A World of Cheese, For your Pleasure

Porn=crack cocaine

As usual, (Re)gina Lynn of Wired's Sex Drive has a pretty good take on the porn industry and sex technology. I pretty much agree with what she says. She came over from tech TV, which, although I have never seen the show, seems to have interesting topics presented by a number of really cute women. Actualy, I think I'd like to have Regina's job. I could write about sex and porn. Why shouldn't I get paid for it? Maybe that's the job I need.

Last Friday, Regina wrote about the recent hearings discussing Internet porn as:

the new crack cocaine, leading to addiction, misogyny, pedophilia, boob jobs and erectile dysfunction, according to clinicians and researchers testifying before a Senate committee Thursday.

First of all, you HAVE to take something seriously when you compare it to crack cocaine. Video games are the crack cocaine of teenage problems. Chat rooms are the crack cocaine of infidelity in women (which, of course, is an actual problem, unlike male infidelity). Crack cocaine is the worst thing you can have, and if anything is compared it then it is the worst thing in its class. Period. Nice frame job.

Jeff Satinover (I can't decide whether or not he is an idiot or , at the very least, not an idiot) says that this causes masturbation. Regina Lynn dissects that comment wittily, but I would like to expand on this. Long before Internet porn, people masturbated. They did it with shame, of course, because onanists are terrible people. But they did do it. Don't get me wrong, most people do not use/view/watch porn to study it carefully, or to expand their minds. Most do it and end up masturbating in one way or another. But to say that this behaviour leads to misogyny and pedophilia is crap. But it does lead to boob jobs, just like the entertainment industry. And misogyny and pedophilia, come to think of it.) And I agree that we should allow ourselves some self time without feeling so bad about it all the time. I bet that a lot of tensions would be relieved if people got off more, and what could be safer than the occasional wank?

From Dr. Mary Anne Layden:

"the myth that women are sexually aroused by engaging in behaviors that are actually sexually pleasuring to men is a particularly narcissistic invention of the pornography industry."

Now, is she contending that women are naturally selfish and have no real interest, sexual or otherwise, in pleasing their men in bed by doing things that the men enjoy? That it's a huge lie that many women actually love giving head? Or is she suggesting that women have only ever done some of these things under extreme duress?

It is unreasonable to assume that all women love being gangbanged, DP'd, doing it with other women or sucking dick. It's unreasonable to assume that all women, or men, or gays or Jews or Republicans enjoy doing any particular thing. It is entirely reasonable to assume that some do like some of these things some of the time, and I don't see anything wrong with like-minded people hooking up.

Furthermore, to say that the porn industry invented male fantasy is more than a little inaccurate. As if people were these "pure" mindless vessels that only fucked for children. No, sexual fantasy never entered into it until Internet porn. right. But under all of this is some kind of assumption that male sexual fantasies are bad things, but female sexual fantasies, if you will admit that they exist, are good and wholesome. That's as sexist as anything you see in porn.

Porm, like drugs, is not something that anyone should see. I'd like to see certain disclaimers in plain view in these movies, such as "These are performers. They are performing sexual acts. This has nothing to do with real life. Most women aren't like this. Most men aren't like this. Black men are not sexual monsters." And so on. You should have a certain strength of mind to not be warped by certain images. I would also put warning disclaimers on things such as reality TV, soap operas or any TV dramas. The truth is, there are a lot of weak-minded people out there that will believe anything they see, especially if is sort of fits into their pre-existing notions of certain people. I see porn as just another sector of the great entertainment machine, designed to shape our consciousness to make other people lots of money. We won't need porn, or Cosmopolitan, once we start thinking of ourselves and life differently.

I like to play with my twanger

Perhaps you've seen this clip already. If not, get a computer with multimedia capabilities and listen. This is so fucking funny I can't stand it. Read along; the script is there. I wonder if it is even real.

Heh?

As I don't have time nor the health to write real entries, entertain yourselves with this:
What in the fuck?
Damn straight. Heh. Straight.

Fanning the flames of hate

Bizarre occurrence in Long Island: Burning cross left at home of interracial couple. I'd like to know why they use burning crosses. is that supposed to represent the wrath of God or something? And who does this shit anymore? I thought this went out with the 20th century. If I were a Christian, I'd be ashamed that they would try to justify this sort of thing with the Bible, if in fact that is what they are doing. This could actually happen to me, well, if I were living in the States. I don't think it has happened in Canada for quite some time, and Quebec doesn't have a history of this sort of thing to the best of my knowledge.

Georgie and Condi sitting in a tree

Big ups go to Birdherder for this post. The picture + the post title is a brilliant combination. I would like to suggest some captions for this picture along the theme of "You Just Know They're Fucking".

You'll get tapped for Colin's old position if you let me tap that ass once more.
"Hey, brown sugar."
"And they called that other guy 'Slick Willie'. Heh."

Any ideas?

UPDATE: I KNOW they're aren't really fucking. It's just funny to think about.

Pole dancing for kids

The bad idea of the day goes to the nims (my new word, short of "nimrods", you could alternatively say "rods") who thought that teaching pole dancing to kids was a good idea, specifically Sarah Davis. Was she going to teach the whole routine? would it have been broken up into beginner, intermediate and advanced? Here's some seminars for 12 year-olds that wuld increase physical fitness, raise their self-esteem and prepare them for the harsh realities of the world:

1. Bumping: Bunny the Bunny shows you the basics of the bumps. Great for all ages.
2. Grinding: Continuation of lesson 1. Includes shimmying and shaking.
3. Pole work 1: This is a more cerebral course. Includes how to think of long thick objects in a phallic sense, and what your role is with respect to them.
4. Pole work 2: Bunny shows off some of her favourite moves and teaches you , too. Taught in conjunction with Puberty Polly, depending on average class age.
5. Take your dancer to work day: Participating bars open up their doors to let your kids in to see what the environment is really like. Fun-filled adventure with Bunny and Polly. 1 drink included.
6. How to maximize your yields: Hosted by Mo the Pimp. He teaches you how to get mo' money with each wiggle.

A graduation ceremony with certificates happens at the end of every session.

Cuddly, plushy body parts

I don't think I could have said it better:

With innovations like this and the boyfriend's arm pillow, Japan has only itself to beat in the creepy body-part cushion market.

The girlfriend lap pillow. Weirdos.

Our new logo?

But if you REALLY want cute:

Professional Responsibility

I know that this is old news, but I would like to comment on health-care professionals that refuse to help people based on moral values. Everyone has their own moral values, but the question is whether or not your social responsibility in your occupation should take precedence in your work. I tend to think that it should, but there are many things to consider.

Here's an example: One day, a cop decides that he believes that on moral grounds, gay men should not receive legal or police protection if "something happens to them" and refuses to arrest those responsible for beating a gay man near to death. THIS IS EXACTLY LIKE LYNCHING, especially considering the police participation at the time. Should he be removed from his position? I suppose it depends on the job description, the law and on the code of ethics for that profession. The code of ethics has nothing to do with law. IANAL*, so I can't really say for sure, but I would think that a police professional code of ethics would not allow for someone to make a decision to NOT do their job based purely on sexual orientation, gender or race, regardless of morals. (They routinely make judgements on how they will do their job based on race, but not whether or not they will do it.)

La Fédération Québécoise des Massothérapeutes has a code of ethics whereby no one is refused based on creed, colour, etc. However, if a woman lives by herself and practices out of her own home feels uncomfortable massaging men she doesn't know, does this go against her professional code of ethics? The law? Suppose she owns a massage centre and simply believes that it is wrong for women to massage men and vice-versa? She is denying a health care service based on her morals and a person's gender.

I feel as though the cop does not have the right to not do his job to the best of his ability, and the massage therapist that has safety concerns has a valid reason for not massaging men. The second therapist, well, I'm not so sure. Generally, it seems to me as though if your occupation puts you in the position to have to make these decisions, then you should step down from that position if you are unable to follow through with your responsibilities. These responsibilities change with time, and like any profession, if you cannot keep up, then you should not be doing that job unless there are extenuating circumstances such as safety issues for the patient, victim or practitioner. Yes, I believe that health care professionals are responsible for providing help in whatever form to whomever needs it, just as cops are responsible for enforcing law no matter who the perpetrators or victims are.

What do you think?

*IANAL="I am not a lawyer"

They're screwing us AGAIN

via Cory at Boingboing: "Canada Heritage is now recommending an Internet "levy" that will go to a collecting society, on a grounds that everything on the Internet is copyrighted by someone, and the collecting society will gather money for them in exchange for your use of their material."

Does this mean that if someone links something that I wrote, or if someone uses my words somehow, or saves it to their computer, then I should get paid, and that this collecting society will pay me? Of fucking course not. It's yet another ridiculous cash grab. As Cory says, what am I getting for this? A slut dipped in water and rolled in sugar? (Also known as "sweet fuck all".) Some quotes:

Michael Geist, who holds the Canada Research chair in Internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, and Howard Knopf, a Canadian copyright lawyer and director for the Center for Intellectual Property at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago, have sharply condemned the proposals. Mr. Geist blames "an amazing lobby job" by the recording industry, and Mr. Knopf calls it a "travesty [and] an exercise in hyperbole."

The proposals are so tough, Ms. Murray said, they have already encouraged the CanWest newspaper chain to introduce a new contract for freelancers that demands they hand over all their rights "throughout the universe, in perpetuity."

"You'd think this would make writers' groups wonder about why [the writers have] been busting themselves to support WIPO ratification [and] Internet licensing," she argued.

Throughout the universe, in perpetuity. That really sums things up, doesn't it? You can't really have rights when you are a freelancer. What do staff have to sign? Throughout the multiverse, in all future incarnations? No wonder blog reporting is gaining such popularity. Of course, not all people believe that blogging as reporting events around you is a good thing. This leads into my next post.

How rich are you?

Pretty rich, apparently.

I'm loaded. It's official. I'm the 418,566,177 richest person on earth! How rich are you? >>

You might want to believe it's false, but it's not

You didn't really think you'd get away with that, did you?

Girl found inside pinata. "One was heavier than the others," they said. Brilliant.

Illegal Sex Acts

On a much lighter note, perhaps we should just fight for the right to fuck where, who and how we want. I bet you the people who could change this shit would defend these ridiculous laws to the end, but have no idea why they are (still) there.

Terrorism is Wrong

Here's news: Paris Hilton is bad for kids! this comes from none other than Sharon Osbourne, mother of kids more wholesome than the Olsen twins. Well, any (cum)shot against against that Hilton girl is a shot for sanity. Get her outta there.

How much more are we going to take in the name of "security"? I think that this is an outrage. It's a strip search for everyone, without all the hassle. What will we put up with? Do they do random cavity searches? Will people allow random home searches, or passing of personal information just because you blogged about how much you hate some government people? What will it take?

Actually, I mentioned something like this to someone. You know the end of the movie Fight Club? I'd like something like that to happen, but on a much bigger scale. The thing is that no one is willing to put an end to the things that really hurt them, or even annoy them. And here is where I begin to sound like a terrorist.

There seem to be only two things that could ever really make us get behind something these days. If the world were invaded by aliens intent on killing most of us and enslaving most of the rest, then yes, we would be united (more or less) in fighting that menace. Surely there would be some that would profit from this, but just as likely there would not be enough influence from these powerful people to keep us in our places. If it came down to this, those who would benefit from our enslavement would be removed from power by any means necessary. We simply wouldn't take it.

But if the big threat is more terrestrial, then we simply sit back and say that things are good enough, or that it isn't really happening. We whine and complain for another day, but do nothing. Maybe I am guilty of doing just that right now. In Canada and the US, and likely everywhere else in the "have" countries, we bitch and whine about things such as money-wasting scandals, gay marriage or some blowjob in the Oval Office. Others, meanwhile, in the "have not" countries sit quietly trying to scrape by enough to eat while not even having a pot to piss in. More specifically, as long as we have our running water, cable, hockey, football and Oprah, it's all pretty much all right. Everything else is gravy, so let the overlords do whatever they want. If some freak minority group is having problems, that's terrible. But we sure as hell are not going to do nothing about it. We might make them feel as though they are getting somewhere, though. We might make them feel special, but when they need us, fuck 'em.

So if a person or group sees no other way to get from under what they see as oppression, does it come as that much of a surprise when some of them start advocating extreme measures? That they seek to destroy that which seeks to destroy them? Some pro-lifers feel that they need to kill abortionists. It's wrong on all levels, but some believe that it is necessary. They may be more sane than you think. Blacks were (?) systematically classed as and treated as second-class citizens. If that were still the case today, or if I were born a long time ago, I can't say that I would not be part of a terrorist group that did extreme things if we could get sufficiently organized.

Hmm. I went from X-ray scans to me as a would-be terrorist. Just to be clear, Terrorism is Wrong, and I don't know any terrorists.

Milkmen

I should make an ohmygodno category. I'm all for equality, but male breastfeeding is not something I want to become fashionable. I don't care how much of a bonding experience it is.

Historically, male lactation was noted by the German explorer Alexander Freiherr von Humboldt prior to 1859, who wrote of a 32-year-old man who breastfed his child for five months. It was also observed in a 55-year-old Baltimore man who had been the wetnurse of the children of his mistress."

A middle aged male wetnurse. Somehow I feel very...dry. If you ever wanted to know why men have nipples, well, now you know.

"If milk production in men were truly unnatural, it wouldn't exist. The fact that it does, leads me to believe that perhaps male lactation is simply nature's back-up system."

No matter how progressive I get, I doubt I would ever do anything to promote milk production. However. it does give me some insight into the bond between mother and child at birth that so often happens (although I wonder if it happens as much as it used to, or in the same way).

Try not to cry

Let me preface this by saying I have never been a fan of Eminem. However. Watch this video and tell me you aren't scared. Frustrated. Grieving. Tell me you don't feel powerless to effect change.

America as a Woman

"You'll take it and you'll like it, bitch."

American Pansies!

You know, maybe Canadians and Americans are more alike than I thought.

In the months leading up to June 28, Canada's last election day, there was all kinds of talk, talk, talk about Paul Martin and the Liberal Party, stating that people wanted change, they are a bunch of crooks, blah, blah, blah. It really looked as though they were going down. They only got a minority thanks largely to Gilles Duceppe's Bloc Quebecois, who took 54 out of 308 seats. The West went Conservative. but despite the bitching and threatening in Ontario, in the end, when it actually mattered, what did Ontario do? Ontario caved. They voted overwhelmingly Liberal, and that is why the Liberals are still in power, although not that strongly.

Well, what do you know? Despite all the anti-Bush rhetoric and propaganda, despite all the good reasons to get rid of this joker, what did the Americans do? Sweet fuck all. They voted almost exactly the way they did before, or they were too scared to go with an alternative. The Americans fucking caved. The devil you know, and all that. And that is just a damn shame.

Like here in Canada, I don't feel as though you are going to make any real changes until it is much too late and meaningless to matter. And the Americans are supposed to be tough. Right.