In any group there are three kinds of people: The leader, the follower and the asshole. It never fails and try as you might, no group will be successful without all three elements present.
The leader leads, the follower follows, and the asshole questions the leader and antagonizes the follower. All three factions are crucial to the dynamics of any group. Without the asshole, the leader wouldn't conquer the little challenges such as keeping a group together, while the follower wouldn't learn to stand up and solve an issue on their own. Assholes truly are a needed commodity in the world. Unfortunately for the group, the job of an asshole is to be an asshole. Trust me; it's not as easy as people may think. We've got a tough job despite it being only a single track agenda. I was told as a child that I could be anything I wanted to be when I grew up, so I became an asshole. It's a thankless job, and it's not easy to fill the shoes of a good asshole. We're often ostracized from "normal" social groups for being too ‘verb adjective', but – that's what we do. We are also painfully undervalued. Be that as it may, I feel it is my duty to try and shed light on the two distinct breeds of assholes.
Think of this as my way of saying that your today sucks, but that doesn't mean my tomorrow has to.
A good asshole will always have:
A sense of humor.
A good asshole can make almost anything funny, even jokes about themselves. However, making anything funny isn't enough; they've got to know when it's appropriate to make something funny and when to plain shut up. If someone asks "Do these pants make me look fat?", the good asshole will respond with a light hearted "No.", give a pregnant pause and follow up with "The fat makes you look fat." The bad asshole will simply reply with a "yes." It would have been better to say nothing because "yes" isn't funny.
Someone to kick when they are down.
Often times we come across someone who is having a bad day. The good asshole will remind their victim that certain aspects of their life sucks or that, despite various other achievements, there is one irritating challenge not yet met.
This can be best seen in the "Do these pants make me look fat?" question where their victim obviously has concern about their weight and it is likely that this is the unmet challenge.
A bad asshole will devalue the achievements already attained by their victim or make a general statement about the status of various elements in their victim's life to a degree of being downright ugly (which, from a 3rd person perspective, is funny to a good asshole).
Someone to remind them that they are an asshole.
All assholes know they are an asshole. They're told this religiously, but a good asshole needs to be encouraged to continue to be a good asshole, or they go bad very quickly. Good assholes love to make someone laugh (though often it is themselves who laugh). As such, assholes are in their own rights attention whores – narcissistic attention whores, but attention whores nonetheless. It is important to note that the reminders given to assholes must be gentle.
Assholes can take being treated accordingly, but nagging an asshole about being an asshole does one of two things: Makes them a bad asshole or makes them a follower. On the same token, forgetting to remind the asshole that they are about to miss a perfect moment to be an asshole will confuse and dilute the asshole into becoming a mindless drone.
Trust me when I say this – the only thing worse than a bad asshole is an ex-asshole. They're unfunny with horrible timing and really bad taste. They strive for a level of excellence that they'll never achieve – like the 70-year old grandma who still lives in her whoring glory days by wearing a Limited Too ensemble to the grocery store. You know the deal - sports bra that supports... nothing, "hooker red" lipstick that serves to only accentuate the unique hue of antique yellow her teeth have become, 6 months overdue for a re-dye red hair in an 80's coiffe/bouffant thing, a tattoo of what I'm guessing was a baby that now looks like a tattoo of Edvard Munch's "The Scream," spray tanned leather covering she calls "skin," and booty shorts that say "juicy" which are loosely draped over the ass yet is somehow shoved up it as if to indicate that her ass was eating the shorts.
Intelligence and Self Control.
A good asshole has some degree of intelligence. People love to hate the smart asses, but their points are generally well founded. It happens to be that their means of delivery can seem sophomoric and infantile with respect to the topic. People will laugh with the good asshole or smart ass, whereas they'll laugh at the dumbass bad asshole or not at all. Thus, the dumbass counters the point of pimping themselves out for the laugh of the crowd.
I have never heard anyone say, "What's this guy doing here, he's such a smartass."
I have heard people say, "What's this guy doing here, he's such a dumbass."
Furthermore, a good asshole won't be too much of an asshole with the wrong issues or will refrain from being an asshole altogether. Good assholes know when it's time to be an asshole. Bad assholes do not.
A sense of self worth.
This can be best summed up as "Poor planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on mine." One might also infer that when comparing the good and bad asshole, it is akin to the comparison of a geisha and a butterfly girl; the geisha gets respect although she in essence is a whore, while the other gets no respect and is also a whore.
A good asshole will know when it is inappropriate to whore themselves out for the laugh. An ugly baby is funny, while a dead baby isn't.
The bad asshole will try to make them both funny at exactly the wrong time, while the good asshole will make only the former funny at the right time.
Effective time management
Assholes, good and bad alike, know the value of their time and in general are great people to go to when you have time management issues. This isn't to say that the price of consultation isn't light, or that you'll like their solution, but it is to say that the good asshole will manage your time effectively to get the most from and for you. While the bad asshole also manages time effectively, they'll simply tell you to go away as a form of better managing their own time by not wasting it on you. In short, at least the good asshole will help you.
So, next time you run into a good asshole, be sure to let them know that they're doing a good job of being an asshole by calling them an asshole. They'll be an asshole to you for it, but you deserve it.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Safety in Satanism
In the interest of safety for myself and others, I think I'm going to become a Satanist.
Think about it: In this day and age of Jews killing Muslims, Muslims killing Jews, abortion clinics bombed by Christians, and Christians being arrested in China, it seems that the safest faith to have is in the Dark Deceiver himself.
When was the last time you heard about a group of Satanists kidnapping people or strapping bombs to themselves? I mean, once in a while you'll hear about a misguided teen with an unhealthy interest in occult practices who becomes involved in a serious graffiti incident, but for the most part, Satanists are just keeping to themselves and keeping out of trouble.
Considering the significant trouble caused by Christians, Muslims, and Jews, it's odd that schools and communities always label the Satanist kids as at risk teens. You'd think it would be the other way around. Sure, the kid with the pentagram necklace may draw on the cafeteria table with a sharpie, but he's not going to grow up to wear dynamite leg-warmers on a bus full of people.
Going the Satanist route honestly seems pretty harmless. Besides needing to sacrifice a baby goat once in a while or organize an occasional Black Mass Orgy, the expectations are relatively low and the rewards are plenty. Check it out-- as a Satanist, I:
Get to sleep in on Saturday and Sunday mornings
Don't have to involve myself in a physical or spiritual jihad
Don't have to proselytize and stir the turd with everyone
Can eat bacon and put cheese on my burger
Can listen to all the Rock N' Roll I want
Don't have to be terrified of sex or disgusted with my body
I could go on, but you get the idea. Who's with me on this? Maybe we could give Anton LeVey a call and see if there's a nice local SatanistChurch in the area. If not, we could meet at my house. Or we could just take a Ouija board over to the bar and grab a beer or something. Whatever.
Pace Yourself
Today, my good friend CNN tells me that people over seventy who consume one to seven alcoholic beverages a week have a "significantly lower risk of heart problems or death than those who didn't imbibe.???
Read it again -- Lower risk of DEATH. My first thought is to ask the question, "Does this mean they maybe won't die, ever? As in their risk for overall death -- impending, no-way-around-it death -- is lessened???? But I know that isn't what they mean, exactly. They mean a "lower risk of death, tomorrow.??? Which is fine. I'm guessing that's a risk you want to manage when you're over seventy.
Hell, it's a risk I want to manage NOW, so I'm thinking I should get a jump start on managing my death-risk. You can bet those older folks clinking glasses seven times a week didn't start knockin 'em back on their sixty-eighth birthday. They've had to be in training longer than that.
These are the health articles I love. As soon as I get so discouraged about trans-fats and pesticides and frankenfoods and the price of organics and poorly tested drugs and impure water and cleaning product residues and fiber intake and processed, white devil-flour that I'm certain I'll poison and pickle myself into an early grave, the media kicks me something like this. Something that says "Yeah, we said all that other stuff, but who are we kidding? Drink up!??? Like at camp when you hear that chilling story about the guy with the hook for an arm, running around these very woods, killing people, and just when you're all scared and ready to call your mom, somebody asks the camp counselor if it's true, and he says "Naw, none of that's true.??? Sweet relief!
So good news, folks! Clean livin' isn't all it's cracked up to be. Besides encouraging me to continue with the cocktails, this story cements my plan to tie it all back on when I start my coast down the slope. And you can bet I'll start up again with the smokes, too, because who can enjoy her nice, old-lady-brandy-drunk without a cigarette between her wrinkled fingers?
Read it again -- Lower risk of DEATH. My first thought is to ask the question, "Does this mean they maybe won't die, ever? As in their risk for overall death -- impending, no-way-around-it death -- is lessened???? But I know that isn't what they mean, exactly. They mean a "lower risk of death, tomorrow.??? Which is fine. I'm guessing that's a risk you want to manage when you're over seventy.
Hell, it's a risk I want to manage NOW, so I'm thinking I should get a jump start on managing my death-risk. You can bet those older folks clinking glasses seven times a week didn't start knockin 'em back on their sixty-eighth birthday. They've had to be in training longer than that.
These are the health articles I love. As soon as I get so discouraged about trans-fats and pesticides and frankenfoods and the price of organics and poorly tested drugs and impure water and cleaning product residues and fiber intake and processed, white devil-flour that I'm certain I'll poison and pickle myself into an early grave, the media kicks me something like this. Something that says "Yeah, we said all that other stuff, but who are we kidding? Drink up!??? Like at camp when you hear that chilling story about the guy with the hook for an arm, running around these very woods, killing people, and just when you're all scared and ready to call your mom, somebody asks the camp counselor if it's true, and he says "Naw, none of that's true.??? Sweet relief!
So good news, folks! Clean livin' isn't all it's cracked up to be. Besides encouraging me to continue with the cocktails, this story cements my plan to tie it all back on when I start my coast down the slope. And you can bet I'll start up again with the smokes, too, because who can enjoy her nice, old-lady-brandy-drunk without a cigarette between her wrinkled fingers?
Abstinence Only
I bet you've been wondering about my under-informed opinion on sex education. You're in luck, reader, because you're about to get it. (The opinion, not the education... or the sex.)
Okay, here we go. On the one side, we have Abstinence-Only programs. These programs teach that the only safe way to express sexuality is within the bounds of marriage. Specific information about disease and pregnancy prevention is not included. The reasoning for this: if you teach kids about sex, they will be more likely to have it.
On the other side, we have Comprehensive sex education programs. Most of you probably had this growing up. Remember the day you walked in late to health class and the teacher was putting a condom on a banana? Of course you do -- the memory arouses you to this day. That's what we're talking about here. These programs teach kids about contraception and disease prevention. The reasoning behind this method: kids are curious and talkative; better for them to get helpful, accurate information from a teacher than be dangerously misinformed by a friend.
Abstinence-Only programs are normally supported by religious conservatives, while Comprehensive programs are favored by every prominent American health organization. Which one do you think received $170 million in federal funding in 2005? Ostensibly, both programs have the same goal -- keeping teenage bodies STD-less and-baby-free -- so you'd think that federal funding would go to the one that DOCTORS approve of. You'd be wrong, though. The money goes to the Abstinence-Only programs.
You've probably noticed the slight bitterness in my tone, so I'll just go ahead and voice a few of my problems with the Abstinence-Only programs.
1) Statistics show that kids are going to explore their sexuality no matter what adults tell them. Virginity pledges may delay intercourse, but usually do not prevent it. We should give kids the information they need to keep themselves safe and knowledgeable.
2) Promoting abstinence-until-marriage is a slap to the face of homosexuals in the U.S., seeing as how, in most states, they are prevented from being married.
3) Keeping children from learning about their sexuality propagates the taboo on human sexuality. Our sexuality is a powerful, meaningful part of our identities; it seems to me to be a huge disservice to teens to attempt to keep them in the dark about such matters.
Teaching kids about the wonders and dangers of sexuality will not turn them into raging nymphomaniacs. Using Abstinence-Only programs to avoid teen pregnancy and STDs is the rough equivalent of teaching kids that the only appropriate way to avoid a broken leg is to avoid any activity that involves walking and running... until marriage.
Jesus, once again, tries to kill Halloween buzz
The time of year has come once again for many Christian parents to debate whether it's okay to have fun on Halloween or if they should, instead, make their children wait an extra day to celebrate the much lamer All Saints Day.
For the most part, the controversy surrounding Halloween has little to do with practical matters -- say, your child ingesting a razor blade hidden in a candy apple -- and is more focused on the pagan roots of the Holiday. Originally celebrated as a part of a Celtic harvest festival, Halloween marks the time when Samhain, Celtic Lord of Death, sent evil spirits out to attack humans; the logical recourse of humans being to dress up like evil spirits themselves in attempts to fool the demons and avoid harm.
Today, Wiccans still recognize the holiday as a sacred and powerful time, but most everyone else simply finds it to be a good excuse to suit up and gorge themselves on wacky taffy and mini Mr. Goodbars. Is that really so wrong?
Apparently it is. An article I just read suggests that "those who celebrate Halloween either are unaware of its roots, or are intentionally promoting a world where evil is lauded and viewed as an ultimate power??? It is not considered an option, apparently, to be aware of the roots and realize that your kids just want some freakin' candy. The article went on to say that "to counter the evil influence of Halloween, we need to join together and celebrate the reality of the heroic efforts of Christian saints over the evil in their day???
Do I get candy on All Saints Day? Can I dress up like Frankenstein’s monster? Do I get to TP the trees outside Old Man Montgomery's house? If the answer to these questions is no, you can stuff that lame ass holiday up your ass.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
11 Things Women Won't Tell You (and probably why I am divorced)
Editor's note: Some personal thoughts will slip into this list so rants are impossible to avoid.
1. Everything a woman buys for herself – from shoes to skirts and even shampoo – really costs 20 percent more than she tells you. (Nice to know "trust" is doomed in every relationship.)
2. She actually thinks about sex -- with you -- a lot. It's just that by the end of the day she's too tired to do anything about it. (Then just lay there. Not like you do much during anyway!!!)
3. She is just as nervous about commitment as you are. (Why? I'm the one who is going to suffer.)
4. She may be modern and independent, but she still wants you to be "the man." (Proof all women are schizophrenic.)
5. Her ex-boyfriends were not completely terrible in bed. (Are you saying she wasn't a virgin? That lying c**t!!!)
6. She is scared she will turn into her mother. So the worst insult you can throw at a woman you love is, “You’re acting just like your mother.” (Insult? It was the truth!!! Only difference was her mother loved me.)
7. She wants you to be jealous – but just a little bit. (Make up your mind! Do I punch the guy out or tell him to have you home by midnight?)
8. Yes, she fantasizes about hot celebrity guys, but that doesn’t mean she wants you to be one of them. (Is that why we had sex with the lights out?)
9. She tells her girlfriends more than she will ever admit to you but less than you fear. (I have video to the contrary.)
10. She really does notice and appreciate all the chores you do though she won't admit it. (No sex. No thank you. And men are the savages in a relationship? Bull shit! Take out your own trash till you throw a pity fuck my way.)
11. She loves you with all her heart, but she still gets wistful about the fact that she'll never feel that falling-in-love sizzle and spark again. (Blame #2 for the lack of sizzle and spark.)
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Pondering Reality...
I know this site is notorious for its comedic/satirical, rather than overtly intellectual, content. Over the past month I've been mulling around numerous thoughts which have sprung up from my Psychology and Philosophy classes.
First and foremost, the human body is an amazing creation. How it came to be has been endlessly debated for well over a century and a half. Was it evolution? Was it the hand of God? Well, I'm not here to enter the fray of life's origin. I'm just here to posit some of my thoughts for you to chew on. Whether you swallow or spit is really your choice.
My studies have revealed how the human body is constantly evolving. I do not mean over periods of centuries or millennia, I mean during one's lifetime. The human brain is an excellent example with how it rewires and alters its shape and functionality based on stimuli. In effect, our thoughts control and affect us. We are the products of reason, thinking, and reaction.
Now I've believed as far back as I can remember that we create our own realities. There is no real right or wrong. It is what we instill faith in which makes something real. Examples are God creating the universe versus the entire process coming about from a raw, untamed force of energy exploding outward in a "Big Bang". For some the former is real. For others it is the latter. We build our lives around beliefs, create realities from thought.
Where does thought come from? Perception. But what we perceive is governed by the flesh we find ourselves in. What we see, hear, taste, smell, and feel is radically different from other species and thus not real to them. Our reality is not their reality. It is solely ours. Does that make it more important? Does that humble us in knowing there are shared realities? In fact, how would our realities look should our eyes be capable of seeing beyond the limited spectral plain we now perceive or if we were unable to taste.
Philosophy and science can be difficult subjects to bring together. Science requires true quantifiable evidence leading to a single answer for phenomena whereas philosophy is open to interpretation. What philosophy has shown me is how we structure our conscious realities around us, try to explain the reasons we act. Yet science would say we do not act but simply react. We have been reacting since the "Big Bang", or God's shove (whichever you prefer). Every action has been the result of a prior action, known in philosophy as Determinism. Without a prior act a future act cannot be. If one were to follow this theory to its end, then all action began from one single action yet if action cannot happen without prior action then how can action be at all? Surely everything has a beginning and end. But what if that is merely our view of reality corrupting what it truth? We measure time, action, and event based on temporal structure: past, present, future. Does time really function that way or is it merely a construct of our reality based on limited perception? What if life is truly a circle, constant renewal, growth, collapse, etc. What if there is no beginning, no end, but a constant. Science says energy can neither be created nor destroyed. How did this all arise? Is growth impossible? Collapse as well?
In fact, what if our lifetime is the equivalent of a small town nestled in a valley upon the whole of the Earth. All we see and know is what happens in and around us yet we are part of something larger despite not perceiving it. We cannot see what we believe to be tomorrow over the ridge nor yesterday because of a shroud of mist. Yet it is there just as we are. What if every point functions at the same time yet we cannot perceive it. What if time really is more frequency than passing, layers rather a one way road. What if all were now and as easy to touch as the screen you read this upon.
What interests me most about the human form is its ability to manipulate energy, mostly at the subconscious or unconscious level. Thoughts, sensations, sight, etc. are all nothing more than the body converting energy into electrical, chemical, or some other form which is then deciphered and translated by the brain. Our bodies are repositories of energy. Our souls, that initial spark struck by the union of sperm and egg, flares in our flesh. Thus our soul is really manipulated energy. That force out there in space which governs gravity, light, and so much more at the macro level is within us at a sort of micro level. Yet our manipulation of energy is more than the simple process of chemical reaction, kinetic power, or electrical discharge. We manipulate energy into sentience; consciousness. What does that truly mean? In manipulating energy into creating our personalities what does that say about our flesh? What does that say about death? If energy cannot be destroyed do we dissipate into all things? Do we rejoin some lost galactic whole? Or does our energy signature somehow hold? Do we become a packet of energy, like a transmission, which holds together and continues to survive beyond the flesh? If we were to continue beyond physical death what would that type of existence be like?
Science has shown energy is useless without the physical. The physical manipulates energy, turning into a thing of creation. Could life be the evolution of energy? Could we be giving thought to that once raw, unbridled force? From destruction comes construction.
And what does this say concerning the prior subject of Determinism? If everything can only happen due to a prior act, then do we really have choice? Are we bound by some fate instigated eons ago which continues to play on through us? And if we have no choice then are our thoughts really illusions? If we cannot change things, if we have no control over events, then our thoughts can't truly be unique but the combination of prior events, actions, and material. Thus we serve no purpose for ourselves but only for whatever began the process yet if the process began blindly then we are all struggling forward blindly. Is the individual really real or does it exist simply because that is how we perceive the process of existence?
Energy has evolved and continues to do so through the physical world, but if we truly do have some control over it through our bodies then imagine when we are able to consciously manipulate it. I do not mean through machines but by thought. If all began because of some prior event, mindlessly started perhaps, what if our will became powerful enough to break the onward cycle and we became strong enough to alter our reality beyond perception.
So many large ideas. So much muddling and meandering. What do I truly believe? All I can say is I believe in the right to discover. That is the only way to learn.
First and foremost, the human body is an amazing creation. How it came to be has been endlessly debated for well over a century and a half. Was it evolution? Was it the hand of God? Well, I'm not here to enter the fray of life's origin. I'm just here to posit some of my thoughts for you to chew on. Whether you swallow or spit is really your choice.
My studies have revealed how the human body is constantly evolving. I do not mean over periods of centuries or millennia, I mean during one's lifetime. The human brain is an excellent example with how it rewires and alters its shape and functionality based on stimuli. In effect, our thoughts control and affect us. We are the products of reason, thinking, and reaction.
Now I've believed as far back as I can remember that we create our own realities. There is no real right or wrong. It is what we instill faith in which makes something real. Examples are God creating the universe versus the entire process coming about from a raw, untamed force of energy exploding outward in a "Big Bang". For some the former is real. For others it is the latter. We build our lives around beliefs, create realities from thought.
Where does thought come from? Perception. But what we perceive is governed by the flesh we find ourselves in. What we see, hear, taste, smell, and feel is radically different from other species and thus not real to them. Our reality is not their reality. It is solely ours. Does that make it more important? Does that humble us in knowing there are shared realities? In fact, how would our realities look should our eyes be capable of seeing beyond the limited spectral plain we now perceive or if we were unable to taste.
Philosophy and science can be difficult subjects to bring together. Science requires true quantifiable evidence leading to a single answer for phenomena whereas philosophy is open to interpretation. What philosophy has shown me is how we structure our conscious realities around us, try to explain the reasons we act. Yet science would say we do not act but simply react. We have been reacting since the "Big Bang", or God's shove (whichever you prefer). Every action has been the result of a prior action, known in philosophy as Determinism. Without a prior act a future act cannot be. If one were to follow this theory to its end, then all action began from one single action yet if action cannot happen without prior action then how can action be at all? Surely everything has a beginning and end. But what if that is merely our view of reality corrupting what it truth? We measure time, action, and event based on temporal structure: past, present, future. Does time really function that way or is it merely a construct of our reality based on limited perception? What if life is truly a circle, constant renewal, growth, collapse, etc. What if there is no beginning, no end, but a constant. Science says energy can neither be created nor destroyed. How did this all arise? Is growth impossible? Collapse as well?
In fact, what if our lifetime is the equivalent of a small town nestled in a valley upon the whole of the Earth. All we see and know is what happens in and around us yet we are part of something larger despite not perceiving it. We cannot see what we believe to be tomorrow over the ridge nor yesterday because of a shroud of mist. Yet it is there just as we are. What if every point functions at the same time yet we cannot perceive it. What if time really is more frequency than passing, layers rather a one way road. What if all were now and as easy to touch as the screen you read this upon.
What interests me most about the human form is its ability to manipulate energy, mostly at the subconscious or unconscious level. Thoughts, sensations, sight, etc. are all nothing more than the body converting energy into electrical, chemical, or some other form which is then deciphered and translated by the brain. Our bodies are repositories of energy. Our souls, that initial spark struck by the union of sperm and egg, flares in our flesh. Thus our soul is really manipulated energy. That force out there in space which governs gravity, light, and so much more at the macro level is within us at a sort of micro level. Yet our manipulation of energy is more than the simple process of chemical reaction, kinetic power, or electrical discharge. We manipulate energy into sentience; consciousness. What does that truly mean? In manipulating energy into creating our personalities what does that say about our flesh? What does that say about death? If energy cannot be destroyed do we dissipate into all things? Do we rejoin some lost galactic whole? Or does our energy signature somehow hold? Do we become a packet of energy, like a transmission, which holds together and continues to survive beyond the flesh? If we were to continue beyond physical death what would that type of existence be like?
Science has shown energy is useless without the physical. The physical manipulates energy, turning into a thing of creation. Could life be the evolution of energy? Could we be giving thought to that once raw, unbridled force? From destruction comes construction.
And what does this say concerning the prior subject of Determinism? If everything can only happen due to a prior act, then do we really have choice? Are we bound by some fate instigated eons ago which continues to play on through us? And if we have no choice then are our thoughts really illusions? If we cannot change things, if we have no control over events, then our thoughts can't truly be unique but the combination of prior events, actions, and material. Thus we serve no purpose for ourselves but only for whatever began the process yet if the process began blindly then we are all struggling forward blindly. Is the individual really real or does it exist simply because that is how we perceive the process of existence?
Energy has evolved and continues to do so through the physical world, but if we truly do have some control over it through our bodies then imagine when we are able to consciously manipulate it. I do not mean through machines but by thought. If all began because of some prior event, mindlessly started perhaps, what if our will became powerful enough to break the onward cycle and we became strong enough to alter our reality beyond perception.
So many large ideas. So much muddling and meandering. What do I truly believe? All I can say is I believe in the right to discover. That is the only way to learn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
