The problem with superhero movies is the lack of absolutely ANY lasting negative consequences.
Die? Come back to life.
Lose your powers? Get way better powers.
Get arrested? Escape.
Lose an arm? Bionic arm.
(Box office bomb? Reboot.)
No wonder there are so many villains. If you lived in a world where there were zero lasting negative consequences to your actions, you’d probably be a villain too.
Audiences are getting sick of it. Maybe that will be a lasting negative consequence they can’t ignore.
If you ask me what genre of music I like, I’ll tell you I like Music That Is Made For People Who Make Music.
Music That Understands It Is Part Of A Conservation That We’re All Adding To.
That’s why I don’t listen to 80s or 90s music, or The Beatles, or music that tries to sound like oldies. I think we’ve pretty much already covered those topics around 20. Freaking. Years. Ago.
It’s disrespectful to the people who are still having the conservation to butt in with some non sequitur throwback to a theme that’s already been thoroughly discussed and then moved on from. When you keep popping up with that feel-good story from your high school years (that we’ve all already heard a million times), my mind starts to wander.
Don’t be that guy, bro. Don’t be that guy.
Any adult person who is religious deserves to be lied to.
The one thing religious people & atheists agree on is that there is no proof behind religious belief systems, & there probably never will be.
If you are a religious person who has put any thought into your beliefs, you understand that they are not supported by any verifiable facts or data.
By believing things that are not supported by facts & have no basis in concrete evidence or even strong suggestion, what you are saying is that facts don’t matter to you.
If facts don’t matter to you, then the difference between true & false is a very blurry line.
If the difference between true & false is blurry, honey, then yes, I stayed late at the office, “working.”
or Equality vs ME-quality
Equality will always come in second to ME-quality.
No matter how pressing the problems of a different social group may objectively become, the problems of your own social group will always matter more to the majority of human beings. This is just a simple fact about humans and how our survival instinct has evolved.
It is statistically true that there has been an imbalance of power in favor of men for far too many years now. This power imbalance applies across many areas of life including politically, domestically, financially, and socially.
I believe the imbalance may be due mostly or in part to the higher average strength and agility levels of the male gender, which are of course due to our higher testosterone levels. The imbalance may have originated in cave-times, when brute strength correlated more closely with power, and then carried over to modern times.
Now the power imbalance is slowly disappearing as our one male advantage of brute strength matters less and less in everyday life. We as a species are focusing more on the other human skill sets in which males and females have more equal abilities: general intelligence, strategizing, creativity, memory, social manipulation, economic productivity, etc.
So when someone complains about the way “men” (or “women”) act, I think it’s silly. The entire premise of feminism is predicated on the intellectual, social, and sexual equality of the genders. The one remaining difference is our programming, whether social, cultural, or parental.
So if a generic man acts a certain way in a certain situation, you can be sure that if you put a generic woman in an identical situation, she will respond in a similar manner.
Rich guys love to show off their wealth; Rich girls love to show off their wealth.
Attractive girls are divas; Attractive guys are divas.
Cool guys act like they don’t give a fuck; Cool girls act like they don’t give a fuck.
(Most of them actually do give a fuck.)
For every entitled male, there is an equally entitled female.
For every offensive male trope about women, there is an equally offensive female trope about men.
For every male gaze, there is an equally penetrating female gaze.
Let’s not kid ourselves.
Whether it’s race, gender, sexual orientation, economic class or whatever, lumping together everyone in a certain group strikes me as unfair.
I didn’t give up my seat on the bus today to the tired, heavyset woman standing beside me.
What exactly is it that offends you about this?
If we are two organisms jostling around on a rock in a vacuum, I would say I think the arc of the moral universe is indifferent towards me keeping my seat. At this long term level of morality, you being offended makes no sense.
If it’s polite for a man to give his seat to a woman, I would say I think you’re a misogynist.
If the stronger should protect and care for the weaker, I would say I think this is the specific level of morality where you have the strongest argument. As the more capable being, I have a moral obligation toward beings less capable than myself, and to keep my seat would be the moral equivalent of a conquistador annihilating a tribe or an extraterrestrial annihilating the human race. If you look at the situation through a morally-nearsighted lens, I have a moral imperative to bequeath the poor soul my seat. At this short term level of morality, the high ground belongs to you.
If sitting is the new smoking, however, I would say I think my moral imperative would be to keep my secondhand smoke to myself. If sedentary lifestyles kill in the medium term, then I am doing this woman a favor by keeping her on her feet. I exercise a lot more than she does and am therefore more capable of assuming on my shoulders the considerable risks involved in sitting. She may or may not even literally tell her friends that she doesn’t need the gym because she gets her exercise standing on the bus every day for an hour.
If diminishing pain and maximizing pleasure is your morality, the minutes of discomfort she may have to endure today will save her from a world of pain in the future.
If by sitting in her stead, I can prolong her life for even a mere hour – by keeping her heart rate up, her muscles flexed, and her blood circulating, which in turn will increase her organs’ lifespan, her physical capability, and her quality of life – do I not owe it to her to snatch that seat away, to remove the danger that lies in her path? Am I not sacrificing my own wellbeing for hers?
Should not we all grab the seats for ourselves, laying down our lives on the altar for humanity? Or is humanity under the perpetual curse of an instinctively narrow purview of morality that prevents us from seeing into even the medium term much less the long term?
Men who are unhappy with their sex lives find solutions.
We buy porn and hire prostitutes. We invest in our sex lives because they matter that much to us.
Women who are unhappy with their sex lives… complain about it to their friends?
You rarely hear a man whining about how his wife can’t find his glans. If you aren’t doing something right in bed, we won’t fake an orgasm and go to sleep, we’ll show you how to do it right. And if you can’t learn, by God, we’ll find someone else who will, even if we have to pay them for it.
That’s how much of a shit we give.
It’s telling that the disparity between people who complain about their sex lives and people who spend money on their sex lives is divided about equally across gender lines (estimated 25% of women regularly fake orgasms, & estimated 20% of men hire prostitutes). If I only drive cars that arrive on my doorstep for free, I would be a pretty shitty person if I complained about the condition of those cars.
And as they say, don’t look a gift cock in the mouth.
If you’re a woman and you complain about your sex life, tell me when’s the last time you demonstrated how much it mattered to you by spending money on it?
If you think porn is disgusting and way too male-oriented, tell me when’s the last time you paid for some you liked?
If your partner doesn’t do what you like in bed, tell me when’s the last time you hired someone who would?
Sex, like any other industry, follows the money.
So put your dirty money where your mouth is.
or Consent vs Nonsense
Dear Amber Rose,
I can go to a restaurant, sit down at a table, fold my napkin on my lap, call a waiter over, & then tell them that I don’t want anything to eat. I might not be welcomed back to the restaurant though.
I can spend years training to be an astronaut, pass my medical, physical, and psychological tests, become an expert in navigating the harsh environment of space, suit up, climb into a rocket, prep all systems for launch, and then let Houston know that I don’t actually want to go to the moon. No one’s going to force me to go to the moon.
I can run for president, throw millions of my own dollars into my campaign, travel incessantly around the country, perform all sorts of ethically dubious tricks to get voters on my side, by some miracle claim a decisive victory where it matters, and then refuse to go to intelligence briefings and tell my VP and Cabinet to do my job while I comb my hair in front of a golden mirror. My backers might feel cheated; but political, social, and sexual norms are very different from laws; and I wouldn’t be breaking any (laws, that is).
I am also well within my rights to go to the farmer’s market and stock up on beautiful, ripe, organic produce; go home and finely chop that produce into a delicious tossed salad; fire up the grill and cook up a piping hot grilled steak to round off my meal; and then throw that entire meal into the garbage and go to bed hungry. I can do that. I am allowed to change my mind.
The thing is, if I make a habit out of building walls and then banging my head against them, I might raise some eyebrows among the mental health professional community.
There are no laws against schizophrenic self-sabotage. So yes, you can say no to anything at any time. You can also say yes to anything at any time. I say yes to being a legendary rock star every day; doesn’t mean I am one.
If you take the ‘sense’ out of ‘consensual,’ all you’re left with is a big, fat con.
It might be helpful if we talked more CONsent and less NONsense.
Walter White would definitely vote for fellow empire-builder Trump.
You know Jesse Pinkman was hardcore Trump, bitch.
Saul Goodman probably voted Trump.
One sociopath to another, Dexter would be a killer Trump voter.
FBI agents & conspiracy theorists Mulder & Scully would have hated Hillary, voted Trump.
As a friend & supporter of the hacking community, I can see how Mr. Trump might have even appealed to Mr. Robot.
Barney Stinson would have been a legendary Trump supporter.
The entire Modern Family would be huge Trump cheerleaders (yes, even Gloria, statistically speaking).
All of the Sopranos would have taken great pleasure in voting for Trump.
Those adorable kids on Stranger Things? -All their fictional parents would have been fictional Trump voters.
The entire Lannister family INCLUDING Tyrion– definitely Trump voters.
Yer darn tootin’ sure all the characters in Fargo voted Trump.
Fellow millionaire Bruce Wayne would definitely vote for the President the US deserves: Donald Trump.
Frank Underwood would’ve voted Hillary.
As the mature & adult thing to do, Seinfield would definitely NOT have voted for Hillary.
Joey, Chandler, Ross, Rachel – all your favorite Friends characters would be big Trump supporters.
Ash & all of the Evil Dead definitely moonlighted as Trump supporters, baby.
No question, Rick Grimes would have voted Trump. For Carl.
Daryl & Carol would have definitely voted Trump. Glenn probably would have voted Hillary (had his head not been split open).
Don Draper would have voted Trump like there was no tomorrow.
Piper Chapman would probably be a Trump supporter.
Oliver Queen would totally have voted Trump. (Hillary failed his city.)
And you KNOW Archer Sterling was one shitsnacking proud idiot Trump voter.
or Why You Should Just Stay Home and Jerk Off
When making a case for something, there are a lot of ways to compare the options.
Let’s use your computer as an example.
You can compare for price: cheaper is better.
You can compare for graphics: prettier is better.
You can compare for speed: faster is better.
You can compare for energy: more efficient is better.
You can compare for popularity: the more people like it the better.
You can compare for memory: the better memory, the better.
You can compare for danger: safer is better.
Or you can compare for value – performance rated against cost: the lowest cost for the highest performance wins.
It all depends on what you want out of the product – and out of life.
Sex, it could be said, is more or less the same.