Short, inconsequential review of 1Q84.

Adding to the litany of reviews over this book. It might be that culture is like a river and unless I keep current I might be swept away to the cascades. Spending all these precious minutes and finite man-hours, something productive [must] come by. If so, then I've no choice, but to conspicuously consume this book by writing a review. In consideration, a reputable source of journalism that might have been the New York Times called it the literary sensation of the year.

First, to describe 1Q84 in Lemony Snicket terms, presenting the ridiculous yet quintessential circumstances in which fate deposits the hero and heroine of the story. Indeed, it is the fault of fatality. Involucrated: Janacek's Sinfonietta, a Green Pea moon, fatal acupuncture techniques, the mysterious Sakigake religion, its pointedly ethereal Leader and his perhuman daughter, Fuka-Eri, and a race of tiny demons that wreak havoc with time and space, in addition to working towards the rape and murder and general fucking-over of humans.

Video of Day - Roland Martin

I did a small bit of looking but could not find the study (but let me say that I'm terrible at finding those things). If someone finds it please, share with the rest of the class?

Humiliation or Affirmation?

This one is about to be about porn and sex. Tread carefully.

I'm liking this piece by Hugo Schwyzer right here.

Its a post on why it may be a bit presumptive to go straight to "he wants to degrade and humiliate her" as to the reason men want to give women facials (facial: ejaculating on your partner's face). A bit of background on the origins of the facial.

Glickman suggests that the AIDS crisis and the concern with safer sex was what made the facial popular. "Cum on me, not in me" was a popular sex educator slogan as far back as the late 1980s. Ejaculating on a woman's stomach, however, usually meant that the camera wouldn't let the audience see the actress' expression. But if the male actor came on her face, the viewer could see two things at once: evidence of male pleasure (symbolized by the ejaculation) and the equally important sign that a woman's reaction to that pleasure mattered. With sex now so dangerous — and HIV particularly likely to be spread through semen — facials were relatively "safe." But in the era of AIDS, they were also compelling visual evidence that a woman wasn't threatened by a man's semen. In that sense facials were, almost from the start, more about women's acceptance of men's bodies than about women's degradation.

I think this is a plausible explanation that could serve as an almost polar opposite of the "humiliation/degradation" view on facials.

I've talked about how many view male sexuality as dirty before. I wonder if the "humiliation/degradation" crowd are starting from the destructive premise that since male sexuality is dirty then giving a woman a facial is a way to "make her dirty". Just like with other sex acts the facial may be seen by such people as another way that a "pure woman" is made "dirty" by having sexual contact with men. Which may be why some people have a hard time with the idea that a woman may not care if a guy gives a facial and a really hard time with the idea that she may actually like it (there's a small anecdote in the article about a woman who experienced her first orgasm after getting a facial). But let's go a bit deeper.

It probably won't take much effort to realize that a lot of males think that their sexuality is dirty. They are sex hungry brutes that need to have sex with as many women as possible as fast as possible (its a sign that they're "real men" right?). So what if a male thought that the sight of a woman letting him ejaculate on her face and not freaking out about how "disgusting he is" was a form of acceptance? A sign that she wasn't repulsed by a part of him. Proof that she is okay with coming in contact with semen. Because let's face it (see what I did there) if a woman is letting you cum on her face then that probably means she trusts you if for no other reason than a lot of bad stuff can be transmitted through semen to skin contact.

And yes I said "letting him". This is contingent on consent. There is nothing wrong with a woman that doesn't want a guy to ejaculate on her face. She could have any number of reasons from having a traumatic experience, to she's allergic to it, to even the idea that she thinks its disgusting (and yes its entirely possible for her think semen is disgusting while not thinking the guy its coming from is disgusting) for not wanting it done but those are neither here nor there. Also more than likely a guy that's looking for affirmation, validation, and TRUST will be respectful enough to take a woman at her word when she says she doesn't want a facial.

That bit about trust will eliminate from this line of thought any guys that actually get off on doing it to her for their own pleasure whether she wants to or not and in their sick minds her not wanting it is a usually a bonus. They are in it for the lack of consent (notice that they don't even ask or do it anyway after she says no), humiliation (because there aren't many things that will generate humiliation more than having something done to you against your will), degradation (thinking that them doing it to you anyway is a sign that you are beneath them) and who knows what else. So bear this in mind.

In any case, humiliation and affirmation aren't incompatible reactions to the same act; a feeling of indignity when your partner ejaculates on your face isn't contingent on his intending to demean you.

In short the fact that you find facials to be disgusting doesn't automatically translate into "he wants to do it to humiliate me".

Personally I think that this could hold true for guys that want to ejaculate on a woman's face but don't want to do it to humiliate her, who are probably operating from the thought that if she is being humiliated (and I don't mean "she gets off on being treated that way but its consensual" I mean "she just had her boundaries violated in a serious way") then she's not going to want to be with him. What person wants to be with some that doesn't respect them?

Two things I want to add:
1. I'm not trying to pass this off as proof that no guy has ever wanted to give a woman a facial for sole purpose of humiliating her. Yes there are jerks out there like that.

2. Despite this being written in terms of man ejaculating on woman this could probably be applied to any (and I can't believe I'm about to say this) ejaculator/ejaculatee relationship. In fact I think the existence of facials in male/male porn challenges the assumptions that facials are about humiliating women, as the article notes. (unless you're one of those folks that traces everyone back to a hatred of women).

Reading debates.

NOW, LISTEN HERE. I'm one of those old geezers who lacks a fascination with the television as a medium for everything. Weather channel this and shopping channel that. I also feel the television is not a great place to experience a Presidential debate, which plays out like (American) football, punctuated by endless and irrelevant advertisements, more filling than crust in my opinion.

Which is why I like to snuggle up in an old office chair, a cup of heated chocolate drink in one hand and a debate transcript glaring loudly on the monitor, appropriately playing Last of the Country Gentlemen as the backdrop to this cabal of Southern-wannabes, and a great country album altogether if any one person were to be so inclined. Although I might not have the good chocolate or a particularly comfortable chair, I can get through what is sure to be an uncomfortable experience faster than fiddling with the remote control. ABC, which co-sponsored the debate I'm reading in conjunction with Yahoo, makes it quite simple: like all the cool kids, their website offers a pre-formatted PDF option for particularizing people like me.

Post that goes nowhere piece of shit.

In those halcyon days of capital punishment, we'd used to layout a picnic blanket in the town square and kindle someone alight. Roast some pork in the tangy smoke. Bring fire pokers so that the children might examine (mind your-selves!) what would happen to the worst of sinners. At the close of the day, we'd watch a convict make their last stride for heaven in the ascending ashes.

Or maybe it wasn't as romantic as a touchdown in the eleventh hour. The Apollo capsule rounding the moon, and mooning the forces of nature. As a hall of Republicans would have you think in the wild blaze they erupted, some time ago in the era of journalistic irrelevancy. It is unfortunate that 2011 will go down as a another year in a series of millenia where people still get hard and wet, contemplating execution on a herded, emotional basis, although it must be noted it was Allen in 1977 who first made the connection explicit when he suggested to Annie she should take sodium pentothal to slumber through relational duality.

Most Viewed Posts of 2011 [that's right, another end-of-year Top Ten list!]

Inspired by Alas, A Blog's recent post, I decided to see what our most widely-read blog posts of 2011 were.  The Top Ten (drumroll, please):

Distributism, a blog post that contained precisely three original words, yielded a whopping 638 pageviews;

Still Think Intent Doesn't Matter? received 695 pageviews;

American Aristocracy and the Return of Prosperity received 772 pageviews;

Weiner's Wiener, whose accompanying image is mysteriously MIA, got an annoying 802 pageviews;

Best Films of the Decade got 830 pageviews;

Discussion Thread: Politicians came in at 961 views;

One Industry That Should Never Be Privatized was viewed  978 times;

A Story About the End of the World had 1,093 views;

You Cannot Vote In Favor of Defining Marriage As Between One Man and One Woman Without Being A Bigot, a post with likely the longest title in the world, came in at 1,405; and last but not least, with 2,498 pageviews, is

"Nice Guys," Sex, and Self-Confidence.

Also, since the blog's move form Wordpress to Blogger, we've been viewed a total of 96,182 times!  Woo!  Thanks for all your awesome reading, readers, and our awesome writing, fellow writers.  Here's to an even more well-read 2012!

Prognosticating the Politics of 2012

After living through a volatile 2011 (the Arab Spring, the Japanese earthquake/tsunami/nuclear meltdown, Libya, the Occupy Movement, economic uncertainty, etc.) the world might see a 2012 that's just as chaotic and harrowing.  Yet there's much to be thankful for as we begin another year, with the potential for more outbursts of democratic revolution.

via Los Angeles Times

Syria Moving Toward Peace?  
The political will of the people is becoming centralized of late, deciding to go it alone by not allowing a foreign military intervention (ala Libya).  It's exciting to not only see this unity of opposing factions but also the clarity of their purpose, unwilling to be compromised by external forces in pursuing the ouster of Bashar al-Assad.  Who knows if the military will continue their sniper attacks, continuing their assault on the citizens of Syria that's raged since last March or if the Arab League will be able to diplomatically influence what's happening on the ground.  In time, the only ways I see a peaceful resolution to this bloody turmoil is either an overthrow of the Assad regime or long-term economic isolation to the point of Assad conceding.  Neither outcome looks to be on the immediate horizon.

The latest news in Syria, reported just this morning, is that the government has withdrawn their tanks out of the cities and released "3,500 detainees" as a result of "regional initiative" following reports from Arab League observers on the ground who recently withdrew as well.  The evident goal is cease-fire, which has not as of this morning been achieved, yet every positive step in the process is welcome at this point.

   Scary to see how linked our growth is to Europe's...          via American Progress

The Global Economy
In the US, the economy is finally starting to show signs of life with increased growth and lower unemployment of late.  The problem now?  The shoe is on the other foot with economic foreign powers slumping (China, Europe) while we're just starting to get back on our feet.  If the EU debt crisis continues to damage the European markets and/or China's growth continues to slow, it could spell a longer economic recession for everybody and cast further uncertainty on who leads America going forward.  In 2012, I see an increase in American output, a slower yet steady continuance of Chinese growth and a mediocre or even no recovery for the Euro-zone, potentially similar to the slow 2011 recovery here in the US.  ABC News put something out this morning on their projections for the US economy.

via theaustralian.com.au

China and North Korea 
Will they become further destabilized or instead continue their partnership of citizen oppression, censorship and famine?  If North Korea or China are ever going to trend toward the Democratic changes we've seen in the past year in the Arab states, it'll happen in the next five years.  Though what's been most evident during Kim Jung Un's transition to power is just how strong their Stalinist system is, with those in power enjoying the fruits of their work. Historically, the most successful attempts at toppling a regime have been undertaken during times of transition and in North Korea I see no such weakness.  While the people of China are are gathering and protesting more than they have in recent years, there is no doubting the power their leaders have in suppressing the voices of the people via censorship, jailing human rights lawyers, continued suppression of religion and human rights, with no evidence of their leadership crumbling at this point.


The Occupy Movement
While most of the occupy encampments have been forcibly removed and the cold weather may have frozen out the original notion of a constant physical presence (though there are exceptions), there continues to be a plethora of activity in many of the originally occupying cities.  The most exciting recent actions have included the West Coast port shutdown, the Minnesota house occupations and just this morning, the march that concluded the Tournament of Roses Parade in Pasadena.  I don't see the Occupy Movement abating anytime soon, expecting it to only gather more steam as the weather gets better this Spring.

via CBS News

The Caucuses and Primaries  
Romney will most likely capture a majority of the state-by-state contests, with Paul and Gingrich possibly picking up a couple and Perry potentially snagging one or two himself.  It's pretty tough to project considering the volatility of the electorate, as evidenced by their mad Fall campaigns, the diversity of the states and the huge fluctuations in polling.  I see Romney winning a long battle (reminiscent of the long primary season between Clinton and Obama in '08), ultimately ending with Romney losing by a greater margin in the general election than McCain did to Obama in 2008.  Below is the most recent poll of polls from Real Clear Politics:

People get so wrapped up in polling and the excitement the traditional horse race handicapping of candidates that they often miss the simplicity of how determining a projected winner can be.  Please take a look at Allan Lichtman's Keys to the White House method of prediction.  He's accurately predicted 7 of the last 7 presidential elections based on his thirteen criteria. He had a great debate earlier last year with Nate Silver and this year he's predicting a victory for President Obama.  I see no reason to doubt his method at this point, unless the economy takes a drastic turn for the worse.

For more political and cultural commentary, stop by Auspicious Scuttlebutt, as I'll be covering the coming primaries and caucuses, plus in-depth looks at each of the remaining candidates.

Hope your 2012 is filled with joy and prosperity!

My first (successful) GIF- Jimmy McNulty

I don't know why but I find this irrationally funny. (Perhaps it's the duck-face he's making?) I suppose this starts the year on a good foot.

A deservingly stupid EOY meta-list.

[I apologize in advance if you find this post offensively unfunny. I can only say with certainty that I think I'm humorous.] THERE SEEMS TO BE an excess of top-lists in the internet world. Even in this-here relative ark of sanity some hack has managed to toss in a list about the 'best' movies or something, a conclusive thing like a funeral, sending off at sea the preceding year, decade, and century. In a floating wooden box so that the culture-waste might wash up the random shore, or otherwise orbit the web of garbage alleged to be the size of Texas! In parody and in honor of these squandered clicks, that appear in yours and mine Google News page, seducing good men and women with the secret to happiness in life: The whitest bleaches for removing gravy stains. The best apps for engaging in anonysex with twenty-something homosexual lawyers. Most popular weights of paper for printing office memos regarding kitchen cleanliness. Quietest hammers for night-time construction work. Music lists from magazines scared of their readers so that every genre is mashed together, with requisite token spots for bestselling albums, Radiohead or Coldplay and even some harpsichord revivalism (it's coming back!) for the lunatic fringe.

Now that it has been established that lists are made for everything, I've decided to contribute a few of my own worthless microlists. Join in, I'll append.

Hottest US Cabinet members of the year:

1. Hillary
2. Geithner
3. Panetta
4. Holder

Best songs directed at telephone operators I've listened to:

1. "Satellite", Kills
2. "Little Black Submarine", Black Keys 

Best foods I tasted for the first time this year:

1. Cashews 
2. Waffles 
3. Black Coffee 

Top colors of the year containing diphthong 'au':

1. Taupe
2. Mauve 
3. Auburn 
4. Jaundice

Best books of all time with years for titles:

1. 1914
2. 1939
3. 1984
4. 1Q84
5. 2001
6. 2666

Hipster Madison