Saturday, September 04, 2004
Human sexuality is more complicated than we think
Normally, I delete all the pornographic emails that show up in my inbox (well, except for the ones from friends, lol), but I was feeling a little wild on a Friday night, and I actually went and looked at one of the websites... and I think the sex researchers need to start from square 1 again, because there's stuff out there that I've never even HEARD of.
I'm not talking about the sexual positions that have never actually been achieved by a couple having unassisted, genuine sex, although I did have to wonder who exactly finds that sort of contortionism erotic... I mean the staggering number of fetishes that have apparently always existed in the minds of FAR more people than the supposed experts realize.
The statistics I've read place fetishism in the single digits; 6% is the most common # I've seen.... and that just CAN'T be right, given the sheer volume of fetish sites dedicated to every "perversion" you've never heard of (I use the quotes because I don't think we know enough about sexuality and the workings of the brain to be sure about where to draw the line between "normal" and "abnormal"). When you think about it, it's not too surprising that the #'s would be so far off for something considered socially unacceptable, since the only way they have of gathering data on it is by ASKING people, who might be too ashamed to admit to it in person, and in too deep of denial to admit to it even in an anonymous survey; it's unfortunate, though, because if every fetishist of every kind "came out" about it, it might well turn out that fetishism is so common that there'd be no stigma attached to it, and people would have one less thing to feel guilty about.
Do you think that I'm exaggerating, that a handful of guys who love feet and stockings and such can't add up to much? The # of people who love those 2 things alone is astounding, but they're honestly just the tip of the iceberg: There are fetishes for raingear, swimming caps, smoking, tickling, robots, statues, noses, eyeballs, diapers, fur, being vomited on, being hit with PIES... stuff that the most strenuous mental effort can't figure out how they could have EVER become the focus of sexual feelings. These odd and often elaborate sexual paths must reveal something really important about how our minds work; sadly, while scientists remain afraid to ask for grants for sexual studies that can't be justified as being of immediate medical concern, that something will remain a mystery.
In most households, it wouldn't be the woman looking at this sort of thing-it would be the man surfing around the fringes of "extreme porn" in trembling secrecy. In MY marriage, though, I'm by far the less squeamish one (except where bugs and spiders are concerned), and when I find graphic sexual images, I get a bonus; I can see how many times I can call my husband in to look at what's on the screen and get grossed out before he wises up and refuses to come look any more.
He's a VERY slow learner. :-)
I'm not talking about the sexual positions that have never actually been achieved by a couple having unassisted, genuine sex, although I did have to wonder who exactly finds that sort of contortionism erotic... I mean the staggering number of fetishes that have apparently always existed in the minds of FAR more people than the supposed experts realize.
The statistics I've read place fetishism in the single digits; 6% is the most common # I've seen.... and that just CAN'T be right, given the sheer volume of fetish sites dedicated to every "perversion" you've never heard of (I use the quotes because I don't think we know enough about sexuality and the workings of the brain to be sure about where to draw the line between "normal" and "abnormal"). When you think about it, it's not too surprising that the #'s would be so far off for something considered socially unacceptable, since the only way they have of gathering data on it is by ASKING people, who might be too ashamed to admit to it in person, and in too deep of denial to admit to it even in an anonymous survey; it's unfortunate, though, because if every fetishist of every kind "came out" about it, it might well turn out that fetishism is so common that there'd be no stigma attached to it, and people would have one less thing to feel guilty about.
Do you think that I'm exaggerating, that a handful of guys who love feet and stockings and such can't add up to much? The # of people who love those 2 things alone is astounding, but they're honestly just the tip of the iceberg: There are fetishes for raingear, swimming caps, smoking, tickling, robots, statues, noses, eyeballs, diapers, fur, being vomited on, being hit with PIES... stuff that the most strenuous mental effort can't figure out how they could have EVER become the focus of sexual feelings. These odd and often elaborate sexual paths must reveal something really important about how our minds work; sadly, while scientists remain afraid to ask for grants for sexual studies that can't be justified as being of immediate medical concern, that something will remain a mystery.
In most households, it wouldn't be the woman looking at this sort of thing-it would be the man surfing around the fringes of "extreme porn" in trembling secrecy. In MY marriage, though, I'm by far the less squeamish one (except where bugs and spiders are concerned), and when I find graphic sexual images, I get a bonus; I can see how many times I can call my husband in to look at what's on the screen and get grossed out before he wises up and refuses to come look any more.
He's a VERY slow learner. :-)
Friday, September 03, 2004
What makes a man a "real man"?
There are probably as many answers to this one as there are people, but here's my take on it:
A real man has feelings, and isn't afraid to express them... and yes, that includes crying if he's sad.
A real man has the sort of masculinity that can't be threatened, and therefore can wear pink, be friends with gay people, and eat fat-free cookies ... even when his friends are watching.
A real man works for what he gets; he doesn't steal or cheat for gain, nor is he willing to live off of the labors of others.
A real man can be beaten at a game, out-performed at work, or disagreed with without getting nasty about it.
A real man's word is his bond.
A real man doesn't see feminism as an excuse to not be a gentleman.
A real man isn't a bully; he's kind to women, children, the elderly, pets, waitresses, his employees.... anyone he has power over or might be able to dominate if he wanted to.
A real man sees his romantic partner as his equal, not as his maid, mommy, child, slave or punching bag.
A real man takes care of his children, and focuses his time, $, and emotional energy on them and their welfare, no matter what his relationship is with their mother.
A real man is tall, muscular and powerful. You'd BETTER be shocked at that one, because it's a big load of bull; real men come in EVERY shape and size... and the surest sign of a real WOMAN is that she can see that.
A real man has feelings, and isn't afraid to express them... and yes, that includes crying if he's sad.
A real man has the sort of masculinity that can't be threatened, and therefore can wear pink, be friends with gay people, and eat fat-free cookies ... even when his friends are watching.
A real man works for what he gets; he doesn't steal or cheat for gain, nor is he willing to live off of the labors of others.
A real man can be beaten at a game, out-performed at work, or disagreed with without getting nasty about it.
A real man's word is his bond.
A real man doesn't see feminism as an excuse to not be a gentleman.
A real man isn't a bully; he's kind to women, children, the elderly, pets, waitresses, his employees.... anyone he has power over or might be able to dominate if he wanted to.
A real man sees his romantic partner as his equal, not as his maid, mommy, child, slave or punching bag.
A real man takes care of his children, and focuses his time, $, and emotional energy on them and their welfare, no matter what his relationship is with their mother.
A real man is tall, muscular and powerful. You'd BETTER be shocked at that one, because it's a big load of bull; real men come in EVERY shape and size... and the surest sign of a real WOMAN is that she can see that.
Thursday, September 02, 2004
The "nuclear" debate
Do you pronounce it "noo-kyoo-lar" or "noo-klee-ar"? Don't be too quick to answer; you know which way is the RIGHT way to pronounce it, but do you, or anyone you know, actually pronounce it that way?
I was puzzled when a big deal started being made about Bush saying "noo-kyoo-lar"; *I* say it that way, and so does everyone I know... it's the way MOST people say it, aside from newscasters. I said as much to my husband at the time the hooraw started, and he claimed that HE didn't say it that way; he was wrong about that, of course, and every time he's said the word since, I've taken great glee in pointing out that he DID, in fact, say it that way. He also tried to deny that most people say it that way, but every time it's been used in a non-news program we were watching... you guessed it, lol.
Have you ever wondered WHY this mis-pronunciation is so common? I started thinking about it, and was coming up blank, so I did some looking around, and ended up here:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nuclear
and found this (with the phonetics altered because the special characters they used wouldn't copy):
"Usage Note: The pronunciation (noo-kyoo-lar), which is generally considered incorrect, is an example of how a familiar phonological pattern can influence an unfamiliar one. The usual pronunciation of the final two syllables of this word is (klee-ar), but this sequence of sounds is rare in English. Much more common is the similar sequence (kyoo-lar), which occurs in words like particular, circular, spectacular, and in many scientific words like molecular, ocular, and vascular."
And that's why the mispronunciation is so common; it made perfect sense AFTER I read it. Now, if I could only figure out why most people pronounce "restaurant" as "rest-rahnt" instead of the proper way, "res-tah-rahnt"... ;-)
I was puzzled when a big deal started being made about Bush saying "noo-kyoo-lar"; *I* say it that way, and so does everyone I know... it's the way MOST people say it, aside from newscasters. I said as much to my husband at the time the hooraw started, and he claimed that HE didn't say it that way; he was wrong about that, of course, and every time he's said the word since, I've taken great glee in pointing out that he DID, in fact, say it that way. He also tried to deny that most people say it that way, but every time it's been used in a non-news program we were watching... you guessed it, lol.
Have you ever wondered WHY this mis-pronunciation is so common? I started thinking about it, and was coming up blank, so I did some looking around, and ended up here:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nuclear
and found this (with the phonetics altered because the special characters they used wouldn't copy):
"Usage Note: The pronunciation (noo-kyoo-lar), which is generally considered incorrect, is an example of how a familiar phonological pattern can influence an unfamiliar one. The usual pronunciation of the final two syllables of this word is (klee-ar), but this sequence of sounds is rare in English. Much more common is the similar sequence (kyoo-lar), which occurs in words like particular, circular, spectacular, and in many scientific words like molecular, ocular, and vascular."
And that's why the mispronunciation is so common; it made perfect sense AFTER I read it. Now, if I could only figure out why most people pronounce "restaurant" as "rest-rahnt" instead of the proper way, "res-tah-rahnt"... ;-)
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
Karma works FAST
In my post of this past Saturday, I bemoaned the fact that my husband had switched to referring to one of our recently-arrested, drug-dealer neighbors as a "nice guy" because the lowlife had said a few polite sentences to him; no matter what aspects of the neighbor's illegal behaviors I reminded him about, he kept on "yeah, but"-ing me and clearly NOT accepting the thoroughly criminal, evil nature of the man. Sunday, the very next day, this "nice guy" neighbor broke into my husband's car and stole over $1000 worth of equipment... and that's NOT a typo.
Karma, as I said in the title, works FAST.
My husband learned the lessons he obviously needed to, about the neighbor, about the nature of evil and how to judge it, and about the validity of my endless lectures to him about the importance of NOT leaving valuables laying out in plain view in a car that's being parked in the driveway or on the street, and not leaving the window cracked (yes, the window was down several inches to facilitate the theft) which he had previously pooh-poohed as "worrying about nothing"... that's alot of heavy-duty lessons all at once; karma is quite efficient.
He was so embarrassed to have been proven so overwhelmingly wrong about so many things, and at such a high cost, that he didn't even tell me it had happened until the cops came to the neighbors' house AGAIN, this evening, and other neighbors were gathering to talk about it, all of whom, it turns out, HAD been told about the theft as part of trying to find out if anyone had witnessed the event (when they say the wife is always the last to know, this isn't what I thought they meant). He actually thought he had a shot at permanently concealing the theft, and thus the stupidity of his choices and judgment, from me; there's another valuable lesson for him.
He's still denying the most valuable lesson here, though; the one about the workings of karma. He's been leaving equipment in plain view in his car for the entire time I've known him, and for all the months those crooks have lived next to us, but it wasn't until he started denying their evil that they helped themselves to his stuff... if that's not synchronicity in action, I don't know what is.
Karma, as I said in the title, works FAST.
My husband learned the lessons he obviously needed to, about the neighbor, about the nature of evil and how to judge it, and about the validity of my endless lectures to him about the importance of NOT leaving valuables laying out in plain view in a car that's being parked in the driveway or on the street, and not leaving the window cracked (yes, the window was down several inches to facilitate the theft) which he had previously pooh-poohed as "worrying about nothing"... that's alot of heavy-duty lessons all at once; karma is quite efficient.
He was so embarrassed to have been proven so overwhelmingly wrong about so many things, and at such a high cost, that he didn't even tell me it had happened until the cops came to the neighbors' house AGAIN, this evening, and other neighbors were gathering to talk about it, all of whom, it turns out, HAD been told about the theft as part of trying to find out if anyone had witnessed the event (when they say the wife is always the last to know, this isn't what I thought they meant). He actually thought he had a shot at permanently concealing the theft, and thus the stupidity of his choices and judgment, from me; there's another valuable lesson for him.
He's still denying the most valuable lesson here, though; the one about the workings of karma. He's been leaving equipment in plain view in his car for the entire time I've known him, and for all the months those crooks have lived next to us, but it wasn't until he started denying their evil that they helped themselves to his stuff... if that's not synchronicity in action, I don't know what is.
Tuesday, August 31, 2004
Cell phones
When did it become necessary for every human being from grammar school to the grave to have a cell phone?
When did we become so convinced of our own importance that we figured we had to be reachable every single minute of the day?
When did we become so impatient that we can't wait until we get home to pass along our thoughts to our friends?
When did we become so detached from life that we feel we always have to be talking nonstop rather than paying attention to what's going on around us and DOING things?
When did we become so stupid that we talked on the phones in our cars to the point where the accident rate went shooting up, making it necessary to pass laws to prevent it?
When did we become so rude that we intrude our trivial business into other people's meals at restaurants, into people's thoughts while they're standing in line with us, and right in the faces of people we're supposed to be interacting with in person, even at important functions and during dates, without noticing or caring about the dismay we're causing those around us?
When did our culture become so permeated by cell phones that you have to have one to be considered "normal"?
People are STUNNED to discover that *I* don't have a cell phone, and bombard me with questions designed to ferret out the reason for this deviant behavior; with my standard bluntness, I tell them that because I'm neither a doctor on call nor the parent of a minor child, there's never any need for me to be instantly reachable, and therefore no reason to waste $ on a cell phone... and they look at me like I must have just escaped from an insane asylum, lol.
What do you suppose people will say if I get a BlackBerry:
http://www.blackberry.com/products/blackberry7700/blackberry7730.shtml
with a cell connection (so I can place bids on eBay when I'm out of the house) and never use it as a phone, hehehehehe?
When did we become so convinced of our own importance that we figured we had to be reachable every single minute of the day?
When did we become so impatient that we can't wait until we get home to pass along our thoughts to our friends?
When did we become so detached from life that we feel we always have to be talking nonstop rather than paying attention to what's going on around us and DOING things?
When did we become so stupid that we talked on the phones in our cars to the point where the accident rate went shooting up, making it necessary to pass laws to prevent it?
When did we become so rude that we intrude our trivial business into other people's meals at restaurants, into people's thoughts while they're standing in line with us, and right in the faces of people we're supposed to be interacting with in person, even at important functions and during dates, without noticing or caring about the dismay we're causing those around us?
When did our culture become so permeated by cell phones that you have to have one to be considered "normal"?
People are STUNNED to discover that *I* don't have a cell phone, and bombard me with questions designed to ferret out the reason for this deviant behavior; with my standard bluntness, I tell them that because I'm neither a doctor on call nor the parent of a minor child, there's never any need for me to be instantly reachable, and therefore no reason to waste $ on a cell phone... and they look at me like I must have just escaped from an insane asylum, lol.
What do you suppose people will say if I get a BlackBerry:
http://www.blackberry.com/products/blackberry7700/blackberry7730.shtml
with a cell connection (so I can place bids on eBay when I'm out of the house) and never use it as a phone, hehehehehe?
Monday, August 30, 2004
Karmic inertia
A couple of days ago, I was talking to a friend who's heavily into karma (and religion, too), and we were speculating as to the reason for one of the oddest aspects of karma; when you try to make a big life change, it "responds" as if there was in fact a STRUCTURE to it, where your path is dug into a "rut," and you have to struggle to get out of it, just like you would from a gorge with steep, slippery sides that you'd been walking along and decided you wanted to climb out of... as if there were inertia involved, as there is with objects in motion.
What causes this? One thought I had is: Because precognition exists, we know that the future exists, in some form and to some extent; it exists as an extension of what exists now, and it might "resist" having to change form because you're changing something.
Another idea I had was: Karma is very consistent about tossing tests at us when we've learned a major life lesson, which I've always thought of as a way of making sure we've actually made the internal change necessary to implement what we've learned... but what if it's actually an example of karmic inertia trying to keep us from making the change by tempting us to fall back into our old patterns?
I got on this train of thought because of something Joel Osteen said today; non-coincidentally, right after I started thinking more deeply about how a surge of problems comes up when people try to change, he preached about how, when you try to change, "the enemy" (aka Satan) gets involved and tries his hardest to turn you from your new path and make you stay in your old rut. Once again, he comes from a Christian perspective and sees the exact same non-intuitive thing I see via my studies of karma... and his timing is eerie. (Just because I have a strong belief in synchronicity doesn't mean that it doesn't still give me chills.)
He managed to get another karmic truism into his half-hour sermon; he pointed out, correctly, that what you keep thinking about gets DRAWN into your life, and yes, he used that EXACT word... and how many times have *I* said that?
I told my friend about Osteen, and told her to tape it tonight (she goes to bed early); I'm going to have to call her and see if she remembered, and has watched it... and see what SHE says about the content and timing of his message, coming from her perspective of being a believer in karma AND a Christian. Stay tuned.
What causes this? One thought I had is: Because precognition exists, we know that the future exists, in some form and to some extent; it exists as an extension of what exists now, and it might "resist" having to change form because you're changing something.
Another idea I had was: Karma is very consistent about tossing tests at us when we've learned a major life lesson, which I've always thought of as a way of making sure we've actually made the internal change necessary to implement what we've learned... but what if it's actually an example of karmic inertia trying to keep us from making the change by tempting us to fall back into our old patterns?
I got on this train of thought because of something Joel Osteen said today; non-coincidentally, right after I started thinking more deeply about how a surge of problems comes up when people try to change, he preached about how, when you try to change, "the enemy" (aka Satan) gets involved and tries his hardest to turn you from your new path and make you stay in your old rut. Once again, he comes from a Christian perspective and sees the exact same non-intuitive thing I see via my studies of karma... and his timing is eerie. (Just because I have a strong belief in synchronicity doesn't mean that it doesn't still give me chills.)
He managed to get another karmic truism into his half-hour sermon; he pointed out, correctly, that what you keep thinking about gets DRAWN into your life, and yes, he used that EXACT word... and how many times have *I* said that?
I told my friend about Osteen, and told her to tape it tonight (she goes to bed early); I'm going to have to call her and see if she remembered, and has watched it... and see what SHE says about the content and timing of his message, coming from her perspective of being a believer in karma AND a Christian. Stay tuned.
Sunday, August 29, 2004
Is all porn bad?
There are all sorts of things we can point to that are bad about porn: Child porn is abuse of the innocent. Some of the more extreme varieties, such as those featuring animals and corpses, cater to, and encourage interest in, socially unacceptable behavior. Porn creates unrealistic ideas of what human bodies and sexual encounters are actually like, and leads to the objectification of the models/actors (usually seen as being women, but those who say that have no idea how much gay men's porn there is), and by extension of their entire gender, which can be devastating to young people who have little or no real life experience to use for comparison. And on and on; we've all heard the reasons that porn is "bad," and an excellent case is made by those reasons... but does that mean that all porn really IS bad, for all people under all circumstances?
I'm getting at something, can you tell? I can't count the # of times I've read about, or been told about, a situation that goes like; a woman gets home early, or gets up in the middle of the night, and finds her man, um, holding a magazine, or their mouse, in one hand, so to speak, and freaks out because he's not only choking the proverbial chicken, but is doing so while looking at sexual imagery... she sees it as somehow being the equivalent of him cheating on her. What follows is usually a hysterical demand that the man throw out all his magazines and/or delete his porn files and bookmarks, which the humiliated man agrees to. What follows THAT is the man employing an increased level of secrecy in order to resume this perfectly harmless activity that he's been doing his entire life and will continue to do until the day he dies.
Yes, that's right, ladies; HARMLESS. Masturbation is an integral part of maleness; male infants even do it in the womb. While women do it too, obviously, they often see it as something to do only when they don't HAVE a man, and then tend not to use porn; that doesn't make it the "right" way to do it, though, and in fact it's totally normal for men to do it even when they're coupled up, and totally normal for them to look at sexual imagery when they do it... they're biologically programmed to want, and NEED, to look, and to want to keep seeing NEW images.
I'm not saying that it's not right for a woman to be concerned if what her man is looking at is something truly sick; we just need to grit our teeth and accept that the standard nudie pics, and depictions of the same sexual acts we all participate in, are NOT sick, and not causing any harm unless the guy's refusing real sex to focus on porn... and let's face it, THAT doesn't happen too often, lol.
So, while there's inarguably plenty of porn that IS bad, and porn should certainly be kept away from kids, we as women need to lose the excessively PC attitude that's it's ALL bad, and let men look in peace... or, even better, we should stop being squeamish and take a look at pics of some of the mega-hotties working in the gay porn industry (don't bother with straight porn, trust me) , and find out what all the fuss is about. If your man catches you at it, you can just blame me. ;-)
I'm getting at something, can you tell? I can't count the # of times I've read about, or been told about, a situation that goes like; a woman gets home early, or gets up in the middle of the night, and finds her man, um, holding a magazine, or their mouse, in one hand, so to speak, and freaks out because he's not only choking the proverbial chicken, but is doing so while looking at sexual imagery... she sees it as somehow being the equivalent of him cheating on her. What follows is usually a hysterical demand that the man throw out all his magazines and/or delete his porn files and bookmarks, which the humiliated man agrees to. What follows THAT is the man employing an increased level of secrecy in order to resume this perfectly harmless activity that he's been doing his entire life and will continue to do until the day he dies.
Yes, that's right, ladies; HARMLESS. Masturbation is an integral part of maleness; male infants even do it in the womb. While women do it too, obviously, they often see it as something to do only when they don't HAVE a man, and then tend not to use porn; that doesn't make it the "right" way to do it, though, and in fact it's totally normal for men to do it even when they're coupled up, and totally normal for them to look at sexual imagery when they do it... they're biologically programmed to want, and NEED, to look, and to want to keep seeing NEW images.
I'm not saying that it's not right for a woman to be concerned if what her man is looking at is something truly sick; we just need to grit our teeth and accept that the standard nudie pics, and depictions of the same sexual acts we all participate in, are NOT sick, and not causing any harm unless the guy's refusing real sex to focus on porn... and let's face it, THAT doesn't happen too often, lol.
So, while there's inarguably plenty of porn that IS bad, and porn should certainly be kept away from kids, we as women need to lose the excessively PC attitude that's it's ALL bad, and let men look in peace... or, even better, we should stop being squeamish and take a look at pics of some of the mega-hotties working in the gay porn industry (don't bother with straight porn, trust me) , and find out what all the fuss is about. If your man catches you at it, you can just blame me. ;-)
