Saturday, April 28, 2007

The Flesh


This flesh
Is nothing more
Than a corruption
Of a fading light.
We are the ashes
Blown free by that consuming fire,
Fragile particles
Chewed from the corpse of existence.
Blackened and charred,
Souls stained
By this fallen form.
We are the ever encroaching night,
The harbinger of spiritual end.
Our shadows loom across the land
Starving the soil of precious life.
We leave barren desert in our wake,
Choke the rivers dry,
Polluting once azure sky gray.
Look into my eyes
And see my core.
What once was shining
Has dulled and darkened
Leaving a well of abyss.
Know that my core is empty
And my soul is nothing.
Begin to see
What it is to be:
An end to the ideal,
The spawning of the cynic,
And the rotting of hope.
How we devour possibility
And wallow in the filth of our depression.
How long before we fully cool into lifeless clay
And the final flame of reality's pyre
Burns itself out
Leaving nothing more
Than a scattered once
And a eternal never will be?

Friday, April 27, 2007

Five questions, five people...

Hello hello,

So I've been tasked with answering five questions which are to follow. To explain what I am doing, I will take a quote from the origin of this endeavor, Rhys:

...this meme is unique in that it works more like an ongoing interview. Somebody began by asking someone 5 questions, who had to answer them honestly. (haha!)

Here are the meme 'rules':
1. Leave me a comment saying, "Interview me."
2. I will respond by emailing you five questions. I get to pick the questions.
3. You will update your blog with the answers to the questions.
4. You will include this explanation and an offer to interview someone else in the same post.
5. When others comment asking to be interviewed, you will ask them five questions.
6. Originally, the rule offered a cap off at five people so you could get a break, but my nosy self can ask questions all day long, so I don't care.

What follows are my questions and the answers I gave:

1)Which five words describe you best?

Observant, creative, irrational, curious, and idealistic

2)A super-advanced think tank with outlandish resources including time travel hands you a list of names of the people who will commit the most heinous, horrifying crimes in the next ten years. You are given the option of hunting these people down and 'eliminating' them, before they have a chance to commit those crimes. Do you do it? Why/why not?

I would have to travel a bit forward in time to see what the long term results of these actions would be, meaning the criminals’ and not mine. Maybe in allowing these men to commit the crimes legislation can be put forward to prevent further atrocities. Maybe humanity will learn from the horror to grow and change. If we had killed Hitler then a true moderate democratic German state never would have emerged, eugenics would have remained a feasible science, Communism would have threatened Europe and the world even worse than it did in our timeline, the German people would have remained immensely militaristic and caught up in the lie that there was a stab in the back, racism would have remained acceptable (the Holocaust aided in causing many to rethink what was the eventual latter stage of racist doctrine), and I could go on. Sure, as a human being and a utilitarian I believe in doing what is best for humanity, but that utilitarianism orders me to do what is best for the overall construct. If a bit of pain leads to immense reform, I have to go with the bit of pain. You leave an infection alone too long and it can lead to terminal problems.

3)A fairy (the wish-granting kind) shows up and offers you a deal: Tomorrow morning, you can wake up and every wish you ever wanted, everything you ever desired, will be yours. Wealth, health, love...you've got it...with just one minor catch: you have to spend your life as the opposite gender, as you will be transformed upon having all your wishes granted. Do you do it? Why or why not?

No way! I would have to alter a part of me to complete the rest?!? Part of my wishes are driven by my very sex. Having to relearn life; you know, walking in high heels, what clothes work best for me, having to deal with that “time of the month” only to face menopause. It sounds like too much hassle despite having everything else I’ve ever wanted.

4)You are given the opportunity to travel back into your past and change one thing. What would it be? Or would you not do it?

This is a hard question. Deep down, despite all I’ve been through, I know it has made me who I am. To negate a part is to reject the whole. I may not like my life but it has been an interesting adventure. If I had to go back, though, the only thing I’d change is the way my father raised the siblings and I. I would have asked him not to move around so much, to think before he spoke, and to encourage us and our endeavors. My childhood was a little too lonely for someone with five brothers and sisters.

5)Describe your favorite color to a blind person who has never seen it. (You'll have to be creative and use other senses besides sight...fun! And to make it extra fun, don't say what the color is, so we can try to guess it.)

It starts with a word or a touch, something personal that draws like from your soul. It is warm and soothing, sweet to the touch though it might cause a tinge of embarrassment when you feel it beginning. Yet you don’t really mind, realizing it is your body speaking what you yourself are too afraid to utter; your tongue dry and swollen. Your nerves come to life when it surges out, a little secret that enflames your face. You sense giddiness as it emerges, your heart skipping and ceasing. You feel lightheaded as you fly through the heavens of your thoughts. It is emotion playing across your body, tingling each and every pore as it passes. If you listen closely, you can hear the thundering of your heart following the lightning you sense beneath the surface. It is honesty, coy honesty. And you only hope in its revelation you might receive an answer as to whether they feel the same. That…is my favorite color.

The Things I've Done for Love

To read through these posts, you'd think I wasn't a romantic. Well boys and girl (even the belief of one woman reading this is stretching reality), I have done some wild things in the name of love. Let's mark off a few shall we, in ever ascending insane order:

- Bought a dozen roses for one on Valentine's Day complete with a self-written poem. The girl never appreciated the effort though I was told that quite a few of her dormmates were clamoring for my number.

- Stayed behind rather than go to a party so that I could cheer up this one girl who was having a hard time. The downside: there was a girl at the party who actually wanted to have sex with me, no strings attached. No strings! NONE! And what do I do? I stay behind to console this one girl. Result. She felt better. Me? I'm still numb from the waist down.

- Danced with one girl's ugly friend in order to prove I was sympathetic to said friend being ignored by every other guy at the dance. If you saw her you'd know why. Nothing is freakier than dancing with a clown who has a crude scar across her cheek. I swear that to you! The result: the girl felt it would be wrong to date since the friend ended up liking me. Doh!

- Joined the soccer team. I didn't get the girl, but I did manage to run a two mile in 13 minutes. Wanna see the calves?

- Went to a nightclub, on girls' night, only to end up in a brawl in the parking lot. The best part? Some guy punching through the car window and cutting up the entire side of my face. Yeah, I saw no action that night!

- Tutored a girl all semester, took her phone calls late at night throughout that semester whenever she felt depressed (which was often), listened to her problems, helped her get her life together, did a few drama productions so that I could be "involved" in the same activities as she was (I really liked being around her), only to see her go back to her ex-boyfriend who was a total ass. That's right. AN ASS!

- Made a big deal out of letting one lass know I cared about her by making an ass out of myself and recording it on video before playing it across the school announcement system. Yeah, I was popular for doing it. No, she didn't appreciate it.

- Went without sleep for over two months in order to talk to one lovely lady (sarcasm unheard due to typing rather than saying). She lived in a time zone twelve hours ahead of mine. Plus, to make things really interesting, I had to be up days but the only time I could talk to her were nights. Well, to show I "cared" about the travails she was going through halfway across the globe, I'd be up talking to her either on the phone or on the net. Yeah, I wasn't all there by the end of the relationship when, clingy as she was, she began to fall apart as I distanced our talks from daily to weekly in order to function (I actually blacked out during a drive home and woke up stopped at a red light five miles later!). I do draw the weird ones. She tried to emotionally blackmail me by saying how depressed she was when I curtailed our talks and then, at least one of her co-workers told me, she tried to kill herself by walking in front of a car. Yeah, that was over!

- Became an officer in the U.S. Army believing that would draw women to me. Result? Fond memories as well as an honorary discharge after two years (whole other story). Downside? Well, I'm single aren't I?!?!

- Flew to South Africa to meet one girl I'd only talked to online in order to see if things would work out. They actually went pretty well. I did marry her, on South African television no less! Of course, five years after that we divorced. Her excuse: she was too young to be married. Yeah, I don't know if that should make me feel old (28) since I don't feel too young for matrimony or view her as selfish beyond belief.

There are many more, but I think I've scarred you all enough with these tidbits. I know, how can I be alone? Everytime I ask myself that question I can only think of one answer: God has a sick sense of humor.

The nature of politics today

You know, more and more everyday and I am really being repulsed by the Republican Party. Now I am a moderate with some conservative leanings (belief in gun rights, capital punishment, small government, an end to welfare, etc.) with only a smattering of liberal views (belief in abortion, redistribution of wealth though through a VAT rather than an income tax). I don't believe completely in the power of rehabilitation. Certain cases, such as sexual assault and mental illness, I fail to believe in second chances. One cannot force individuals to take medication nor can one expect to ever rewire an individuals sexual proclivities. That is biologicial fact. The willingness of many Democrats to ease prison restrictions and make an inmate's life more comfortable than mine were for the longest time something that kept me at arms length. Now, the Republicans are truly beginning to piss the living shit out of me.

I was tired enough of listening to Bush blackmail this nation for years along the lines of, "If you don't do what I say, 9-11 will happen again. If you don't believe in me you aren't a patriot. You want your friends to die. You want our soldiers to die. Do what I say and don't challenge me." I heard enough of this BS in church where one isn't expected to think but to succumb. Anyone or any organization that does not believe in constructive criticism or debate knows they are not completely in the right, have a shaky faith, and probably shouldn't be incontrol. A problem cannot simply be solved head on. Bush has surrounded himself with sycophants who refuse to tell him alternatives, to challenge him, to make him govern effectively. With so much power in such mediocre hands is it any wonder this nation has gone into the crapper? Certain people laud what he has done but what I have seen is a system of divide and conquer used most effectively by tyrants.

Have you ever wondered why there is so much war in Africa? It is because of the historical culture built up by European efforts at colonization. Being the minority, the Europeans found ways to create groups and pit them against each other. It helped to prevent any group from rising up and threatening the artificial status quo created to benefit the few at the expense of the many. When the Europeans imploded following two world wars and left a vaccuum in their wake, Africa never recovered. I am afraid that this nation might be following that course. What was once a united country in one shape or form has grown more disparate, more fragmented, more hostile. Bush has used so many tools to ward our eyes from war to fear to patriotism: the tools of despots. He rewards those who support him, those power players who finance his campaigns and keep him squarely in authority. Bush sacrifices underlings to protect himself and the illegal activities that he does. Illegal wiretapping, spying, government contracts to corrupt organizations, torture, and worse. Bush uses the same scheme as Hitler: when something untoward is uncovered, of course he never knew about it. He is insulated by a layer of underlings. This administration is so rotten it is making me sick.

And now once great men are following his stead believing it will lead them to power. McCain, a man I once admired, has so sold his soul that I cannot stand to look at him anymore. He has become a liar (Baghdad safe anyone?), a conformer (belief in abortion and the Christian conservatives, a true pox on modern politics), and a syophant (Bush is right on the surge). Giuliani has become an echo of Bush policy (need for extreme government intervention to prevent 9-11, Democrats threaten the safety of this country, blah blah). These men are not fit to govern. I will not elect them. I cannot.



I refuse to go through another eight years of military involvement in what is a foreign government's obligation to right itself. Split Iraq into the three separate entities it is and allow those new nations to find their way. We didn't try to force Yugoslavia to remain a single entity. Tax breaks need to come to a close. In fact, I believe income tax should be set to a flat tax and a national VAT created so that the rich finally don't have a loophole to escape paying their fair share. They want to live like kings, pay the taxes on the goods that pleasure you so. No Child Left Behind needs to stop. A nation of test takers? There is a reason the educational system is decentralized: flexibility. Immigration: time to either start enforcing the laws or for these various employment opportunities to face up and move south of the border. I cannot defend anyone who breaks the law simply because they want a better life. Perhaps our nation, rather than continually throwing money away to buy influence abroad, should create an organization that provides microloans to Mexicans in their home country to spur on economic growth so that they will have no reason to come north to search out jobs only to be met by the backlash of a nation that fears them and their cheap labor. Time to own up to the Kyoto Pact rather than sell out to businesses who only think of the profits today rather than the environmental ruin of tomorrow. Financial accountability would also be nice. I have to spend as I earn. Why the hell should government have the right to continually spend more of my money without my say? Folks, I could go on all day.



Now, regardless of what I'm saying I'm not a Democrat. I believe them to be spineless, too idealistic and out of touch with reality, and far too willing to raise taxes to give to the "poor and downtrodden". Welfare wrecked this country. You give people money without earning it and it soons becomes an entitlement. I believe in the Pavlovian Reflex. If they stay poor they get paid. Why bother to work for something one can get for free? There is no incentive there. I believe mandatory sterilization should begin for all individuals on wlefare. If you can't take care of yourself then you have no right to do with your body something you have no right to. I also do not believe in total withdrawal from Iraq. The place is in such a shambles that with us gone it is no doubt that someone will try to step in (Iran, Syria, etc.). Then there are the candidates. Hilary is almost as bad as Bush, willing to lie through her teeth in order to garner support from anyone and everyone. Yeah, I trust you with this nation! Obama has gradually shown himself to be a political animal turning Virginia Tech into a chip on the political table with his statements meant to capitalize on that tragedy. Not even the decency to leave it alone. And since when has jobs being moved overseas been perceived as violence, Barack?

I'm telling you, if I had the money I'd probably move to fucking Canada. Canada! You see how insane I'm becoming!?!? Sure it's dull, quiet, and really empty up north but at least things still work there. And for those who call me a traitor to my country and get the hell out if I don't like it, I ask you this: if you are willing to accept something rather than do what is best for you and those around you, refuse to even try to change things for the better, unwilling to give back and improve the country that you so love, then how are you anything but freeloaders? If you aren't an active citizen, then why do you call yourself a patriot?

Thursday, April 26, 2007

A return to school

So it is seeming more and more a reality that I am going to be returning to college this Fall. Yes, yes, I am more than likely going to start towards my Psychology degree and the excitement is taking even me by surprise. I'm loving the possibilities this is opening for my future. Likewise, it is a subject I excel at. Large parts of my family are unstable/dysfunctional and I have seen my fair share of mental meltdowns. Hell, I nearly had a breakdown two years ago but that is an entirely different story.

I'm not a stranger to the field. I took enough classes during my first degree that Psychology was nearly a minor. One of my fave classes was Abnormal Psych, which I wrote a paper for regarding the mental health of Ivan the Terrible. I also took a Russian History class not long afterwards leading me to the realization that Drozny, Ivan's nickname, meant feared. Funny part is feared can be taken either in the negative, the Terrible, or positive, revered. Funny little culture isn't it? I did a psych profile on the Russian nation along with others regarding my political classes. If one would simply take history into perspective and view nations as organic entities, you'd be surprised how well you can come to understand a people.

I've always applied psychology to my writing. I got into a major argument with the collegiate faculty over my thesis last Fall. Some professors just don't want the human perspective added to any equation.

I'm so tired of having to view human beings as nothing more than statistics. I want to get my hands dirty. I want to experience the myriad of personalities out there; see the soul in all its forms. Mankind fascinates me. What makes us who we are? What forms those gears, causes them to turn?

The scary part? I'm not into this field to make millions coddling the fragile, bruised egos of the pampered aristocracy whose only malady is infections caused by sycophantic parasites whose attention causes their highnesses mental capacities to atrophy. I want to wade into darker waters. I want to stare into those empty eyes and see the abyss. Maybe in the fallen I can find some semblance of purpose. For them. For me. The damned aren't a warning. They are a lesson. I want to see what they can teach me.

Spider-Man, the subtle Superman clone

They say history repeats itself and I see the maxim being repeated rather blatantly to the point of plagiarism in the Spider-Man movies. Now what do I mean? Afterall, aren't the Spider-Man movies some of the most original, most exciting movies out there? I say no. The series has gradually turned into asubtle clone of the Superman movies. What do I mean? Let's do some mild comparisons.

The first Spider-Man movie is about a kid who feels alienated and in love with someone he can't have. His father, who isn't his real father, offers sage advice and eventually dies after imparting his most lasting statement leavingan indelible image in the mind of his "son". Spider-Man? Or Superman? Superman was an awkward teen when he was Clark in the original 1978 movie. Everyone laughs at him. He is excluded. He loves Lana but can't have her though she appears to care about him. His adoptive father is constantly talking to him about how special he is, about some future purpose, about using his powers for the right reason and not self gain. "You are here for a reason. But I'll tell you one thing. It's not to score touchdowns." The original movie of both series likewise show our heroes weaving their way through their big cities making an impact on crime. We even get the love subplot of the girl loving the hero's one identity but not the other and even speaking to the one's identity about loving the other.

Spider-Man 2 continues this thread by ripping off the most important part of the plot. In Spider-Man 2, like Superman 2, the hero sacrifices his powers in order to find love and a normal life only to discover their needed and to forgo their personal wants for the greater good.

Spider-Man 3 really proves Raimi is ripping off the franchise by the fact that now we have our hero turned into an evil version of himself a la some foreign object. It was artifical Kryptonite in Superman III, a symbiote from space in Spider-Man 3. We get the hero to gradually turn into a selfish, self-centered individual who uses his powers for self-satisfaction and even to gain a new girl (both blondes, Lorelai Ambrosia in Superman III and Gwen Stacey in Spider-Man 3). Their costumes darken. Eventually the dual identities fight one another after discovering how the darkness in consuming them with that moment of "one great scream" before the separation. And of course the heroes kill their alternate versions. Sandman seems a mild rip-off of Richard Pryor's Gus Gorman in that he is a reluctant villain who feels guilty for his role in the film. Even more compelling is the fact that this movie, like Superman III, is getting mixed reviews.

Do you see the common thread running through this series? It's even got to the point that Maguire, like Reeve, swears there won't be a 4 though Reeve eventually conceded. The question is whether Maguire will do the same. If there is a 4, will it kill the series like Superman IV: The Quest for Peace did?

And yes, I know, I need to get a life. Women out there...save me from myself!

Politics can be entertaining

To show that politics in this country are gradually turning into a bloodsport, I offer you an interesting little article I found today:

ATLANTA -- Politics can be rough, but usually there's no real bloodshed. Apparently things got out of hand at a Midtown Atlanta bar early Saturday morning. Lobbyist Peter Stokes, 25, attacked fellow lobbyist John Clayton, hitting him over the head with a beer bottle, slicing off part of the victim's ear, according to police.

The men were attending a party at the Spotted Dog on North Avenue marking the end of the legislative session. Stokes was arrested on felony aggravated assault charges and booked into the FultonCounty jail.

He made a court appearance on Monday morning and bond was set at $20,000. On the State Ethics Commission Web site, Stokes is registered as a lobbyist for Georgia Natural Gas, the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, the Medical Association of Georgia, the Strollo Group, Verizon and a business called Pull-A-Part.

Is it any wonder things have led to this what with the downward spiral of politics since Bush Jr. became President? There is a bitterness to the whole process that only seems to worsen in times of corrupt administrations when those with money realize the opportunity open to them and literally lead to conflict as everyone tries to rush and acquire their piece of the influential pie.

I mean come on. We had the Abramoff scandal which tainted virtually the entire Republican Congressional body. We even had one Congressman claim that he was safe from prosecution for bribery because of separation of powers, saying with great relish that the courts shouldn't have any authority to prosecute him for taking bribes because it would set the precedent of the judicial branch having hegemony over the legislature. Sorry, but aren't elected officials supposed to be answerable to the very laws they create?

Those in power truly are becoming farther and farther removed from us. Sometimes I wonder if there isn't some sort of alien world these people come from. This fraction of citizens does realize that there are nearly three hundred million other people in this nation besides themselves, yes? They do know that this game called "politics" actually has far reaching consquences, yes?

Now, I’m all for lobbyists killing one another. They are the viruses that infect the body of national/local politics. The less of them the better. Who knows. Maybe this can be the opening salvo in a "miniature civil war". Let the PACs storm one another's bastions and consume the whole in PR Hell. Their annihilation can finally free up politicians' time to actually listen to their constituents.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

God Told Me To


From Larry Cohen, who brought us It’s Alive and what my friend describes as “the best blaxploitation movie ever,” Black Caesar, comes God Told Me To, one of the strangest and most compelling horror/sci-fi movies I know of.

The movie begins with a beautiful and creepy credits sequence showing these things floating through liquid. It reminded me a bit of the beautiful but equally inexplicable credits sequence from eXistenZ. Then we quickly move on to an average day in 70s Manhattan, where a sniper suddenly begins taking out random people on the sidewalk. This is an awesome scene, which gains a lot of resonance from recent events, creating a very creepy and surreal scene that one could very easily imagine happening. Anyway, Peter, our hero, climbs up the water tower where the sniper is and tries to talk him down. The guy tells him that “God told him to” kill the people, then tosses himself to the ground. And we’re off!

This movie was part of one of those “10-movies on DVD for $20” sets that I bought a while ago, which, case in point, often contain at least 10% gems. I was immediately glad to have this movie on DVD, and with 9 other movies… bonus! Though I hear that there’s now a deluxe edition with commentary, etc. Anyway, Peter is played by Tony Lo Bianco, the protagonist from one of my favorite movies of all time, The Honeymoon Killers.

Anyway, soon the plot point start getting piled on. Peter is super religious; it’s apparently like an addiction with him. He’s dating this woman who inexplicably wears these ludicrous glasses at all times [even in bed], and has a wife who is, shall we say, a bit dour.

There are more inexplicable murders, and the killers all say “God told me to” before dying. One of these sequences takes place during the St. Patrick’s Day parade, where we get extensive coverage of the cops [back when cops had mustaches and weren’t all burgeoning metrosexuals]. One of the cops freaks out and begins shooting. The thing is, this cop is played by ANDY KAUFMAN. You barely notice it, but it’s just one of the interesting factoids about this movie. Another, that we learn from the IMDb, is that what we’re watching is actual footage from an actual parade, shot on the sly by Cohen, who told the police that he was shooting a documentary.

As it all goes on it starts getting stranger and stranger. In fact, if you’re going to watch the movie [which you should], I would recommend not reading until the spoilers end, as it’s good to be surprised by where this all is headed.

SPOILERS >>>
So there begins to be a lot of hugger-mugger about virgin births, and a woman who was transported like 50 miles in a half hour. And you start to think “WTF?? Is this going to be about aliens?” And sure enough, viewer, this is going to be about aliens. You see, apparently the aliens abducted two women who both had “virgin births,” and this got all entangled with earthly religion and now there’s this “entity” living in basement somewhere, who is contacting these people and making them kill others. BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE! Only, I’m not going to reveal all that to you, since even though this is the spoiler section, I know that a few of you cheeky readers are perusing this even though you haven’t seen the movie, and I need to step in to protect you… from yourselves.

One of the unique features of this movie is that the entity in the basement has A PUSSY IN HIS RIB CAGE, which he invites our intrepid hero to fuck. You know, that’s just not a scene you see every day.
<<< SPOLERS END

It all gets very complicated and quite labyrinthine at the end. I thought maybe it was just me, who couldn’t follow it because it was late and I was falling asleep, but I was glad to see on the IMDb that other people had a lot of trouble sorting out the intricacies of all the revelations piled on at the end as well. I’m not totally sure it’s worth sorting out all the way, but one can get enough from one viewing to piece together the basics.

As a bonus, the movie abruptly becomes a blaxploitation movie for about 10 minutes toward the end. It’s like getting a little bonus genre in there, which is always delightful. As if we didn’t have enough genres in here, though.

The movie is well directed and sustains a good mood of mystery and tension. Plus, it’s just not quite like any other movie I know of, which makes it worthwhile to me as well. If you like it creepy and weird, this movie is where it’s at.

God's Whispers



Dreams are the whispers of God,
Yet we seldom understand
Those sighs of Creation.
How we struggle
To capture that fleeting essence
In physical manifestations
Only to see its form decay and collapse
Loosing that gasp
Back to the void.

By our hands
Do we become Heaven’s tools,
That by which His will be done.
And though our works
May be flawed,
And fail to hold His form,
In that fleeting moment
Between creation and cessation
Do we “know”
What He is trying to tell us:
That to follow that path
Of immaterial to physical,
Immortal to mortal,
Is not a fall from perfection.
It is to understand the price,
The value of Life.

Just shut up about VT!!!

I'm going to keep today's blog short due to the fact that the subject matter has me completely incensed on a personal level. I am thoroughly disgusted by American media's handling of the events at Virginia Tech as well as the actions of many Americans surrounding this tragedy. The sheer shallowness of my culture is enough to make me feel disgusted at being an American.

Below is a comment I made on a messageboard after a fucking moron made the statement that Comedy Central should have pulled the latest South Park episode due to it concerning the shooting of various characters. Afterall, "America had had enough death."

Dear God, why is everyone hyping on VT?!?!? One commentator said it best when asked, "How are we going to stop events like this?" His answer: "Stop talking about them." It's so vogue to mourn individuals dying. Everyone can say I'm being distasteful but I say the reverse. All of you are demeaning what happened by blowing this entire event out of proportion. You are making one man's vile actions into something worthy of scrutiny, attention, and public reaction. That is why these figures continually do what they do. They are making a statement. If you truly felt anything for these people, mourn respectfully. Either do it in private, at their service, or with friends and family. Stop hyping the living $hit out of it. These individuals deserve better than to serve as the fodder of a madman and news ratings.

Rant rant rant

So, today I discovered my supervisor is being promoted and one of the leading figures to replace him is, surprise, me. Of course I don't want the position. If I were to take it then goodbye days, goodbye slacking off, goodbye free time for college in the fall. It would also mean surrendering to "the machine" and becoming a cog rather than still having the fleeting hope that I might one day make it as a writer. Let's be serious: I am an artist, not a realist. I simply cannot commit to something as "responsible" as supervision. That was one of the major factors behind me quitting the military.

I was finally able to put together a script for my next YouTube video. Hopefully this weekend I'll have put it together and posted it. It'll be a laugh riot I tell you. Probably more controversial than my last video, but I was never one for pulling my punches when it came to opinion.

Since every other blog has made mention of the Virginia Tech fiasco, I guess I should too. I don't believe in gun reform. As has been said better on other forums, and as I discovered in nations with harsh anti-gun laws (South Africa), the very idea doesn't work. People can and will forever get their hands on pistols and rifles should they ever want them. Unless you shut down every manufacturing plant for both weapons and ammunition, you will not see a decline in violence and we all know that is impossible. Deterrence is key, ala the Cold War. Both sides had nukes preventing either from actually using them. Would you be willing to attack someone with a gun if you knew they had one as well? Of course not, because you would realize the possibility of being shot. So all you reactionaries back off the, "We need to protect the children," bullshit.

I do believe the college shares part of the blame for this. The fact that the shootings happened two hours apart and all VT did was issue an e-mail is beyond reproachable. Some are trying to say, "Let's not place blame, only fix the problem," since to do so would level a mighty lawsuit against the incompetency of the administration. I'll admit that when I went to college I never checked e-mails coming from the school. What should have been done was have those lazy ass campus security personnel secure the area, call the cops, and search the grounds. That is common sense. The problem was the school authorities made an assumption that called for the least action, i.e. must have been an isolated incident. Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups. Shit went down on your watch, you didn't perform accordingly, so buck up, admit your wrong, and fix it! The fact the school won't admit that part of the blame was theirs makes me cringe. The glory of today's society: no one is to blame. You wonder why so many people do the things they do: they don't have to take responsibility.

Oh well, I'm red in the face and really just dreading work tonight as they've closed down my main avenue of travel, the 2nd Street Bridge, for lame ass "Thunder Over Louisville". So now I have to go out of my way and my OCD is really acting up, the dread stabbing me in the chest. God, living in a land of hillbillies who love to watch jets and things go boom: I am truly in Hell.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

The Power of Dreams

I believe in one simple maxim: dreams are reality waiting to happen. The magic that makes that possible, to weave the ethereal into the fabric of existence is will and faith. Faith...can truly move mountains as long as there is will, that soul of faith. Sometimes dreams are all we have. The world can take away your wealth, your home, the very ground you stand on. But no one can take your dreams unless you let them. In that single possession we all have lies forever the possibility of redemption, of ascension, of immortality. When one allows their dreams to be taken, that is the true meaning of the word poverty.

Despite the battering of every day on your head, each second of life slipping through your fingers to create the barrens of yesterday, there is always the sky with its twinkling wonders and worlds waiting to be made real, visited upon this malleable slate called Earth. Never settle for less than one of those stars. Reach as far as you can, strain for all that you're worth, and should you fall you can always stand back up and try again. There is no shame in failure, only surrender.

And so I look at my life, stripped of all I once had. I have nothing left save my dreams and in the end that is all I need. From them I shall build empires, discover new worlds, and most importantly: be heard.

My voice shall transcend me and my dreams shall fire the souls of others. Oh, the blazing light of the horizon as each of you emerge from the dark abyss of fading day, scorching away a greying, pallid shade as your shattered, fallen stars rise and coalesce into a triumphant orb of flaring gold. The world shall regain color and the distance made bare as we remove the veil between waking and sleeping lands. We will see clearly the paths of Destiny waiting for us to follow, establishing cities of Fate along the way, a growing kingdom of fantasy, myth, and vision fashioned in the world of Men.

The beauty of possibility. Will you not join me on my journey?

The Last Girl

Carol J. Clover’s 1987 essay “Her Body, Himself,” modified and included in her book Men, Women, and Chain Saws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film [Princeton, 1992], was the first to coin the wonderful phrase “Final Girl.” This refers to the final survivor of a slasher film, almost invariably female. Clover’s question is, if the majority of the audience for slasher films are men, why is it that the hero in the end is usually a woman? And since they are, what is the nature of the enjoyment that these young men get out of these movies? Does this phenomenon mean that the men are psychically crossing gender lines to identify with the Final Girl? Clover says that they are. After reading the book and considering her theory, I have a different interpretation.

The Final Girl
One of the big contributions of Clover’s essay is simply the work she put into identifying and defining the standard tropes of horror films. She notes that the Final Girl is usually smarter, more conscientious, and more morally pure than her cohorts, who are usually stupid, sloppy, horny teens. The Final Girl tends not to have sex or use drugs, and is often the first of her group to sense danger, or recognize a moral failing or obligation her group has incurred.

The killer is often a man who is feminized in some way [for example Norman Bates in Psycho or James Gumb in The Silence of the Lambs], and there is often a relationship or history of some kind with the person who turns out to be the killer. Over the course of the film, the Final Girl tends to become more and more masculine and phallic, as she becomes more active and aggressive, turning from hiding and cowering from the killer to fighting back or in fact hunting him down. She usually has an androgynous or male-sounding name, like Billie, Max, Teddy, or Alex. She often also has, or assumes, other male-like characteristics. Let’s have two examples that will illustrate these observations:

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 serves well as a ‘textbook example,’ because it is so non-representative; the point of view of the movie is very consciously aware of how it is presenting issues of gender. In the middle of the movie, our hero Stretch is assaulted by Leatherface, wielding an extremely long chainsaw that is turned off. He runs the blade up her leg, eventually pressing it against her crotch as a surrogate phallus. Stretch attempts to put off her murder by sexually engaging him; she provocatively asks “Are you good?... Oh, you ARE good… You’re the best.” She then adopts a mother’s scolding tone and says “No! No good!” when he becomes aggressive again.

Clover makes much of the fact that Leatherface is left sexually confused and impotent in this scene, his chainsaw failing to start when he tries to get it going again. What she does not note, however, is that after a few seconds of it not starting, it does start. He doesn’t kill her, however, as he now has a motherly connection with her, but he humps his chainsaw-as-penis in her direction a few times, in the manner of a young boy, before leaving her. This encounter, in which she has gained a measure of sexual power over him, reduces his sexual threat to her so greatly [in horror movie terms] that in the end, someone else winds up killing him.

Throughout the course of the film, Stretch notably “puts on” the trappings of male hood. She is forced to wear her male friend’s face and hat, thus literally wearing a male exterior. Then at the end she appropriates one of the family chainsaws, already established as a phallic symbol, and cuts a vagina-like wound in her attacker’s chest. She then holds the chainsaw above her head in a reversed version of the same posture [in which Leatherface held the saw] from the ending of the first movie.

Let’s have another example, from the original A Nightmare on Elm Street. Over the course of the film, it becomes apparent that the men in Final Girl Nancy’s life are as ineffective as they can possibly be. Her boyfriend, whom she asks to protect her on two separate occasions, falls asleep both times. Her father is often absent, and when she specifically asks him to come home to protect her, he doesn’t. In the face of this, Nancy becomes more and more active on her own behalf, including building a number of booby traps in which to lure the killer when he comes for her. Eventually the killer is vanquished and sent back to his hell-world.

Clover: Men Identify Across Gender
Clover is interested in what I going on in a young man’s mind as he watches these scenes. She wonders: ‘if the young men in the audience were there to watch women be terrorized and killed, then why is it satisfying for them to watch a woman triumph at the end?’ And why is it almost invariably a woman who triumphs at the end?

What she comes to conclude is that the reason the main hero is a woman is that the audience will feel more fear for a woman in peril than they will for a man in the same situation. What she says is surprising is that the male in the audience will identify across gender with the Final Girl. That is, the focus of their excitement will lie with the killer in the first half of the film, but switch to side with the Final Girl by the end [she also notes that the film’s point-of-view also changes from killer to heroine]. She argues that the young men in the audience enjoy a somewhat pleasurable masochistic experience as they watch the killer be bested by the female hero. They see themselves as the Final Girl in the last sections of the film, and cheer her on as they would the male hero of an action film. She is impressed with the gender fluidity with which men can do this.

While Clover’s perspective is interesting and certainly very generous to men, it has some drawbacks and limitations. Most notably, though it explains the results of why these movies invariably include these patterns, it does not explain why the pattern came to exist in the first place, nor why it is so powerful that it is repeated again and again. It doesn’t explain what men would get out of this cross-gender identification, aside from simply psychically siding with the hero, and a diffuse pleasure from becoming dislocated from their gender. Finally, although it is a very interesting question to consider, Clover’s formulation does not ultimately offer a great deal of insight into either the movies or their audience. It is an observation more than an explanation, and as such is very interesting, but doesn’t leave us with much useful information.

“Justice” Buys An Audience’s Pleasure
One of the most influential things I ever read on film morality was an analysis of an Alfred Hitchcock television show. The writer gave the specific example of one of the more famous episodes, in which a woman kills her husband with a frozen roast, then cooks and serves the roast to the detectives that have come to investigate. It was seen as necessary that justice be restored at the end, and what the article noted as Hitchcock’s genius was that he didn’t have to show a dramatization of justice being restored in order for it to be effective, he merely told the audience that it was. In this particular example, Hitchcock came on at the end and said “the woman later went to jail,” and that was all it took.

The important point is that justice must be restored at the end, or else the audience will not allow itself to enjoy all of the violence and murder that has come before. If the woman is able to get away with the murder, most people in the audience will feel uncomfortable about what kind of behavior they have “supported” by enjoying a movie in which the heroine gets away with killing. If we know that she later went to jail, we can get an evil enjoyment out of her crime, knowing it is all “made okay” by the fact that she later went to prison.

I think there’s a similar principle with slasher movies. The young men in the audience legitimately enjoy all of the torture, terrorizing and murder of what are almost invariably young women in these movies. What’s more, these women are usually the types that the males in the horror movie audience want and cannot attain: “hotties” of any and all varieties, usually ones who have rejected men like those in the audience in the past. So there is an impetus there to see these types of women “get what they deserve” by being tortured, raped, murdered… or all three.

Final Girls Excuse the Audience’s Sadism
Let’s add to this another feature of how many men view women: as either “Women” or “Whores”. As Clover quotes director Sam Peckinpah in her book: “There are women and there’s pussy” [P. 139]. I think this split also works quite actively in allowing men to enjoy watching the “victim” women in horror films be tortured and raped; they’re “whores.” But the Final Girls aren’t; they avoid sex, and they’re invariably shown as smarter and more conscientious than the other women. So they’re different; they’re “women.” The very presence of these “women” tells a viewer that part of the point of view of the movie is: “Not all women are whores.” And if not all women are whores, this knowledge makes possible the enjoyment of watching the torture and murder of those who are.

And how do the women who are not whores earn men’s respect? By being more like men. So in A Nightmare on Elm Street, Nancy learns how to build booby traps and sets them as she turns to attack Freddy. It is only before she becomes active in these ways that she is sexualized; Freddy’s hand comes up between her legs, and soon after she is pulled into a pool and we are invited to oogle her breasts. In Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, Stretch, after literally wearing a male exterior, assumes the phallic instrument of power that has been used against her. What’s more, she symbolically turns her opponent into a woman by carving a vagina-like wound into his chest.

This assumption of male-like qualities helps to make the Final Girl an “Okay chick.” In this way a guy can relate to her, as he respects that she’s not afraid to kick some ass when she needs to. What is important is that the Final Girl is NOT a helpless “whore.” That Final Girls on the whole do not want to have sex is one of the few areas in which they preserve their difference from most men. However, this distinction serves an important purpose: it explicitly sets them apart from the “whores.”

Once these women have been split into two types in the male audience member’s mind, he is free to enjoy getting off on watching the “whores” be tortured, terrorized and murdered, because the presence of the smart, active Final Girl as “woman” tells him “not all women are like that.” The Final Girl slaying the killer at the end restores justice and order, thus excusing—and enabling—all of the prurient thoughts the male audience member had all along.

This would also indicate why it is vitally important that the Final Girl be a girl; a man who vanquished the killer would not balance the perceived view of women. Thus all of the torture and murder the male audience member enjoyed would remain unbalanced by a more positive image of womanhood, and he would start feeling guilty about seeing all of these women as "whores." Having a prominent woman be obviously capable, intelligent and effective assuages the guilt of watching the torture and murder of women who aren’t.

Clover believes that men vicariously enjoy the rape, torture and murder of women in slasher films, but identify across gender at the end to root for and empathize with the surviving woman. Although one can greatly appreciate her generosity of spirit toward men, the truth may be much darker. I believe that the presence of an intelligent and effective woman triumphing at the end of a horror film excuses the guilt a man might otherwise feel from his vicarious enjoyment of watching women be terrorized, tortured, and murdered.

Ghost World


The song "Turn My Way" on New Order's Get Ready album goes “I don't want to be like other people are, down want to own a key, don't want to wash my car, don't want to have to work like other people do. I want it to be free. I want it to be true.” This lyric sums up a lot of what I see in the attitudes toward life of people in my older brother’s generation [He’s 38] and those born after him; this feeling of: “Hello? I am so very special and unique that I shouldn't have to hold a normal JOB. I, who alone see through all the bullshit to comprehend the true essence of life, must follow my own personal muse and everyone else should a) pay for it, and b) feel glad to act as recipients of my inherent brilliance.”

Look around. Since the late 60s all the movies, music, books, and everything else is all filled with messages about what a special little snowflake you are and how you have to follow your heart and blaze your own path. The majority of movies are full of adulation for those who “break the rules.” Now more than ever messages are everywhere about a) how being a celebrity is the highest state of human achievement possible, and b) you too will be a star, it's just a matter of time before someone sees the TRUE GENIUS within your soul. I remember seeing a piece in the New York Times magazine where they interviewed high school dropouts about what they were going to do with their lives. One of them said that it's no problem that she didn't finish high school, because she's going to be a model, and if not, she'll be a veterinarian.

The thing the New Order song gets exactly right is in marrying this feeling of being too special and unique to hold down a “normal” job with the feeling that one needs to stay “true” to oneself and experience things as they “really” are. To not be suckered in by all the bullshit of contemporary life, particularly in American society. It also works in the reverse—one can feel that one is too true and pure to handle having a normal job, because we see through all the bullshit and that makes it harder to fit in with the normal people who, we assume, just want to go to the mall, eat fast food, have superficial conversations, and see Deuce Bigalow. You see how self-serving this is—in either case it's all about how very special the person is and how they alone see through all of the bullshit.

To me, Ghost World sums up this phenomenon, about a girl who sees through the utter bullshit of everything going on around her, and how she does or does not cope with it.

Thora Birch plays Enid, a snarky girl from divorced parents who lives with her weak, ineffectual father. Scarlett Johansson plays her best friend Rebecca. The movie joins then during their graduation from high school, announcing its wicked sense of humor in having a girl in a wheelchair and head brace give a speech about how she doesn't need drugs to enjoy life [implying that drugs were how she ended up in her condition], immediately followed by a trio of students rapping about graduation. It is just the everyday tastelessness of life in suburban America, and Enid's expression of appalled disgust registers her feelings about it.

Enid and Rebecca follow a couple they suspect are “Satanists” to a 50s-themed diner with 80s metal-pop on the soundtrack. They make fun of the personal ads, focusing on a “missed connection” ad placed by a lonely man. They call the number, pretending to be the woman sought, and arrange a meeting at the 50s diner. When the man [Steve Buscemi] shows up, they observe and make fun of him to themselves, wrapped up in their own fun, oblivious to the hurt they are causing him.

Enid and Rebecca hang out, as it is clear they have done for a long while. Neither plans to go to college, they plan to get jobs and live together. Soon Rebecca starts looking for a job. Enid keeps making excuses.

They decide to seek out Seymour, the man they tricked with the fake ad response, in order to gain further amusement from him. They find him selling old records out of his garage. He is a serious record collector, interested in early jazz and blues. Enid buys a blues collection as a novelty.

Informed that she needs one more credit before she can get her diploma, Enid is enrolled in a summer art class. The teacher is played by Illeana Douglas, introduced through a snippet of her hilariously “artsy” B&W video art piece that shows a man's shadow climbing the stairs as a voice on the soundtrack drones “Mirror… Father… Mirror….” She wants the students to use art to express their feelings and how they see social issues… and she obviously has a very preconceived notion of how that can be done. She hopes to display their work in an upcoming local show amusingly entitled “Brotherhood and community: Art as dialogue.”

One night, Enid listens to the record she bought from Seymour, and really responds to one song; “Devil Got My Woman.” She goes back to find Seymour, and a friendship develops. Enid takes it upon herself to find Seymour a girlfriend, and they go out looking for suitable women. During one sequence they go out to a blues club where an old Delta blues musician is opening for a group called Blues Hammer [a not very well disguised Blues Traveler or Jon Spencer Blues Explosion?]. The authentic blues musician is drowned out by the people waiting for the headlining band. Then a potential date for Seymour tells him that “if he really loves authentic blues he'll love Blues Hammer.” Blues Hammer then comes on; they are suburban white guys playing blues-tinged heavy metal about “picking cotton for the man.”

Rebecca gets a job at a Starbucks-like café. She wonders when Enid will get a job so they can start looking for apartments together. Enid continues to say she will.

At one point they see an older man in a suit sitting on a bench, waiting for a bus. “He's always there,” Rebecca says. They inform him that the bus line was cancelled years ago, and a bus will never come, No, he insists, a bus will come.

Enid isn't doing very well in her art class. Her teacher responds to the other kids' banal projects [a tampon in a teacup reflects one student's feelings about a woman's right to choose], but doesn't approve of Enid's drawings, which she deems simple. It is the one unrealistic note in the film that the teacher cannot recognize the obvious artistic ability demonstrated by Enid's drawings [created for the film by Robert Crumb's daughter].

Enid's father has begun to see a woman he had previously been involved with, whom Enid hates.

Seymour begins a relationship with a woman, the one he was trying to reach with his personal ad from the beginning of the film. Some of the most painfully funny moments come from Seymour's trying to lower his expectations for human companionship enough to accept this woman and begin a relationship. My favorite moment is the utterly appalled look on his face when Ashford & Simpson's “Solid” comes on, and the woman jumps up and says “Oh! I love this song!”

At one point, Enid says to Seymour that sometimes she fantasizes about going off to “some random place, and I'd just disappear and no one would ever see me again.”

Enid attempts to get a job at a movie theater, but her sarcastic comments get her fired after one day. Rebecca enlists her to look for apartments, even though Enid doesn't have a job. She asks Enid to dress relatively conservative, as they will need to impress their potential landlord. Enid responds by dyeing her hair bright green. This is just the latest passive-aggressive thing that Enid has done to Rebecca, like inviting her to a party that turns out to be gathering for geeky serious archival record collectors. Enid wants to keep everything at an ironic distance, to be able to annoy her friend, but receive in return affection for how lightly they both take things and how much Rebecca will take from her. But Rebecca has begun to move on, to understand the importance of taking certain things seriously, and they grow apart. Rebecca makes excuses to avoid hanging out with Enid, and begins to look for an apartment on her own.

Enid finally turns in a project that her art teacher approves of [this is a large part of the story, but it is also best left to be seen in the movie], and her teacher offers to submit her for a full scholarship to a nearby college.

The situation with the art project blows up into a controversy that involves Seymour. He ends up returning to live with his mother, and in therapy. The implication is that Enid will not be seeing him much anymore. Enid fails to show up to move into an apartment with Rebecca, and her friend has finally had enough. Enid's father informs her that the former flame that Enid hates will be moving back in with them. And finally, Enid is informed by her art teacher that, because of the controversy her art project caused, she is being forced to withdraw her nomination for the scholarship.

SPOILERS>>>>>Abandoned by everyone, Enid walks the streets. She looks across the street and sees the man waiting for the discontinued bus. Only, the bus arrives, and he gets on. Next we see Enid with her suitcase in hand. She waits, the bus arrives, and she gets on. The final shot is a wonderfully-photographed dusk scene as the bus crosses a bridge. We cannot see what is on the other side.
<<<<<
In attempting to write this rough synopsis, it occurs to me how very small the numerous details that make up this movie are. The plots meander and are told with tiny touches that accumulate over its running time. It occurred to me during my last viewing of this film that the deadpan sense of humor and focus on minute details of Napoleon Dynamite could not exist if this film had not come first.

The reason this movie works so well is that a great majority of the audience will believe that Enid is RIGHT. The world around her is rife with false and forced sincerity, banality, desperate grasping at elusive visions of happiness, and empty products—and the movie does a fantastic job of sprinkling evocative details throughout. A great many of the laughs generated by the first half of the film arise from recognizing all the luminous details from our own lives, and the thrill that can come from finding a movie that has the same viewpoint toward them that we do.

Enid sees how entirely stupid, false, and pointless virtually every aspect of the suburban reality around her is. And, like any intelligent person, she doesn't want to participate. She wants to be different, to both stand outside the culture and make fun, and also to be sincere in her own actions and feelings. The many passive-aggressive stunts and caustic remarks she makes to her friends can be seen as an attempt to connect to them sincerely [if annoyingly], in contrast to the smiley-faced falseness all around. She is never more offended than when someone takes an outfit she's wearing as a lame attempt at aping an old fashion, when it's “obviously a genuine 1977 punk look!”

The problem is that, wrong, stupid, and false as everything is, if you don't participate in it in some way… you end up on the bus to nowhere. This aspect is what really elevates this movie above being a cute but ultimately empty trifle about lovable nerds, like Napoleon Dynamite, and to a serious statement about a social phenomenon in this country. Ghost World's fully-realized social environment, deep and realistic characters, and delicately-rendered moral conundrum make it about more than just the few characters it follows.

When I first watched this movie in the theater, I recall speculating as to how it would end; maybe Enid would meet someone, or she'd get the art scholarship, or something good would happen. During the last half hour, when all possible avenues of escape were closing to her, I remember the concerned feeling of “WHAT is going to happen to this girl?” There is no doubt that the movie wouldn't have had nearly the impact that it does if it didn't have the courage to follow its story to its natural conclusion, and to conclude it in such a brilliantly artistic and evocative way.

I also remember thinking back to what I had heard from several people who had seen the film before me: that it was hilariously funny! I could only shake my head; sure, there are funny touches, but overall, to me this film is distressingly painful. Probably because I recognize my brother and several of my friends in Enid's struggle to remain free of the bullshit that surrounds us everywhere in American society. And also the resistance to being forced to participate in the society, yet the reality that one must participate or simply disappear.

In perfectly capturing a wide swath of an entire culture, and so evocatively and precisely creating such an accurate picture of a certain generation of Americans and the moral and spiritual dilemmas they face, or refuse to face, this movie really becomes a definitive statement on the life situation and future faced by those born in the 70s and 80s.

Saturday, April 14, 2007

A Slanted, Secular Opinion

In the interest of slanted, secular observation, I offer up one of the prime symbols of Church Authority: Pope John XII. An example of the evils of political authority mixed with ecclesiastical power, the Christian right should take heed and learn from history.

John XII (Rome, c. 937 – May 14, 964), was Pope from 955 to 964, the son of Alberic II (932–954), whom he succeeded as Patrician of Rome in 954, at only eighteen years of age.John XII (Rome, c. 937 – May 14, 964), was Pope from 955 to 964, the son of Alberic II (932–954), whom he succeeded as Patrician of Rome in 954, at only eighteen years of age.

Through his mother Alda of Vienne, he was a seventh generation descendant of Charlemagne.

His original name was Octavian, but when he assumed the papal tiara as successor to Pope Agapetus II (946–955), he adopted the apostolic name of John XII. This was the second example of taking a regnal name upon elevation to the papal chair, the first being Pope John II (533–535). As a temporal ruler, John XII was devoid of the vigour and firmness of his father, and his usage of the papal office, through his controversial private life, he is said to have made a byword of reproach with his civil dignities.

An account of the charges leveled against him from Patrologia Latina includes:

"Then, rising up, the cardinal priest Peter testified that he himself had seen [John XII] celebrate mass without taking communion. John, bishop of Narni, and John, a cardinal deacon, professed that they themselves saw that a deacon had been ordained in a horse stable, but were unsure of the time. Benedict, cardinal deacon, with other co-deacons and priests, said they knew that he had been paid for ordaining bishops, specifically that he had ordained a ten-year-old bishop in the city of Todi... They testified about his adultery, which they did not see with their own eyes, but nonetheless knew with certainty: he had fornicated with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana his father's concubine, with the widow Anna, and with his own niece, and he made the sacred palace into a whorehouse. They said that he had gone hunting publicly; that he had blinded his confessor Benedict, and thereafter Benedict had died; that he had killed John, cardinal subdeacon, after castrating him; and that he had set fires, girded on a sword, and put on a helmet and cuirass. All, clerics as well as laymen, declared that he had toasted to the devil with wine. They said when playing at dice, he invoked Jupiter, Venus and other demons. They even said he did not celebrate Matins and the canonical hours nor did he make the sign of the cross."

In order to protect himself against the intrigues in Rome and the power of Berengar II of Italy (950–963), the Pope called to his aid Otto I the Great (936–973) of Germany, to whom he granted the imperial crown on February 2, 962.

Even before Otto I left Rome John XII had, however, apologized due to his recognition of a power which threatened altogether to overshadow his authority, and had begun to conspire against the new Emperor. His intrigues were discovered by Otto I, who, after defeating and imprisoning Berengar II, returned to Rome. Otto I subsequently summoned a council which deposed John XII, who was in hiding in the mountains of Campania, and elected Pope Leo VIII (963–965) in his stead.

An attempt at a revolt was made by the inhabitants of Rome even before Otto I left the city. Upon his departure, John XII returned at the head of a formidable company of friends and retainers, thus causing Leo VIII to seek safety in immediate flight. The Emperor determined to make an effort in support of Leo VIII, but before he reached the city John XII had died. The manner of his death is uncertain, although it was rumored that he was murdered by a jealous husband whose wife had been discovered receiving the sexual affections of the Pope.

Through his mother Alda of Vienne, he was a seventh generation descendant of Charlemagne.

His original name was Octavian, but when he assumed the papal tiara as successor to Pope Agapetus II (946–955), he adopted the apostolic name of John XII. This was the second example of taking a regnal name upon elevation to the papal chair, the first being Pope John II (533–535). As a temporal ruler, John XII was devoid of the vigour and firmness of his father, and his usage of the papal office, through his controversial private life, he is said to have made a byword of reproach with his civil dignities.

An account of the charges leveled against him from Patrologia Latina includes:

"Then, rising up, the cardinal priest Peter testified that he himself had seen [John XII] celebrate mass without taking communion. John, bishop of Narni, and John, a cardinal deacon, professed that they themselves saw that a deacon had been ordained in a horse stable, but were unsure of the time. Benedict, cardinal deacon, with other co-deacons and priests, said they knew that he had been paid for ordaining bishops, specifically that he had ordained a ten-year-old bishop in the city of Todi... They testified about his adultery, which they did not see with their own eyes, but nonetheless knew with certainty: he had fornicated with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana his father's concubine, with the widow Anna, and with his own niece, and he made the sacred palace into a whorehouse. They said that he had gone hunting publicly; that he had blinded his confessor Benedict, and thereafter Benedict had died; that he had killed John, cardinal subdeacon, after castrating him; and that he had set fires, girded on a sword, and put on a helmet and cuirass. All, clerics as well as laymen, declared that he had toasted to the devil with wine. They said when playing at dice, he invoked Jupiter, Venus and other demons. They even said he did not celebrate Matins and the canonical hours nor did he make the sign of the cross."

In order to protect himself against the intrigues in Rome and the power of Berengar II of Italy (950–963), the Pope called to his aid Otto I the Great (936–973) of Germany, to whom he granted the imperial crown on February 2, 962.

Even before Otto I left Rome John XII had, however, apologized due to his recognition of a power which threatened altogether to overshadow his authority, and had begun to conspire against the new Emperor. His intrigues were discovered by Otto I, who, after defeating and imprisoning Berengar II, returned to Rome. Otto I subsequently summoned a council which deposed John XII, who was in hiding in the mountains of Campania, and elected Pope Leo VIII (963–965) in his stead.

An attempt at a revolt was made by the inhabitants of Rome even before Otto I left the city. Upon his departure, John XII returned at the head of a formidable company of friends and retainers, thus causing Leo VIII to seek safety in immediate flight. The Emperor determined to make an effort in support of Leo VIII, but before he reached the city John XII had died. The manner of his death is uncertain, although it was rumored that he was murdered by a jealous husband whose wife had been discovered receiving the sexual affections of the Pope.

Friday, April 13, 2007

The Holy Trinity: Id, Ego, Super Ego

You'd be surprised at all the stories I carry around in my head. Well, if you knew me, you probably wouldn't be that surprised. I was always better at creating worlds rather than living in the "real" one. I am the classic withdrawn type. Reality has never really held much for me. Too much pain. Too much disappointment. I just love the power of control over destiny and fate. You could call my id, ego, and superego the holy trinity of my soul and the many worlds which co-exist within this inner existence.

I try not to think in a single genre. Science Fiction, fantasy, horror, comedy, action, adventure: my mind is quite multi-faceted. The building blocks are snatches of old movies, life experiences, history, and forgotten myth. I know when I have a "special" tale when it evokes feelings in me. That is one of the more disturbing parts of my life: I need to invoke artifical sensations because of the fact that I simply cannot feel otherwise.

Perhaps that is why I love writing so much. Fleshing out my soul, giving substance to the thereal parts of my spirit. Sometimes what I say seems wacky and nonsensical, but there is always more to what I write than what it seems. I tend to think symbolically and put in so many subtle pieces laced into every sentence that it is easy to overlook them. I think that is something that has irked me most about some "professionals" who have critiqued my past work. These individuals don't read a story; they examine it. It is the difference between a psychiatrist and a friend. The former will dissect your mind, understand the structure of it, why you do the things you do. But they don't "know" you. They gloss over that unique character, never truly understand the real you. A friend hears what you are really saying, gathers a sense of who you are. They comprehend the whole rather than the parts.

This is the problem of specialization. We become so finely honed and sharpened in one field that we atrophy in others. Perhaps there are flaws in my works, but there is more heart than in most successful titles. Do I need to read yet another book about a struggling father and son? Do I need to read another book on how to improve myself? Or should I read something that actually dares to be different? Something that actually challenges convention, is willing to disturb or anger individuals because it causes them to think? Novels and the publishing industry have become so generalized, so unwilling to move beyond what works, that we, the audience, have become desensitized to the glory of literature. That is the real reason the publishing industry is suffering now. We no longer get that thrill from something new, something fresh, something that makes us think. We need books that challenge us, that make us feel and question. That is the purpose of art: to transcend the now in order to understand the whole. If one can't do that, why even bother to be?

Problems with Politics

Hiya there, fellow peeps. Haven't been up to much lately. I finally came up with a new idea to post up on YouTube. I call it "What Most See". Hopefully it lives up to the concept. If not, well, a glorious failure is still glorious, yes?

I've been thumbing through the media lately. Seen the big uproar surrounding Nancy Pelosi's visit to Syria, which I believe she has every right to do. The far right can piss and moan about the infringement on the sovereignty of the Executive Branch by this "traitorous act" which is undermining American influence abroad. Let's not face the hypocritical truth that Bush has been infringing on both the Judicial and Legislative Branches of government since assuming office: Appointments without Congressional approval, searches without warrants, politicizing of various posts, etc. Last I saw, the American people voted for a change in government policy and at least the Democrats are willing to try anything to not only salvage a badly battered American image but also seek out a new path after the repeated headbutting this administration has done against the wall in Iraq which is not working. By the by, Bush can piss and moan about how Congress is undermining him when A) He doesn't seem to eevn understand the machinations of government. The President isn't blessed with all mighty power despite what his entire life has led him to believe (the glory of the aristocracy in politics) and B) The last official I saw who attempted to centralize authority in his own office, created prison camps outside judicial control, stripped citizens of various civil liberties, created a system of corruption led by dubious figures, and started wars in order to cover up a failing domestic policy was Hitler. Yes, people, we have ourselves a Hitler here despite what so many conservatives wish to say. The honest truth is that many people are using the same exact excuses to defend Bush that they used for Hitler. He doesn't know what is going on in his administration. It's all the officials serving under him doing these unlawful acts. Bush wants what is best for us. I don't know where any American learned their policy on leadership, but I was taught that if something went wrong during your tenure whether it was the highest of subordinates or someone at the bottom of the foodchain, you were responsible. What we get with Bush is denial, denial, denial. He sacrifices everyone beneath him in order to stay atop the power structure.

Bush himself is the greatest illusion. It is now coming out that he is not the incredibly devout Christian he made himself out to be. He made the greatest of proclamations that he was going to work with the new congressional majority only to continue on stubbornly and then point the finger at Democrats when things aren't working when what he is doing has been what hasn't worked in the past sex years!

I remember when Bush was running for office way back in 2000 when he was being presented as the "moral" candidate after the debauchery of Clinton. Let's face facts. Bush has proven himself far more immoral than Clinton ever was. His daughters are complete whores and you can flame me for that one if you want. I don't remember any stories of Chelsea using a fake ID to buy alcohol. Bush has given kickbacks to corporations and the rich, stripping the middle class of their monetary standing. People can say all they want about "trickle down" economics but if it didn't work in the 80s then why would it work now? The proper way to describe trickle down economics isn't to say that when the wealthy become wealthier they invest into the economy and bring us all up with them. Trickle Down Economics is really nothing more than the rich being a sponge and water being currency. Only when the rich are saturated to bursting does anything seep down to us below. The only way to get that money to us, the lower classes, is to squeeze it out of them. Otherwise, that currency will forever remain in their bloated form.

And though this rant is beginning to stretch, I want to point out that final problem with this nation: the growth of religious fervor in government. Now I have nothing against the faithful as long as they realize that their faith has a place and that is in their homes and not in mine. I am tired of the fundamentalists trying to "save my soul" and defend their actions in the vaguest and most subtle of terms. First, most say that America is a Christian nation and was founded on Christian principles. That is of itself a lie. America is based on the importance of the individual, freedom, and liberty; all founded on the philosophies of Greek democracy (who were not Christian at the time) and to a smaller extent Roman law and English common law which evolved from the majority forcing a weakening of the minority. The founders of this country were largely Deists. That is a brand of Christianity which believes God created the Universe and then stepped back to allow it to run on it's own: the best example would be that of a watchmaker creating an elaborate design and then letting it run unhindered. These men believed in the glory of God, but they also believed that God was not a part of the real world anymore. It was up to man, with the tools God gave him, to create something safe, secure, and just. The problem is most fundamentalists believe God is still walking around down here telling us what to do, telling us to bury our heads in the sand rather than to question. There is only one type of figure who never allows you to ask why and that is a tyrant for if they don't have an answer then there isn't one. Second, Christians of this extremely conservative streak bely the collapse of morality in this nation and the need to reinforce our schools and culture with Christian upbringing. Amazing that they label themselves purer than the secular variety of citizen when the Catholic Church and even numerous Protestant sects have had harsh revelations come to light even worse than that of the secular variety of priests knowingly being allowed to molest children, preachers taking donated money to indulge in drugs and homosexual affairs (God would be so proud), and the only type of education most fundamentalists believe in is the reading of the bible. Fundamentalists in this country are taking on the form of the Islamic extremists we are currently dealing with in our war on terror. We thought the enemy was outside our borders. The truth is they have been within ours for years. Bomb an abortion clinic. Afterall, they are "murdering" children. Keep vegetables on life support. God would want that. Don't believe in evolution. It is against God. But didn't the bible explain evolution in Genesis? Last I read, Genesis explained existence along the lines of the Big Bang (Darkness and Light separating), the creation of planets, the emergence of water, life appearing from that water, and then man emerging from the animals. That is evolution though written in very poetic form. But hey, I'm openminded. Guess I can see over the fence built by my less illuminated forebears.

This rant has surely gone on too long and I know I have created enough agitation for today. So I leave you with the thoughts above to digest as you will. Hopefully it doesn't prove too unsettling to your gut instincts.

A Modern Interpretation of the Ten Commandments


Today I've decided to comment on the Ten Commandments from a Third Millenium AD perspective. *Author's note: I was aided in this compilation by the alluring Trish.

1) "Do not worship any other gods." What about our Hollywood stars, Music Legends, or pin-up models? And didn't the Catholics undermine this with their creation of a pantheon of "demi-gods" termed "saints"?

2) "Do not make any idols." Come on, the term has taken on such a 180 degree turn this sounds ludicrous. Hell, the number one show in America makes billions off of doing this very "evil" act! Does this mean Simon Cowell, Paula Abdul, and Randy Jackson are in league with the Devil? In fact, since most of America has a hand in creating the next "American Idol" doesn't that mean that modern American television is really only setting us up to do further acts for our Dark Lord? Did God, television is corrupting us! And they thought Metal Music was the Devil's portal into our souls.

3) "Do not misuse the name of God." Ok, Heavenly Father, you created pain. If I bust my fucking thumb with a hammer or suffer a nutshot, there is no way in Hell I'm "not" using your name!

4) "Keep the sabbath holy." Hey, you told us not to work but to rest on the seventh day, just like you. Do you know how much work it is to get up before noon, shit, shower, and shave, put on something clean (which there never is by this point in the week), drag my ass out to Church, and struggle to stay awake through the same damn sermon I've heard since childhood? That sounds like a lot of work to me. So then, by staying in bed and resting am I not keeping the sabbath holy?

5) "Honor your father and mother." My father is an abusive, recovering alcoholic. My mother is a nagging, bi-polar, anxiety ridden shell who passively allowed my father to break my nose at age 5, strip my ass of an inch of flesh when I was eight, and numerous times scar me emotionally throughout my adolescence. Now, I am supposed to honor them? Isn't this really just an early attempt to indoctrinate us into a system of authoritarian rule where we accept the will of "our elders" without question? Yeah, ol' W. Bush has proven how effective this is.

6) "Do not murder." Hey God, weren't you the one who told His people to start war after war and kill all the enemy? Didn't you wipe out the innocent firstborn of each Egyptian prior to the Exodus rather than the actual individuals responsible for the Jews slavery? And how many people did you "murder" in the Flood? Oh, but that's OK. You're God. Yeah, right. By the by, someone comes at me with a knife that bitch is going down and staying down, Heaven be damned.

7) "Do not commit adultery." No worries here. Marriage is on the decline. Pretty soon, this will be all but impossible. Unless you're gay. They're the only ones who want to get married anymore.

8) "Do not steal." Have to agree. This one bastard stole my boots once at college. Never forgave him. If God can send someone to Hell for this they belong there. Enjoy my boots in Hell, you thieving bastard!

9) "Do not lie."I quote the great Obi-Wan Kenobi when it comes to saying anything. "What I told you was true...from a certain point of view." So then, isn't a lie really just the truth from a different angle. And if God is against the truth in any form then isn't he just as bad as the Nazis. You won't silence the truth, you oppressive bastard!

10) "Do not covet." Come on. This is the driving force behind capitalism as well as modern society. If we don't want then we won't create goals. Without goals there is no drive. Without drive there is no reason to try. If we don't try then aren't we just slackers without any real prupose in life? So then, does God just want us to sit around, get fat, and simply worship Him? The man sounds like he has really low self-esteem. You need too much attention, you whore. Think I'd rather have a house, a full refrigerator, and my X-Box rather than be your spiritual slave. Manna from Heaven. Think I'd rather have pizza.

Coke: The Choice of God's Generation

I so wish I had a picture of this it hurts. Today I discovered Coke became upset when they discovered a small, foreign film, Seven Kilometers From Jerusalem, had a controversial scene where, get ready for it...Jesus drinks a coke. I know, you're waiting for the controversial part. Jesus drinking a coke. There's a problem with that? We've had a fucking polar bear drinking the fucking soda for years now. A FUCKING POLAR BEAR!!!That's beverage bestiality! Don't believe me, ask your local Baptist.

So Coca-Cola, Inc., decided that the idea of the Son of God drinking their beverage was a bad image for their company. Finally, God answers the centuries old question of which was the best brand of cola on Earth. Why is Coca-Cola forsaking Him? In their own words, the Coke company said, "We would not be interested in this type of product placement." Excuse me?

Exactly what is so damn sacriligious about Jesus drinking a coke? Can you tell me that? What? Are we supposed to believe the Messiah never shit or pissed? Wait, wait, no of course he did. He crapped marble and pissed spring water. Really folks, this is the second damn Jesus controversy in the space of a week. This is getting ridiculous. Is the very idea of associating Jesus with chocolate or soda so detrimental to the moral fabric of this nation? For Christ's sake, Catholics have been pouring wine for underage kids to imbibe in Jesus' name for centuries. That's permissible and a coke isn't? Yeah, something like Coke, bad for Jesus. Hey, but let's get a picture of an Irish priest chugging Mad Dog 20/20.

I don't see why Coke just doesn't latch onto this. I mean, this could be the biggest damn promotional scheme in history. Bigger than "Where's the Beef" or "The Energizer Rabbit" or God knows what other schemes exist that my fever addled brain can't seem to drag up. We could have Jesus turn water into coke, perform the miracle of returning Lazarus to life by pouring a bottle of the soda down his throat, and even be crucified by a host of Pepsi employees with Jesus lamenting to his father in Heaven, "Forgive them for they do not understand your flavor." Coke could finally have a viable slogan to combat Pepsi's "Choice of a New Generation", or "You Got the Right One Baby". I can see it now: Coke, drink it or go to hell.

This is what we've been waiting for! Coke, come on. Run with this. Imagine all the free press. All the public interest. You could reinvent the very image of Jesus. Even change the company logo. Copyright the cross. It's an awesome design! You need this, Coca-Cola. The soda industry needs this. America needs this. Save us from bad taste. Give us the Messiah's choice!

God's Country


Hello Hello. Sorry about the late posting. I had a long twelve hour shift behind me made longer by the co-worker I had to deal with. I won't name names, part of the reason being he may read this and I don't need that type of headache. Yes, I know, I'm a pussy. I was never the confrontational type. Passive Aggressive: that's my bag.

So anyway, for four hours I had to deal with this man's rambling. The guy is a Jesus nut. Seriously. He spouted off about how man is incapable of destroying the planet because it was created by God and only God had the power to destroy the Earth. Likewise, he went on and on about how Global Warming isn't real. Just because two scietists to every one claims that Global Warming is a real threat, we should believe the one because the minority always has the correct perception. I love the flawed nature of that argument having seen the debacle of scientists supporting Mbeki in South Africa who claimed HIV did not lead to AIDS and that vitamins could defeat the virus.

People like this just simply agitate me. The man is, for all intents and purposes, part of the herd. He seems to have glossed over the articles that have pointed out how the Bush administration has bullied scientists into hiding findings that support the theory of Global Warming. He likewise loves to point out the hypocritical rantings of men such as Rush Limbaugh, who I love to call the drug addicted balloon (balloon because whenever he goes off he sounds like air squealing; also the fact he dropped weight, yada yada. Ok, I'm tired so the analogy isn't going to get fully explained), who all claim it's a left wing conspiracy.

My co-worker loved pointing out Al Gore only put out An Inconvenient Truth because he owns a company which would benefit from policies that would support cleaning the air. Yeah, and Bush's/Cheney's connections to the oil industry and Haliburton had nothing to do with their invasion of Iraq. Love the short sighted thinking of my co-worker.

But back to my co-worker and Global Warming. Now I don't know where he got this info, but my "friend" says that the Earth isn't the only planet warming up. He claims scientists have discovered the other planets warming up as well. Now this I know is not true because I read virtually everything in the papers and this is something not likely to slip by me. It also sounds like a full of shit statement since, A) a large percentage of the planets in our solar system do not have an atmosphere so the link there is impossible to make, B) we have only been sending probes out into space for the past fifty years, roughly, and we have no hard material to even begin researching what these planets are truly like versus millions of years of solid shit to go through allowing us to give true rsearch on what Earth was like and how it is changing, and C) Go into any city and tell me that the amount of pollution not only makes breathing difficult and seeing anything at a distance impossible but also how much hotter it is in city limits. That last is common sense but out here in Louisville "edumacation" is a hard thing to come by.

I work with Jesus nuts. I swear. This guy believes the world is quickly coming to an end because the Democrats are back in "semi-power" and Hillary may win the election for President (which if anyone even has an inkling of political knowledge knows that is further and further becaoming a non-possibility).

It's morons like this that enable Bush to push through his ludicrous policies. The Bush administration has run this country into the ground by dividing our nation and turning us against one another so that while we are too concerned with "traitors in our midst" he is able to run things as he likes. With the continuing revelations of corruption in his government, something I am still surprised his supporters gloss over, is it any wonder I become angrier and angrier with people who support him. People simply stick their fucking heads in the sand and refuse to recognize this man is either A)incompetent, B) likewise corrupt as hell, or C) both. People keep saying Bush didn't know what was going on so can't be held responsible. That is a crock of shit sense he is the President and this is happening on his watch! WHen I was an officer in the Army I was always told if something happens on your watch you are responsible regardless because these are your subordinates and it is your job to manage them. By the by, most people used this argument of the leader not being responsible for his subordinates corrupt practices when explainging the great leader who was Hitler.

I have said for at least the past three years the level of corruption that is going to come to light in this administration is going to rival anything that has ever existed in America. From the companies who have embezzled funds in Iraq, the tax cuts that largely favor the rich, a politicized bureaucracy, increasing executive authority beyond legal limits (wire tapping without warrants, lack of Habeas Corpus for insurgents, etc.) and more, this man simply roasts my nuts!

I'm really beginning to go rabid so I'm simply going to ease my hands off the keyboard and sign off.

A Fellow Traveler

I've recently been speaking with Qelqoth over at his site, The Cult of Qelqoth. We've been chatting up our various tales which have agitated the local Catholic communities of our respective lands. You can read that story here.

Now how could I respond to this tale? With an honesty skewed by a warped viewpoint of the world of course:

I read the link you sent. LOL, I think I understand a little of the animosity the Catholics felt over that. Screwing a decapitated head with his "holy sceptor"; how rude!

You should have seen how Catholics reacted over here in the US to the slew of American shows which portrayed numerous priestly carnal "trangressions", like the priest who asked children to strip naked in front of him to confess while he "laid hands on them". But nothing matched the case of the one priest who molested dozens of people and when his victims came forward they discovered the statute of limitations had run out and they could do nothing about it. That has to be a kick in the teeth: finally finding the nerve to confront your abuser only to be told, "Eh, so what. You took too long. Besides, you probably liked it."

I always said it was obvious to me early on that the Church was rearing boys for sexual pleasures. Afterall, they do dress choirboys up in dresses and ask them to sing soprano. How much more feminine can you get?


By the by, I always got into trouble for mocking Christianity from Jesus being a zombie, he was raised from the dead, to premarital sex between God and Mary (having to use an angel for the go between, I mean come on. Be a man and make your own moves! Your God for God's sake!), his making Joseph pick up his responsibilities as a father (God really sets the bar for being a negligent papa. Didn't support his kid financially, didn't help raise him physically, just let's him die, then takes all the credit for his greatness!), and finally some of the truly strange stories I found in the bible. There is a talking donkey in one tale. I shit you not, a talking donkey!

So do I believe I am going to Hell for what I've done? Come on, the Catholics don't even believe in Hell anymore so what do I have to worry about?

Choco Jesus


If I may ask, what is all the fuss about the choco fellow above me? Dear God, it's the first rendering of Jesus without a loincloth! Sure, you can see his Messianic wang, but seriously. Sometimes Christians are too uptight on sexual matters. I can't help but wonder if they are overcompensating for former sexual abuse or to conceal perverted proclivities. What is so bad about the above sculpture? I mean really.

If you haven't heard by now, there was an uproar started by the Catholic League over an artist's chocolate rendering of the Christ being crucified. The main point of contention was the fact that his snickers and milkduds are on display. It's rather laughable since nudity has been a part of Christian art for centuries. Take a look at the statue "David", a piece sculptured to represent the former king of biblical lore. Then there is the roof of the Sistine Chapel with a grand mural comprised of a full frontal shot of Adam (go to my "contact" section to catch a glimpse of some divine nakedness). To look at the painting, Adam must have been cold. I could go on and on.

So, there is great outrage over the fact that Jesus is on display in this "wicked" pose for all to see. I found the sculpture quite amusing. For once, we could actually eat the flesh of Christ and not view ourselves as cannibals. I always found that part of the sacrament a tad weird. Jesus telling people to, "Eat me." Wait, that comes off even worse. Anyway...

In a way, one could see this as a statement on the nature of Easter. To some, the holiday is in rememberance of Christ dying and being resurrected. From death life springs anew, Easter actually being the pagan celebration of the start of Spring after Earth's death from Winter...but anyway. Sorry, the scholastic sem-atheist in me. Then there is the modern generation of kids who only know Easter for the bunny and his choco treats. Is this the artist's way of creating a hybrid of the dual nature of Easter? Has Christ become the world's largest choco bunny?

Anyway, I'm veering off of the subject. All I can say is, if Christians hate nudity so much and are so fearful of their "fleshly weakness" then castrate yourselves, accept science since invitro fertilization would free you from all that "nasty sex", and adopt the burqas of the Heathen Muslims since they likewise believe that seeing a bare woman is enough to cause one to turn into a raving sex maniac.

In truth, most Christians believe that man is unable to control himself. Where does this line of thinking come from? I do realize that the very teachings of Christianity encourage a mindless style of thought. Do as you're told, think the way the bible tells you to, act in accordance with ecclesiastical authority. Christian complaints scream of a fear of thought and free will. But why should man think? Man's mind is base and fleshly. Give a man too much time to think and he shall only come up with his own demise. Man can't be trusted. Idle hands are the Devil's workshop. We're all inherently evil. What does that say about the One who created us? Likewise, doesn't that seem a very negative outlook to have of one's fellow man? All this faith in a divine will and the possibility of perfection undermined by the belief that we are unworthy of it. That is such a disparate, divergent way of thinking; so masochistic and degrading, accepting of suffering because humanity does not deserve better. Through pain, tribulation, we find pleasure, Paradise.

Sometimes I look at Christian thought and can only shake my head.