|  |
|
| |
By: rorschach
Date: 1/18/98 4:30:01 PM
# Replies: 89
a theory of sorts has been gelling in my sub-concious for a while now and I think I may be onto something, I'd like ya'lls opinion please.
I have felt for a long time that a company basically ceases to innovate the minute it issues it's IPO. the fact that a whole group of people now have a say in the way a business is run serves to undermine the need for taking the risks required to do something everyone else thinks is not possible. some blatant examples: microsoft, compaq, apple, wang, xerox. companies cannot be run by commitee but yet they are every day. this contradiction leads to products that are only incrementally better than the other guys last product offering. the need for instant gratification forces companies to lay off workers and sell off manufacturing and research and development resources in an attempt to satisfy the shareholders insatiable greed. in the end they cook the goose that lays the golden eggs. sure they eat well today, but tomorrow wheres the next meal coming from?
now compare the previous paragraph with our political system. WE the VOTERS are the commitee. and we ALL want the government to give us everything we can finagle out of it. but at what price? an areospace industry that has only made 3 new rocket engine designs since the 1970's? an air traffic control system that works only half the time and causes it's operators to go insane at a much higher rate that the average population? a weather forcasting network so understaffed and underfunded that private companies are more often used to generate your local forcast? surely there is a better way to run our government, a way that allows our elected officials to think further ahead than the next election. perhaps doubling the term lengths for all elected officials would help. at least they won't have to spend ALL their time in office running in the next election. or maybe term limits are the answer.
Response #1
By: Ralf
Date: 1/18/98 6:09:36 PM
Politics and economics. Cool! If we can sneak religion into this thread, we've got a real crowd-pleaser. :-)
I'm with you, Ror.
Representative Democracy -- the flavor we supposedly embrace in this country -- caters to the least common denominator. Decisions are made not because they're sound, but because they piss off the least number of constituents.
When you're talking about a few hundred citizens, the model has a chance of working. What the founding fathers failed to envision was a nation of 270 million with such wildly polarized beliefs and concerns. When the colonies revolted, the average well-to-do citizen was white, male, believed in God, slavery, and hemp farming.
Now look at what we've got! The diversity is wonderful and stunning... but majority rule doesn't work anymore. Pass a law that 75% of the people approve of, and you piss off 65 MILLION people. And those people are more vocal, more empowered, and more INTOLERANT than at any time in our past.
I say, KILL EM ALL AND START OVER! No, wait... I don't know what the solution is. What you've cited, Ror, are symptoms. What's the cure? Is it even possible to fix the system?
Response #2
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 1/19/98 1:11:51 AM
there isn't any one solution of the kind that you could talk about reasonably easily on a BBS, in a corporate boardroom, or even on the floor of congress. Its just too complex...
So. Who's up for Quake?
:-)
Response #3
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 1/19/98 1:48:26 AM
That's it! Quake is the solution...a frag-fest on the floor of the Senate.
"And the motion is carried, with Senator Stormbringer accumulating 34 frags with his defeat of Senator Dethmaster"
Response #4
By: Da Sissop
Date: 1/19/98 9:30:06 PM
"Haha! I got the FiliBuster 2000!"
Response #5
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 1/22/98 12:34:51 AM
"The computer for the rest of us...on the Hill."
Response #6
By: rorschach
Date: 1/24/98 3:09:07 PM
what is needed is a way of insulating government enough that a long term view is possible but not so much that the citizen is forgotten. the citizen must also be forced to have a stake in the continuance of the nation. citizenship currently is too easy to aquire. nothing worth having comes easy. citizenship should be reserved for those who can prove that they are worthy of ruling this nation. either by a mandatory term of service, demonstration of skills needed to better society as a whole, or some other NON-ARBITRARY, worthwhile test. this is not a new idea. The Greek city-state of Sparta is an excellent example. only Freemen (citizens) were allowed to have a vote in the way government was run and were the only ones allowed to hold governmental office. What is tricky about this idea is, who will be allowed to be citizens. and who will be in charge of administering the tests required to obtain citizenship and do it fairly? that is one of the problems. the other is, how do you take "citizenship" away from those who have it now merely by accident of birth, but have no concept of responsibility to the nation? perhaps having a second category not unlike the niven/pournelle/heinlein idea of a "taxpayer" class. those who chose to become "taxpayers" are allowed to have a hand in controlling what is done with that tax money. those who chose not to pay taxes can earn as much as they like tax free, but may not have a hand in government. the danger here is that it would tend to offer government only to those who could afford to pay taxes. but on the other hand, a person unable to make enough money to pay taxes, probably doesn't have enough skills to be able to adequately weild power anyway. if taxes were say a flat percentage of your income, those who made little money would pay little taxes anyway so this may not be much of an issue. the incentive to become a taxpayer comes from the fact that non-taxpayers are basically at the economic whim of the taxpayers. those who get the shaft will be forced to decide whether to try to change the system or bend over and take it in the ass. to change the system they will have to become taxpayers themselves, forcing some measure of social responsibility on them.
Response #7
By: Ralf
Date: 1/24/98 4:51:35 PM
I like what you said, but it'd be easier to read if you broke it up into paragraphs.
The Heinlienesque concept of "citizen" is somewhat fascist, in that you must serve a military term before you've earned the right to vote. The idea being that only those who have demonstrated a willingness to die for the greater good are fit to decide what's best for everyone else.
The "non-citizens" are like drones, gadding about and enjoying life without the opportunity to have a say-so in the government.
That may be okay, but it creates a whole disenfranchised population who is governed without representation. Historically, when that happens, it's "La Revolucion!!" and blood flows in the streets. Very unstable.
It seems to me we could start things off by balkanizing the United States. Split off California, the entire northeast seaboard, Nevada, Texas, the central states, and the deep south. Let them form their own soveriegn governments with their own levels of intolerance.
Christian Right-Wing Nutball? Move to the New South!
Socialist Tree-Hugging Liberal? Move to New California!
Gun-Toting HyperLibertarian? Move to New Nevada!
...then like-minded folks could just rub elbows with each other, grouse about all the other losers in those other countries (like Texas), and reduce internal tensions.
Response #8
By: rorschach
Date: 1/27/98 9:47:47 AM
sorry ralf, you know that grammer was never my forte.
Yes, I admit I'm a bit of a fascist on this point. But let's face it, theres too damned many people running around with what I call the "Oh Poor Me" syndrome. Hell, just look at any oprah or sally jessie show! the underclasses are already disenfranchised but the haven't a clue how to solve the problem. the solution is involvement and THOUGHT. involvement without thought ruins the system, thought without involvement ignores the system.
Response #9
By: sooz
Date: 1/27/98 7:38:36 PM
Ror*:
RE: Yes. Personal responsibility is the key, instead of that "POOR ME" crap. Let's all not blame one another, and be responsible for ourselves. Whatever you are, you are. It's not your boss' fault, your mama's fault, your cousin's fault or the person who mugged you's fault.
About the daytime talk shows: They're as orchestrated as WWF wrestling. It's just acting, and it's funny, sometimes.
We'll always have brainy types, and we'll always have trashy folks. In all the societies down through history, there's always been classes. That's just the way people work, and it's ok, buecause that way we have Michael Dell, and we have someone to sweep the floor at McDonald's.
See?
Response #10
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 1/27/98 11:02:21 PM
I think that what we need to do in this country is to have everybody smoke a lot of pot and go to Rainbow Gatherings and all chant 'OM' a lot, while our patchouli incense burns and everyone gets all frolicky in the woods, and we have a big drum circle around a huge bonfire.
And *then*, after that, middle-aged white judges will be able to say, "I love you, brother, but you're going to have to go to jail for two months simply for being a minority race in the wrong place at the wrong time. Peace."
Response #11
By: rorschach
Date: 1/28/98 9:59:04 AM
on the subject of minority races, has anyone noticed the demographics of texas lately (i know some of you hale from other places now but most of yall lived in houston at least for a while)? hell white males ARE the minority!
Response #12
By: Da Sissop
Date: 1/28/98 11:25:09 AM
Texas demographics (based on the the most recent available WebNuns census data, collected yesterday):
Generic Assholes: 26%
People who get piercings or tattoos "to be unique": 21%
Generic Morons: 17%
People too old to drive, but driving anyway: 13%
Generic Rednecks: 10%
People with 500-watt amps in their cars and no tweeters: 6%
People who think soccer is "football": 4%
Generic White Males: 3%
Response #13
By: Gowan McGland
Date: 1/28/98 11:28:53 PM
You'll notice Sooz said WWF wrestling.
WCW/nWo wresting on the other hand is completely real.
Response #14
By: Ralf
Date: 1/30/98 7:09:31 AM
About as real as "Mortal Kombat".
Response #15
By: Da Sissop
Date: 1/30/98 10:44:47 AM
I'd like to see a tag-team match where Oprah and Rosie take on Jerry and Sally Jesse.
Response #16
By: sooz
Date: 1/30/98 11:15:17 PM
...and Jerry Springer can stand around with his hand on his forehead, pretending he wishes it wasn't happening.
Response #17
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 1/31/98 4:03:31 PM
I wish public spectacle really *was* public spectacle, rather than televised spectacle. If shows like 'Jerry Springer' weren't televised and were events you had to buy tickets to go and see, or even if they happened as a matter of course in some major metropolitan city center for free, they would fail miserably.
Response #18
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 1/31/98 10:21:35 PM
Watching Jerry Springer is the TV equivilent of slowing down for a traffic accident involving a hearse and a Hart's Fried Chicken delivery truck...it's not so much the individual elements as what happens when they come together.
Response #19
By: Jay
Date: 2/2/98 11:47:07 AM
all I know is if I lived in Cleveland I'd vote him in as Mayor again
Response #20
By: sooz
Date: 2/5/98 7:52:20 PM
I saw Springer on Conan's late night show yesterday. He was absolutely hilarious.
"So, Jerry, we never see you anymore once the fights break out. Just where do you go when they start fighting?" queried Conan.
"To the bank." quipped Mr. Srpinger.
Yes, I thought that was the most honest statement I'd heard all day.
Response #21
By: Cleotis
Date: 2/16/98 8:12:41 PM
My vote for the first official Webnuns '95 Snerd:
We all take a trip to Chitown to see Springer in the studio!
Anybody game?
Response #22
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 2/16/98 10:00:26 PM
Sounds good to me. After we see springer, we can retrace the steps of the Blues Brothers, before they were pried out of the grave for that Blues Brothers 2000 abomination.
Then its off to the Art Institute to set off the alarms near Beuys' 'Felt Suit.' <--extreme inside joke no one will get
Response #23
By: Da Sissop
Date: 2/16/98 10:14:23 PM
I'm sorry, but I can't go to the Jerry Springer show. My religion forbids any show of support for Jerry Springer, Sally Jesse, or *any* of that variety of Morons-On-Parade shows.
Response #24
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 2/17/98 11:13:23 AM
Springer LIVE!?
Kinda smacks of 'professional wrestling'...but with none of the good points. Oh don't get me wrong...I've *tried* to watch...but I find myself cringing too much. I suppose the hateful shit that some people are willing to do to others is just a bit too emarassing...me being a member of the species and all. Reminds me of that line from Aliens..."At least you don't see them screwing each other over for a percentage."
Response #25
By: sooz
Date: 2/17/98 11:52:41 AM
Springer's a genius. He smirks all the way through interviews, because it's just funny to him that people watch this nonsense. He makes no pretense that it's real. He laughs about it, too.
I can't sit through a show, either. It gives me the willies. But he ain't no fool.
Response #26
By: rorschach
Date: 2/17/98 4:48:45 PM
are firearms allowed? what about teflon coated armor peircing ammo? dum-dums? is there a limit to the number of rounds in my clip? is there anyone in the studio that is off limits? soory, but i thought you said something about target practice....
Response #27
By: Gowan McGland
Date: 2/17/98 6:04:50 PM
If you've seen the show, you know that "dum-dums" are allowed if not encouraged.
Response #28
By: Cleotis
Date: 2/17/98 9:13:42 PM
True television genius can be seen in John Henson of Talk Soup. Now THAT GUY is FUNNY.
Response #29
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 2/17/98 10:17:26 PM
Stay Free! is the best thing on television!
(Be sure and read Stewart Ewen..)
Response #30
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 2/18/98 5:16:23 AM
Re: Talk soup..
Greg was good too, ya gotta admit. But Henson fell into his own role rather well....I'm over feeling abandoned.
Response #31
By: sooz
Date: 2/19/98 7:08:15 PM
Is he related to Jim Henson, the late muppett master?
Response #32
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 2/20/98 7:18:47 AM
No...HANSON...as in the unholy trinity of pop music.
Response #33
By: rorschach
Date: 2/20/98 8:11:05 AM
any relation to hansen's disease? (leprosy)
Response #34
By: Shadow Sprite
Date: 2/20/98 8:46:17 AM
You mean like John Henson, the host of Talk Soup?
Response #35
By: Jay
Date: 2/20/98 11:01:43 AM
on an up note not related to this thread at all the PROMISE KEEPERS filed for Bankruptsy
Response #36
By: rorschach
Date: 2/20/98 12:23:31 PM
BUT THEY PROMISED TO PAY!
Response #37
By: sooz
Date: 2/20/98 3:45:32 PM
No, no, no. They're just going to quit paying their full-time employees at the end of March. Geez, this is how rumors get started.
They have a 2 million dollar salary budget, and 237 salaried employees. They used to rely on tickets to their rallies to pay their salaries, but they switched to relying on contributions. They're trying to show they're not out to make money.
Sheesh. Christians try to do something decent, and WHAM.
Response #38
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 2/22/98 1:05:53 AM
I think the best thing the Christian church could do for men would be to say, "Ok. We were lying. GOD IS A WOMAN."
Response #39
By: Cleotis
Date: 2/22/98 11:56:52 AM
So many of my friends find it amusing that I'm an outspoken Christian, and an outspoken anti-fan of Promise Keepers.
I mean, it's not that I don't agree with what they're doing. It's not that at all. Their theology _is_ sound, and all those criticisms about their agenda being sexist is all horsemalarky. They're trying to make men better husbands and better leaders. Nothing wrong with that.
However, for me, I've never been a PK fan for several reasons:
1: I've heard tapes of the crusaides. I can stay home and go to a backwoods Baptist Church if I want to be yelled at by some guy with veins throbbing out of his head.
2: I _DO_ respect my Family, I _AM_ (or try my best to be) a Godly example of a Husband and Father, and I _DON'T EVER_ beat the crap out of my wife, no matter how heated our arguments may get.
3: The PK movement focuses too much on the whole racial harmony thing. Please, kids, can we just get past this color thing? I realize that there are just as many bad white people in the world as there are black people. It ain't about "niggers" or "white trash". It's about BAD PEOPLE, regardless of color.
4: Too many sports analogies. Why is it that when some guy wants to identify with MEN, he feels compelled to use a friggin' sports analogy? Coach McCartney, ya wanna connect with me? Let's talk about wives being a Proverbs 31 motherboard - don't give me all this "two minute warning" B.S.
5: Why does the music that is supposed to relate to the men in the rallies always suck so miserably?
I don't want to make it sound like I'm bitter or that I have an agenda. I think it's sad that PK is going broke. They do a lot of good things for the men of America who _are_ wife beaters, porn viewers, black haters, and football watchers. Thing is, I'm none of those. I just can't relate to 65,000 guys hugging each other.
...All this from a guy who just slept in on a Sunday morning... Oh well, at least I went to my Bible Study yesterday.
Response #40
By: sooz
Date: 2/22/98 4:30:48 PM
This is ironic - I just had lunch with some friends, and the men were explaining why PK is a wonderful thing. I told them I don't have a problem with what they're doing, but that doesn't mean Richie should go. Like CleoMikey, Richie doesn't NEED all that. And the music would drive him wacky.
Thanks, Cleo, for putting into words what I was trying to tell these very nice friends at lunch.
PK isn't going broke, though. They're gonna quit charging people to get in, and rely on contributions. That seems like an ok thing.
Response #41
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 2/23/98 8:39:33 AM
I *like* the idea of 65,000 guys hugging each other. And P0RN IZ KEWL.
Hmm.
Response #42
By: Mycroft
Date: 2/23/98 11:21:13 AM
I have to agree with h0mEr, P0RN _IS_ /<-KEWL.
Response #43
By: Cleotis
Date: 2/23/98 4:36:23 PM
Computer magazines are my porn. My wife hates to see them arrive because she knows that I'm going to lock myself in the bathroom with them. I promise her I'm only reading the articles, but when I leave the bathroom buckling my pants commenting on things like how much prices have come down on mass storage and such, she's gotta be thinking something else.
Response #44
By: Ralf
Date: 2/23/98 6:27:24 PM
I used to hate those little cards that fall into your lap whenever you open a computer magazine. You know, the ones that say, "save 200% on 54 issues: newsstand price $79.00 YOURS for only 14 cents!"
Now whenever I get one, I flex it a few times. This sound is Oscar Meyer Weinerdog's cue to come bounding over and get a subscription card. He runs around the house like a fool with it in his mouth, DARING me to come get it back.
This lasts until the next subscription card I find, when he loses interest in the old card and snatches the new one away.
Bigfun!
Response #45
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 5/4/98 8:03:57 PM
Porn rocks!! (Ask Mulder)
One thingg about Springer, when do you think they'll run out of trailer parks for him to get guests from?
Response #46
By: Da Sissop
Date: 5/5/98 7:36:18 AM
Last I heard the owners of the show want to Stop The Violence, but Jerry's vowed to.. ahem... fight that edict.
It's bad enough that most of those shows exploit morons who are willing to *verbally* abuse each other or be publicly humiliated for a shot at being on TV, but Jerry Springer is the lowest of the low.
I will never support that show in any way, shape or form, until the day that the guests are allowed to start knocking JERRY around.
Response #47
By: Jay
Date: 5/5/98 10:16:05 AM
Lets see if we can all get on Springer claiming we're all stalking eachother over the nunnery...have a big fist fight - then go "sorry it was just a big misunderstanding" and get up and leave...
Response #48
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 5/5/98 8:14:16 PM
Well, the Springer show has that Train-Wreck (hmm, and ad! Train-Wreck TV. To the tune of Must See TV) mystique to it. You know it's horrible, you it's bad, but occasionally, you have to look as you pass, just to see what it looks like. Of course, in my opinon, every talk show is full of crap.
Response #49
By: Mycroft
Date: 5/9/98 11:03:10 AM
I still say that watching Springer more than once a week should be a no-jail-time felony. If you are caught watching that guy more than once a week, you are prohibited from voting for one year. If you're ON the show, the you should lose the right to vote AND breed permanently. I really don't like the show.
Response #50
By: Ralf
Date: 5/10/98 12:21:21 PM
I don't think it's violent enough.
Give all the guests hand-guns THEN watch the fun. Evolution in action...
Response #51
By: Da Sissop
Date: 5/11/98 9:34:58 AM
"Oh look, honey! We got an invitation to be flown to Chicago and be on the special 'I Don't Know How to Tell The Newlyweds Next Door I've Slept with Both of Them' episode of the Jerry Springer show!"
"Chicago? For free? Wooo!"
Response #52
By: Crush the State
Date: 5/28/98 6:40:11 AM
>3: The PK movement focuses too much on the whole racial harmony >thing. Please, kids, can we just get past this color thing? I >realize that there are just as many bad white people in the world as >there are black people. It ain't about "niggers" or "white >trash". It's about BAD PEOPLE, regardless of color.
Geez - it's the same as racism - classifying people as "good" or "bad" is a matter of taste, relativism to your subjectivism. Guess that's another one that didn't understand Kant, Nietzsche, - or - the bible.
BTW, porn is stupid - symbols that encourage us to treat each other as concrete abstract - that is, as symbols rather than living beings. Jerking off with an imagination is a better futurism. See Thomas Pynchon's "Pornographies of Flight," in the novel Gravity's Rainbow which a few of you have a shot in hell of understanding.
Response #53
By: Jay
Date: 5/28/98 10:18:03 AM
the only problem with jacking off to porn is having to wipe the screen off afterwards
porn is just another form of artistic expression made to inspire and move people
Response #54
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 5/30/98 1:08:25 AM
Wow, I might read Thomas Pynchon's "Pornographies of Flight", if I actually cared what someone's opinion about porn was. And I don't know about you, but most people that I have ever had sex with were not very concrete, they were prety pliable. Some were abstract, but not many (you know how artists can be). Maybe that's your problem man, you're fucking statues!
I think porn was designed to allow people a way to get into each other a little more.
Response #55
By: Mycroft
Date: 5/31/98 6:17:34 AM
Nah, porn is a here to provide a viable alternative to rape. "Hmmm. I wanna have sex(or want to have sex in a specific way), and I don't have a partner (or my partner won't do that, the batard/bitch!)"
It's a pretty good alternative, to me.
Response #56
By: Ralf
Date: 5/31/98 10:46:43 AM
Most porn is just plain silly. Rather than invoke feelings of lust and/or arousal, I usually end up on the floor giggling uncontrollably.
I guess I haven't mastered the suspension of disbelief for this medium.
Acknowledging that 90% of anything is crap, that means that there's SOME percentage of quality porn out there. But I ain't seen it.
How can you tell?
Response #57
By: Gowan McGland
Date: 5/31/98 2:54:05 PM
So, those home videos you shot...
well, nevermind.
Response #58
By: Da Sissop
Date: 5/31/98 3:50:02 PM
> How can you tell?
Well, I don't wanna spoil it, but something really amazing will happen to your special part.
Response #59
By: sooz
Date: 5/31/98 5:04:26 PM
Crush, why isn't it right for us to call something "good" or "bad", but it's ok if you refer to something (in this case, porn) as "stupid"? Seems like all value judgements are just opinions, and we all have 'em, no matter how much we wander about singing "Let It Be."
And to Mycoft (I think that's who it was), about porn being a substitute for rape, that's kinda bogus. Rape is usually an outlet for violence and rage, rather than for pent-up sexual lust. It's just another form of physical assault.
Response #60
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 5/31/98 5:13:44 PM
I agree with you Sooz, if that were the case, we could just set rapists in front of the pron screen and we'd never have to worry.
Ralf, Fang almost gave it way. You know it's good porn if you're able to fire off a rocket. Or at least need a napkin for clean up.
I don't know if it's art, but I know what I like!
(Where's my raincoat?)
Response #61
By: Loki
Date: 5/31/98 8:46:16 PM
Hmmm... Generally if a photo is in black and white it can be considered "art" instead of pornography. Can anybody tell me why this is?
Response #62
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 5/31/98 8:47:50 PM
Maybe it's a racial thing Loki???
Response #63
By: Mycroft
Date: 6/1/98 1:53:10 PM
Ehhh, looks like I'm going to have to come up with some sort of symbol to preface all of my pseduo-stupid/fatuous postings. i forget how easy it is to take people seriously on the net.
1. 8==> "Hey, Mycroft's being a dick! good thing he warned me."
2. ------------------------------ 8< --------------------------------
"Ahh, the perforated-for-easy-removal/collect-all-12 fatuous section!"
3. [ASSHEAD] Godnigger, how i hate the special olympics! Gimps should be recycled into vienna sausages! [ASSHEAD] (imagine a / over there)
any preferences?
Response #64
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 6/2/98 2:26:41 AM
StateCrusher sez: >Guess that's another one that didn't understand Kant, Nietzsche, - or - the bible.<
My thought exactly...
------
Porn can be fun. Sexiness is fun. Having a healthy perspective and enjoying pornographic media is fun. Silent happy glow of first chakra pulse steady rythm blissed-out sillygrin goofiness ...is fun.
When I see porn, I don't see abstraction, I see FANTASY. One of the primary goals to achieve for the human race is the Liberation Of Fantasy. Pull it out of the dichotomous pit Crush has it stuffed in and waggle it proudly in the air above your head! Abstraction + Fun = Fantasy. Any dionysian should understand this. :-)
Response #65
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 6/2/98 5:41:10 AM
How could anyone not see a video box that reads 'Edward Penishands' and not at least *wonder* what would be on that tape?
I may eventually be a victim of my own sense of humor, but until then, I enjoy my laughs wherever and whenever I find them.
"Here Lies Zane" "And He's STILL Got A Wedgie"
Response #66
By: sooz
Date: 6/2/98 1:07:07 PM
When I see porn, I imagine some man/woman needing a paycheck really bad, posed in these incredibly goofy positions, with a sweaty, tattooed, unshaven cameraman going click-click-click, and the total unsexiness of it all makes me laugh manically.
But I"m just that way.
Response #67
By: Loki
Date: 6/4/98 1:03:01 AM
I see someone saying "You know, $100 bucks and 1/10th an ounce of crystal meth per donkey, that's what makes this job worthwhile."
Mycroft is being a bad influence on me.
Response #68
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 6/4/98 9:06:46 PM
Loki, once you go donkey, you never go back.
BTW, Edward Penishands, was actually a pretty good parody (pornwise anyway) of the real movie.
Response #69
By: Mycroft
Date: 6/4/98 9:31:07 PM
Yeah, good F/X, too.
Response #70
By: Crush the State
Date: 6/5/98 10:21:07 AM
>I think porn was designed to allow people a way to get into each other a little more.
And another calls it the "Liberation of Fantasy." My friends, the abstract is the liberation of fantasy - but porn is what we might call the abstract-literal, e.g. a symbolization, far more dichotomous than any assault I could manage. Porn is, far from the liberation of fantasy, its enslavement to the finite, and in that not "bad" (as your thinking implies my thinking would be stating, a condition known as "solipsism") but useless to a future-thinking race of humanoids.
It's that "cyclic confrontation of denial" boredom creeping into my posting again...
Response #71
By: Da Sissop
Date: 6/5/98 7:32:39 PM
I'd just like to point out that I was looking up "solipsism" in my trusty old 1992 American Hertiage Dictionary and noticed that there's an entry for (and picture of) O.J. Simpson.
So now I absolutely have to go out and buy an updated American Heritage dictionary.
Response #72
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 6/6/98 12:25:26 PM
OK normally I don't quite, because in this format, it'sa pain in the ass, but I felt it necessary this time.
(Begin quote from Crush) Porn is,far from the liberation of fantasy, its enslavement to the finite, and in that not "bad" (as your thinking implies my thinking would be stating, a condition known as "solipsism") but useless to a future-thinking race of humanoids. (End Quote)
Crush, don't you think that's largely a matter of opinion? I'd really like to know too, how exactly porn serves to enslave? Saying that it's useless implies to me the line of though of "What's the use of eating? It'll just make me have to shit again!" Which is really pretty illogical. I mean just because your mom was on the cover of Crack Whore Magazine is no reason to think the WHOLE porn experience is bad!
Response #73
By: rorschach
Date: 6/6/98 10:15:20 PM
I would like to comment on something mycroft said and kinda sorta got a little toasted about. mycroft said something to the effect that porn was an outlet for sexual frustrations and was a substitute for rape... a couple people seemed a little testy on that point, but you know, in a way, he is right. porn (and prostitution) exist because humankind decided it needed an "acceptable" outlet for those pent up passions. the rapists that are left are those that are acting out more violent frustrations and would not be helped by porn or prostitution.
Response #74
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 6/7/98 6:15:16 AM
Porn changed my life...but prostitution changed my primary care physician. -Zane
Response #75
By: Mycroft
Date: 6/7/98 10:38:05 AM
Actually porn and rape have little to do with each other. Rape is a handy, and incredibly effective, way to impress onto the other person how powerless they are. Porn is a good outlet for those frustrations that could eventually lead a sexually embittered person to go out and claim a little power at the expense of another's evening and self-esteem. It's also an easy way to dispose of excess starlets on the west coast.
Response #76
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 6/7/98 1:15:44 PM
Here-here Mycroft!
I'd like to thave that disposal job!
Response #77
By: sooz
Date: 6/8/98 12:28:26 AM
Anyone that thinks that even some rapists wouldn't rape if they just had a release for their sexual tension is very confused.
Let's think... would it be easier to:
1) Go to Stop N Go and get a Hustler, or to
2) Grab another person, risk bodily injury or death, commit a felony, injure a human physically and/or psychologically, and possibly end up in the slammer for many years with big ol' boys giving it to ya up the rumpus?
Rape is about violence and power, not about sexual release. Ever.
Response #78
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 6/8/98 5:16:28 AM
Rape:Sex::Torpedo:Fishing
....nuff said.
Response #79
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 6/9/98 4:35:09 PM
Zane, I think your Freudian slip is showing
Response #80
By: Jay
Date: 6/9/98 9:19:47 PM
Loose lips sink slips
Response #81
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 6/10/98 3:18:37 AM
Loose slips, pink lips.
Response #82
By: rorschach
Date: 6/11/98 8:30:45 PM
actually sooz, you kinda missed my point...imagine the sexual frustration and tension in everyones lives if there WERE no such thing. surely SOME of those people who under different circumstances would never dream of rape(or perhaps ONLY fantasize), might be pushed over the edge. sex drive in humans (and apparently in all other species who partake in sexual reproduction) is unique in that there is never "enough". the drive to eat is sated when the stomach is full (USUALLY....). the drive to sleep is sated when somebody gets a good 8 hours or more in..... but offer someone who has just had sex the opprotunity to do so again, and flesh willing he or she WILL (or at least want to...)
Response #83
By: Tess Trueheart
Date: 6/13/98 6:35:40 AM
Uhhh..factor age into your theory and you may have to revise your conclusion...
Some men after having sex require sleep.
As Ralp said rape is about violence and power.
Response #84
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 6/13/98 9:38:38 PM
Sometimes...
A rape fantasy can simply be between a man, and his hampster!
Response #85
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 6/14/98 3:24:29 AM
I can't recall if this point was made earlier in the thread or not, but:
Lots of people look at pornography all the time, and most of them don't commit rape. The percentage that do commit rape after viewing pornography is the same number as the percentage of people who commit rape in the general populace. And it is entirely possible for a rapist to have never used pornography to get off.
So. Have fun watching cum shots without fear of inducing rapist tendencies in your brain! Whee!
Response #86
By: Loki
Date: 6/14/98 4:14:57 AM
Actually it was the pictures on alt.bondage.particle-physics that caused me to worry about my lusty intentions.
Response #87
By: Ralf
Date: 6/14/98 4:27:43 PM
People being who they are, I think if violent rape was the normal form of procreation, there's be a sick minority fantasizing about foreplay and petting.
Deviance is in the mind of the beholder, in other words.
Response #88
By: Zane T. Dark
Date: 6/16/98 6:06:07 PM
Spastic: Ooops...it is, isn't it? Actually, I wear my Freudian slip like a sweater vest so this really doesn't come as a surprise to me. My first analogy invloved a pressure washer...go figure.
Response #89
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 6/17/98 5:22:11 PM
I must say I agree Ralf.
Find a ironclad, fool proof fantasy, and I can show the fools that can screw it up!