can't generate a baby on her own. Why is one part of the process valued higher ? Wouldn't it be equally heroic if a woman jumped in front of her boyfriend to save his life ? Or, the other question to ask, if a boyfriend didn't instinctively jump on his girlfriend to save her life, risking his own, does that make him instantly a horrible person - if he thought of his own life and safety first ?

Saturday, March 20, 2010

The walmart racial statement case

That's right folks. I'm out of the wood work, and better than before. Trying to change the world one person at a time.

My phoenix like resurrection is concerning this little tidbit :

I think people are clearly missing the point when it comes to the walmart case of someone saying "All black people please leave the store."

People look at this and say "Look! See how much the world hasn't changed, there's no progress, there's no racial unity, we still are a divisive society."

And I say that's nonsense. Understand this, whoever did this, whether he's an employee, a customer, a insurgent racist sent from wherever these people congregate and dispatch their minions to disrupt shopping, he's obviously committed to his craft of causing racial turmoil and expressing racist views... HOWEVER, I contend, 10 years ago, he would have had no problem saying

"Attention walmart customers, would all the f*cking n*gg*rs get out of here"

Yet, he filtered himself to say 'black people' - so lets celebrate this! It's progress.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Shout out to AK

Hey AK, if you're still out there. Here's a shout out to you.

If there's one chick I miss from the SM days, it's you.

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive Dissonance.

Here is an interesting principle, cognitive dissonance, it's the recognition of two contradictory perceptions, and it usually yields to amending one of the perceptions to become more resonant with the other. The perception that is amended is usually the subordinate of the two.

A very common example, buyer's remorse: Most people have the perception that their purchasing decisions are prudent, wise, and well thought out. Hence, when they spent large amounts of money on something that doesn't yield immediate value, they begin to artificially "bump up" the value of that thing, in order to avoid the dissonance with the stronger perception: I'm a wise purchaser.

Another example is investor strategy and loss. People believe they are wise stock investors, so they put money into a stock, it goes down, and they put more, and repeat the process - all because there's an underlying belief they are good investors, and the stock will eventually turn up. But what ends up happening? either you cut your losses, or go down with the ship.

There is a direct parallel here with women, and their choice of men. While it's clear society privileges women to choose their mates, it implies to most women they are innately better selectors (ie men are superficial, only care about looks, women are more mature, and choose based on personality!) This makes women convince themselves they are great selectors of the men they choose to have in their lives, so much that it becomes a firmly rooted principle.

Therefore, when guys treat them poorly, or is a general prick, they bump up their value, as it resolves the cognitive dissonance with the underlying principle they already have: I'm a smart chooser. Ultimately of course, it's the women that suffer by clinging to the belief they are "good selectors" - and sadly many go down with the ship.

Whats the solution?

It all comes back to equality really. If women actually work to erase the outdated gender model that they are "selectors" and it's the man's job to "chase" them, then *they* will ultimately benefit as they won't be constantly reinforcing to themselves they are "good" at mate selection, and perverting reality in their own minds, in order to avoid the cognitive dissonance.
A societal pressure for men to approach, and be more 'pro-active', has a flip-side:

A society that pressures women to be constant receivers of that information, and by extension, skilled evaluators - which evidence clearly states, they are not. So for their own good, women must actively choose to believe in equality thoroughly and completely, without exceptions and selectivity many normally apply.

*as a side note, if history is any guide, you can never convince ANYONE to undergo a course of action because it's morally correct (ie. pursue a just cause for equality, for equalities sake), rather you have to show how a course of action ( no matter how correct it is, in *principle*), will directly benefit THEM.

And there you go.

Monday, August 31, 2009

A great shirt.

a great shirt.

nothing more to be really said here.