F...book

A couple of days ago, one of my on-line friends has landed on this blog - he was struck by the fact that I tend to digress in a lot of odd directions, and to employ something that looks a lot like forthright honesty in doing so. *(I hope you do not mind, Dr. B.H. )*.

Essentially, he did not expect from me to wrote about "Mr. Rodgers Neighborhood" amidst post-human gods filling the universe with masochist lesbians, BDSM tarots and ternary counting system's foibles.

He knew I was complicated, but I think he hoped - being complicated not being a recipe for happiness, or for mechanical reliability for that matter - I was a little less twisty.

He is as dear a friend as one I can make on-line, i.e. someone with whom I can share some facets of myself that I dare not to share with my immediate social environment - because, you know, lynching mobs are always ready and eager to have fun.

To be honest, I also suspect that landing on the blog of someone you got to know through his drawings of - cough - pretty unrealistically extreme consensual SM porn, and discover that he can cry for a couple of days  because of a phrase from Mr. Rodgers, does not make the same effect as discovering that the principal of your daughter's kindergarten has the complete "No Fun Limits"  collection in his hard drive.

That said, "going out there and telling what I want to tell" is my main reason to be on-line (OK, the second -  the first is self-advertising for the aforementioned drawings).

If I have to beat around the bush, and construct a social façade to prompt up my ego - it simply isn't worth it.

No matter how much plaster you put on it, it doesn't really change the rotten below.

Trust me, I worked as a mason till I was 27 (and then went back to college because, uh, I was fed of my fellow masons calling me haughty for, well, using words like "haughty" - I know, I know).

So, I really do not get those that have a Facebook account with their name, "connected" to their off-line friends and who tend it with the same obsessive care many use in tending to their house gardens.

Trying to "impress their neighbours" - so to speak - with dazzling images of their magnificent successes, in order to project a calculated impression of happiness and personal fulfilment.

Why? Why do they bother?

We already have to go through life wearing masks, caving in to social pressures that require us to conform, perform and do our bit to uphold the status quo - I'd say, especially when said "status quo" is unfavourable to us; Of course, if it was favourable we would not need to be press-ganged into keeping it running, right?   

Why should we open a Facebook account, with our legal name?  - the wet dream of Facebook founder, and they push and push and push to get it at every occasion.

To keep doing the same stupid dance, only on a somewhat grander scale? Really?

Delenda Facebook!

If I go on-line, it is too enjoy some freedom from social pressure, not to participate to new and more pervasive forms of it (*).





Ceterum censeo Facebook esse delendam...



* By the way ,the first available studies on the matter seems to indicate that it is already  fucking up nicely with our youngest generations' mental health, developing social anxiety, depression and other nice idiosyncrasies; Old guys being old guys, we tend to say it is them kids being gutless, as our parents did with us and theirs with them and so forth ever since our species managed speech and to keep old people around.  

I like her

... sweet dreams are made of her ...

I like A.

She is a nice kid, solid with no wild dreams, but still with some dreams of a down-to-Earth nature - the salt of the Earth, they used to say in my language.

In my mind I can clearly see her in a takate kote, curled on the bed with the legs tied to the wall, high above her head, while I eat and frolick her cunt.

Unfortunately, I can also see her nice boobs well squeezed as she dangles from them, tied with ropes to another hook in the wall.

Much more unfortunately, I can't really see me asking her to play that way.

She doesn't give me the vibe that it may be in her chords - no pun intended.

It's just shit going on in my head, and it would be impolite to laden her thoughts with some of it.


- Sigh 
                 (long and hard)

Carrot and Stick

You get why the donkey does not move?

 Everybody knows the tactic of "carrot and stick" - a carrot is tied to the point of a stick and dangled in front of a mule.

The mule pulls trying to reach the carrot.

When he misbehaves, a rapid motion of the wrist puts the carrot on a safe trajectory while the stick is used as a baton.

Simple and effective, we are inured to think. 

But, at times, the donkey stops seeing the carrot as a carrot - (s)he sees it as what it - all too often - really is.

A small-sized, pre-owned, not-well-washed dildo. 

The mule stops. 

Raise your head.

Look at the carrot they dangle in front of you - getting a degree, a good job, starting a family etc. 

Look at it long and hard.

Yes, it is a pre-owned, not-washed-at-all dildo. It was, it has always been, and it always will be one.

Now, it may be your thing.

In which case, feel free to pull long and hard - not that they are really ever going to let you get it, anyway.  If you did, you may declare yourself satisfied and stop anyway. 

If it is not your thing, though, it may be better for you to just stop now, lay down and think about what to do next.

Fear

Apparently, Trump's administration has a number of members trying to manage Trump behaviour through underhanded tactics, like hiding documents he asked to get readied to be signed, because they think that he is mercurial, unprepared, reckless and incapable and unwilling to learn.

Why they don't just step away from the guy and voice for invoking the 25th amendment?

Because they can use him as a tool to get what they want - the tax cut, repeal of anti-pollution rules, the dismantlement of the Financial consumer protection bureau etc.

Also, the 25th amendment takes time;  It is a slow process, who would not remove Trumps' powers for - likely - some months .

Trump still has unfettered access to the "nuclear football";  In four minutes, he can launch a massive nuclear attack and be rid of the judgement of history because - as you may know - history is written by humans that have the luxury items required to write on storable media.

A nuclear Armageddon should eliminate most of the firsts an virtually every of the seconds.

He seems like a raving lunatic in his best day, and has shown a morbid fascination for the USE of nukes as the last embodiment of macho swaggering.

- "Why can't we use them?" , he asked (three times) while they were briefing him on the nuclear attack procedures -

Now, imagine him looking down a removal from power for unfitness - humiliating - or a Clinton-esque impeachment process - more humiliating?- followed by a raft of civil and criminal trials of members of his administration - most of them seem as bent as a three dollars banknote - and staff of his private enterprise - it is not exactly a mystery that many foreign governments and political figures shovel money to Trump concerns as a way to mollify the big guy... efficacious for them, but does not really smell legal, right? - included, maybe, of some of his family.

"Après moi, le déluge" reads very Trumpian, I think. 

Now you feel it?

Fear.

Failed Bayesian Statistics Forever

Admit it: You wish I was making porn here, instead of talking about it, right now.

Consider, if you will, these two links:

All Men Watch Porn (spoiler alert: from when they are 10 onward, on average - bummer, I thought I was a precocious sod).   

Boys who watch porn think sexual harassment is acceptable

Now, raise his hand who, on the light of the first article, thinks that the authors of the second failed Bayesian statistics forever.

All of you? You are not as daft as them, then.

If the first statement/article is true, then it segues that

Every Boy That Thinks That Sexual Harassment Is Unacceptable Watches Porn.

and

[Some] Boys who watch porn do not think that sexual harassment is at all acceptable, in any circumstance. 

Or, in other words,

Watching porn is hardly much meaningful, when talking about men's views on sexuality. 

It is, really, just background noise.

Note that the same "reversed" statistic inference has been used to "prove" that anything with serious mass appeal was dangerous/damaging youths - almost every single kid in the 30s read comics, then they grew up and as some became criminals, Harry Wertham arrived and "discovered" that comics had a nefarious influence. Comes the '90s, it's videogames.


To be honest, I kind of suspected it.

We may still wish that porn was done better and more intelligently, possibly with more women and "minorities" (LGBTQSM) in directing/producing stuff because - being honest - the "heterosexual white man's gaze" prevalent in it at times feel a bit monomaniacal and boring. 

But it's exactly as we wish Sci-fi flicks were done better and more intelligently, possibly with more women and "minorities" (LGBTQSM, black, Asian, French and physicists) in directing/producing stuff because - being honest - the "white man's navel gaze" prevalent in it at times feel a bit monomaniacal and boring.

And I am back at equating porn and science fiction...