Browse Members |
New Members |
[more]
|
Members Born Today |
thelastofourk... 20 year old female Hamilton, ON (CA) We are but hopeful lovers, we are the last of our kind. [more]
|
Submit an Article | Bookmarked Articles
Viewing Various Articles - Page 1
| Twenty to hit with my Rightwing | October 26, 2012, 11:06PM |
 by: Masigno |
|
It’s 4 AM, I awake to a strange noise. My dog, Bella sits up on the edge of the bed and growls. I spring out of bed and take the 9mm from beneath my mattress. I go to my back door and make an inspection, then to my front for another. Nothing to speak of, turns out my broom fell out from beside the refrigerator. No point to this story really, other than to illustrate that I have the right to defend myself and that I choose to do so. In this story, I am using a handgun to ensure my safety, however what I intend to discuss are “assault weapons” and their sale in America. If you don’t know about America’s gun laws, it differs from state to state but here in my home state of Kentucky, there is no registration on handguns or rifles though a background check is required to buy any gun. Nationwide, in the recent past we were under what we knew as the Clinton Assault Ban, this was not a piece of legislation that was voted on, it was an executive order made to last for the next ten years. In every way imaginable, this law failed to accomplish anything. This law didn’t prohibit the sale of weapons of this type just production of new ones; that meant that cost went up on firearms already in existence. It limited, modification of certain parts of a firearm that could possible make it look like an assault rifle. Under this ban, we sold more firearms in the US than previous periods without regulation; we saw no reduction in gun violence. The laws also forced closed several companies that manufacture firearms here in the US costing thousands of jobs and millions in tax revenue. Personally, I own several weapons, knives, swords, firearms, I enjoy collecting weapons, I like to shoot and I admire the history behind a lot of firearms. I will agree, that I don’t need an Ak47 or a Sig 552, but I don’t need a Dodge Challenger either, I don’t need a 1080p television, but I’m a free man and I have the money to buy what I want. When it comes to right’s I lean toward giving more than less, I’ve never known a government to relinquish power easily. Why would I trust the government to tell me what I can and cannot have? My government is the same one that has made several bad decisions and has bloated itself on lobbyists to the point that it’s nearly a plutocracy. Firearms in America make up a billion dollar industry that provides millions of jobs and taxable revenue. I also want to point out that any form of restriction creates a worse black market and more deficits trying to restrict its sale than could be managed with legal sale. A lot of people will argue that I have no need of having a firearm with more than ten rounds of ammunition. I’d simply like to point out that a criminal certainly wouldn't obey the same rules, why would I choose to defend myself less adequately? How am I to know what the exact amount of ammunition I’m going to need will be? Keep in mind there are plenty of stories of people who’ve had to defend themselves during riots and other disasters where they were attacked by more than ten people. You also have to look at the type of people who are advocating for gun control. Rosie O’Donnell, The Clintons and Rudolph Giuliani live in gated communities and employ armed security guards to get them from place to place. It’s kinda like when the X-ray tech puts a lead bib over your balls, means while he steps behind concrete and talks to you through a microphone. I don't want to give the impression that I'm right wing or even libertarian, personally, most of my views are socialist. I'm against the death penalty, for gay marriage and a women's rights. I voted for Obama and intend to do so again. I wish my country could join the rest of the civilized world with socialized medicine. I believe in holding on to the heritage of our firearms and the rights promised us in our Constitution, our inalienable rights. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [8 comments] |
|
| Information on our rights and our country and government | December 29, 2011, 5:09PM |
 by: Jareth |
|
For your use and dissemination. Maybe someone else can see where I am not looking at this properly. As written in the references below, all it will take is interpretation a specific way by the courts, and we can witness one of the worst legal catastrophes in our history as a nation. The references below are current law. Reference HR 1540: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf Section 1021 - p.265 (subtitle D - Counterterrorism) pp.(a) - (e) Section 1022 - p.266 - pp(a)-(b) (these paragraphs and subparagraphs are quite vague in a legal sense as to WHO qualifies, and paragraph (b) does indeed only remove the REQUIREMENT and does nothing to PROHIBIT these actions on citizens or legal residents. Reference S.J. Res 23 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/pdf/PLAW-107publ40.pdf This broadly defines the powers of the President in a loosely defined war against countries, organizations, and individuals deemed a threat, without any real criteria. There is no provision in this to protect American citizens or legal residents. Reference H.J. Res. 55 Which by the opening statement, is a complete revision of the original War Powers Resolution of 1973 Provided for references made in Resolution 23 above. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hjres55ih/pdf/BILLS-112hjres55ih.pdf | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [8 comments] |
|
| The DS Keyring: You Need One. | December 19, 2011, 12:18PM |
||
 by: eon |
|||
| |||
topic: Various | |||
[reply] [132 comments] |
|||
| Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted. | October 24, 2011, 7:08AM |
 by: Satchell |
|
[I originally wrote this for a feminist website, we'll see how that goes.] My goal is equality. After reading such heroic efforts like the black civil rights movement, the fiery lectures of Frederick Douglass, the tenants of integrity from Martin Luther King Jr, the renouncement of segregation in the later work of Malcom X- I'm left wondering, why are people still in a fuss about a black president? Why are there so many black slums in the inner city? Why is there still a systemic and psychological segregation? That movement may have ended American slavery, but not racism- it may have ended segregation in the service industry, but not inequality. This essay is aimed towards addressing the psychological aspects of segregation (in homophobia, racism, sexism, etc), not the systemic aspects, which are just as important and must be addressed for true equality. Let there be no confusion, I think continual and serious activism towards equal rights is necessary; I only want to highlight the harmful effects of taking ourselves too seriously and it's relevance to a civil rights movement. --------------------------------------------- Seriousness is of the mind- it's cerebral and head-dominant. It is the status of man acting as if he is of the gods. “I am to be taken seriously because I am assertive and dominant." It's overwhelmingly masculine and it's idealistically pristine. Comedy is of the body. It's the lewd behavior (receptive) and the vulgar actions. It is the failure, the fall from grace that is comedy. It is the return to the earth (reality) which is visceral and primal. This is the realm in which things collapse and change. It's an overwhelmingly feminine energy (the receptive rather than the assertive). And so we have the polarization of yin and yang, assertive and receptive, creative and destructive, dark and light. The horror in falling from grace is tragedy. The fact we aren't graceful is comedy. Tragedy is the act of falling from the world of the gods and into the world of man. It's the separation or act of all disillusionment and education of what reality is. Learning is painful. It's a crashing sensation, a struggle through the mud and for that reason, it's a comedy. Comedy should not be making light of the situation. By entering the truth through personal pain, you experience the comedy. Essentially it is self improvement through self destruction; by destroying these false ideals, you actually gain what you tried to get in the first place. What I mean to say is that it is only when you give up idealism can you actually work towards accomplishing that ideal- it's the paradox that you laugh at and it's necessary you laugh BECAUSE it's such a horrible experience. The greatest (and I would argue only) joke in the history of man is that by desiring peace, man becomes warlike. An even better example would be the the despot who so badly seeks harmony that he chops off everyone's hands so they can't fight. This is the kind of ignorance that comes with trying to chase harmony. The invention of the ship is the invention of the shipwreck. Comedy brings to light the fact that if we didn't all try so damned hard to be taken seriously, the world would take us seriously. By not competing, no one can compete with us. That, I believe, is why comedy is disrespectful. See, comedy is a rebellion against everything. I suppose the use of homophobic comedy, for example, would be that it takes away all authority of sexuality. Comedy demands that not only is [the great] authority an absolute crackpot, but all authority is shit. Now if you told a genuine homophobic joke with all the virtues I've described, it would also degrade the authority of being able to tell a homophobic joke. It should reveal the paradox of BEING homophobic, as well as trying to be taken seriously is a joke. That not only are homosexuals a total laugh, but so is the person telling the joke. It's a double edged sword that is meant to cut all parties down. THAT is equality. Why should someone be offensive to an oppressed demographic? A successful gay comedy would dissolve the separation between sexualities while also bringing everything into question. Homophobia seeks to ask “Why gay?” while a gay comedy would seek to ask “Why not gay?” By it's separation, it unifies. Too much order and the world suffocates, too much destruction and we dissolve into a puddle. Comedy is the inquisitive force which dissolves all empires and creates the materials to build again through inquiry. A well done gay comedy should destroy every ideology about respect and in this sense, it is the great equalizer. Every person, gay or otherwise, is equal to this destructive force. In this way, we find that offensive, disrespectful comedy is an incredibly effective way to psychologically equalize any number of separate ideologies by the destruction of authority. If this offended you, don't worry, I don't take it seriously. I sure as hell hope people disagree. How else would we become better if not through struggle? One love. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [5 comments] |
|
| Two United as One: Marriage as the reunion of the separated duad. | December 14, 2010, 11:14PM |
 by: Aesyra |
|
Joseph Campbell says that “[Marriage] is the reunion of the separated duad. Originally you were one.” He is not the first to state that we were once one and become one again through the ritual of marriage; Plato also supported this idea in Symposium during Aristophanes’ speech concerning the “Three Genders Theory.”2 To further support the idea that marriage reunites two who were originally one, The Bible repeatedly emphasizes the husband and wife becoming “one flesh.”3 We spend our lives trying to find our other halves so that we can make ourselves whole again. When two people join a marriage, they give themselves to each other, make sacrifices to the relationship and connect on a deeper level than just the physical—they come together on a spiritual level, thus making them one with each other. Campbell supports this, saying “you are now two in the world, but the recognition of the spiritual identity is what marriage is.”4 He says that the two become “one flesh”, though he does not mean in the literal sense, as that would be a biological impossibility.5 Rather, he means that by consistently putting effort into the marriage and focusing on it instead of one’s self—both counterparts must constantly work to achieve this—then the two people essentially become one, united through marriage. We see his support of this when he says, “…and if you are acquiescing constantly to [the marriage] instead of to individual personal whim, you come to realize that that is true—the two really are one.”6 At one point, Bill Moyers states, “So marriage is utterly incompatible with the idea of doing one’s own thing.”7 He is basically saying that because the two people become one person, neither of the two can go off and do something different than the other, or do something without that other person present. Campbell counters this statement, explaining that “it is in a sense doing one’s own thing, but the one isn’t just you, it’s the two together as one.” When one enters a marriage, it is no longer “my life” or “your life”—it becomes “our life”, both lives combined into one. What one person does affects and reflects back on the other, whether in a positive or a negative way. This is the uniting of two lives into one through marriage. Campbell was not the first to believe that we start out as one person, then are separated into two people and constantly search for our other halves in order to be whole again. Plato also believed this, as shown in his classic book Symposium during Aristophanes’ speech. Aristophanes speech contains an allegory which is used to explain why human beings spend most of their lives searching for their “other half” as well as how we came to be separated from these other halves.2 In the allegory, Aristophanes explains that there used to be three genders consisting of: male, female and one consisting of both male and female—the third has “died out.” He goes on to form a picture of what their appearances were: “…they were round, with their backs and sides forming a circle. They had four hands and the same number of legs, and two absolutely identical faces on a cylindrical neck. They had a single head for their two faces (which were on opposite sides), four ears, two sets of genitals, and every other part of their bodies was how you’d imagine it on the basis of what I’ve said.”3 Because they were so strong and ambitious, they attempted to take on the gods. The gods, with Zeus as their leader, held a council and decided that they could not commit genocide—not out of compassion for the human race, but because without the humans, the gods would have no one to sacrifice to them—yet they could not allow the humans to go unpunished. Zeus decided to weaken the human race by splitting them into halves, and so “he cut every member of the human race in half” and commanded Apollo “to twist every divided person’s face and half-neck round towards the gash…[and to] heal their wounds. So Apollo twisted their heads around, and pulled the skin together from all over their bodies on to what is now called the stomach (think of purses being closed by draw-strings), leaving only a single opening in the middle of the stomach, which we call the navel, where he tied the skin up into a knot.”2 The humans began to die out because they refused to eat or do anything at all without their other halves. “Zeus took pity on them…[he] moved their genitals round to the front of their bodies and thus introduced intercourse between two human beings, with the man as the agent of generation taking place within the woman.”3 The allegory explains how we were at one time one with another person, and now, being separate—cut in half—we reunite spiritually through the bonds of marriage. This is what marriage is. Like Joseph Campbell, Plato believed that we were once one, and through marriage our souls are reunited with our other half, making us whole and complete. The Holy Bible also greatly supports Campbell’s belief that marriage unites two people, two lives, into one life. Repeatedly throughout the sacred text is the emphasis on marriage uniting two people into “one flesh,” allegorically speaking.4 The full verse found in Genesis 2:23-24 reads: “And Adam said, This [is] now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” The theme occurs once more in the Gospel of Mathew. “…This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.” Keeping with the repeated scripture, yet again we see “For this reason man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” Time and time again we see the appearance of marriage meaning that two people will be joined as one throughout the bible. In conclusion, Joseph Campbell strongly believes that what defines marriage is two people coming together as two halves of a whole, reuniting spiritually to complete each other through the union of matrimony. Plato presented his belief in the reuniting of two people into one through his character, Aristophanes, in Symposium. To further support Campbell’s idea one only needs to look at the Bible, which has been the top seller of books for years, which constantly emphasizes the union of the two into the one throughout the entire text. Works Cited Campbell, Joseph. The Power of Myth with Bill Moyers. New York: Doubleday, 1988. Plato. Symposium. Trans. Robin Waterfield. New York: Oxford University, 1994. The Holy Bible: King James Version. Zondervan, 2010. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [5 comments] |
|
| Hell explained by a chemistry student | June 17, 2010, 2:41PM |
 by: Diabolic_Pixie |
|
A lot of people are confused as to how Hell actually works. This one chemistry student explained it perfectly. The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid term. The answer by one student was so 'profound' that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well: Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)? Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following: First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added. This gives two possibilities: 1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose. 2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell,then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over. So which is it? If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, 'It will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you,' and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number two must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct......leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting 'Oh my God.' THIS STUDENT RECEIVED AN A+. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [1 comment] |
|
| Childrens Development In An Alternative Lifestye.. | January 8, 2009, 6:37AM |
 by: Digital_Fxxker |
|
“Allowing a child to be exposed to be exposed to alternative lifestyle is damaging to their development”-Anonymous online source. Many people, after reading the given statement, would be fully supportive of it, with the argument that they were brought up in a conventional family environment (heterosexual parent or parents) and they turned out a respectable person. So in their views any other way of life is inappropriate or damaging to that person’s outcome. However, these people also claim that they are open minded and fair but, by stereotyping individuals and groups who have had alternative upbringings as having ‘corrupt minds’ or are ‘deviants of society’ this cancels out there claims of being fair and shows them as being close minded and unjust. Does it not? If you were to do an experiment and compare two children, from separate upbringings and look at their personal views on life, and everyday situations at influential stages of there life, you would most likely find that Child A- the child who had the typical heterosexual parents- who lived by conventional values would be closed off, distant and un-accepting in unfamiliar surroundings and communities. This child would grow up thinking that same sex relationships are ‘un-natural’ and ‘wrong’. Where as Child B- the child who has had an alternative upbringing and have same sex parents - would be more understanding and accepting to people’s different lifestyle choices as they have been shown out in the open to them. And without too much difficulty, these children would be able to adjust to unfamiliar setting. By comparing these children at different stages of their life’s it is evident that even from a very early age the children have similar views on thing surrounding them such as good behaviour and appropriate manners. But a difference in their development is hard to see at such an early age which child is which. However, by the start of primary school it becomes more visible as child A may find it harder to make friends and the friends that they do make they have a close connection with them as they are usually also from the same family setting. Child B will find it easier to be make friends but will find it harder to feel a close connection with these friends. In their teenage years the divide is a lot more visible as Child A (conventional upbringing) shows more signs of being a typical teenager with a small group of friends and is socially more accepted with a conventional appearance and is offended by the opposite lifestyles. Child B (alternative up bringing) appears to be more approachable with their peers and there appearance may reflect there directness towards people which in turn they get ridiculed for by children in group A. These teenagers would possibly be more daring and willing to try new things. These choices and opinions stay with them thought their adult life and acts like a window to their development. by observing they types of people in a variety of jobs across the uk it shows that people who are open with their views feel suited to a position inside the alternative community –by either running an alternative club to being a protest manager-.and the majority of those brought up conventionally have ordinary jobs. In spite of the given examples, it’s true that this is not always the case, you may have heterosexual parents who believe themselves and show there children that there is more than one type of family and that same sex relationships are around and accepted by different societies and that they are also normal. By giving that child un-biast information and allowing them the freedom to have their own views on different communities and there lifestyle choices it allows that child to grow up with a fair and accepting view on different situations. Personally, I disagree that “being exposed to alternative lifestyles is damaging to a Childs development”. because the way I see it, is if a person is brought up in a sheltered environment and told the only one particular way of life is right, then that person is being held back from making there own decisions and judgement. Indirectly is stopping that person growing as a person compared to someone who is aware of alternative lifestyles and having the mental capacity to acknowledge that it is accepted. So incidentally it appears that being exposed to different lifestyles is in fact beneficial to a child development as it allows them to understand and feel comfortable about being in different situations through out life. By Leah Cameron | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [1 comment] |
|
| Can you be fat and fit? | October 18, 2008, 9:18PM |
 by: bloodyXtears |
|
Men and women who are judged fit on a treadmill test but who are overweight or obese have a lower risk of death than those of appropriate weight but have low fitness levels. In a study published in the Journal of The American Medical Association researcher and exercise physiologist Steven Blair of the University of South Carolina tracked 2,600 people over age 60 years to determine how physical fitness and body fat affected their death rates over a period of 12 years. Blair found that those in the lowest 5th of fitness levels were four times more likely to die than those in the top 5th of fitness levels. This level of fitness provided protection against death whether an individual was of normal weight, overweight, or obese. Blair thinks his findings are important because people in the US and many other countries are increasingly inactive and obesity rates are high, and at the same time many of these countries populations are aging. "We should not ignore obesity," Blair said. "But what happens all too often is we focus nearly exclusively on obesity and forget the activity and fitness part." Blair's team assessed participants' fitness using a treadmill test, seeing how long they could walk while the treadmill's workout increased in intensity. They measured body mass index (BMI) a figure that is calculated from a person's height and weight, as well as waist circumference and percent body fat. Their results showed that even a small effort to improve fitness levels provides a health benefit and that people who are sedentary now don't need to take drastic steps in exercise frequency or intensity to make gains. "If you're overweight or obese and you're sedentary and unfit and you start taking three 10-minute walks a day and you do that at least five days a week, you're not going to lose an enormous amount of weight," Blair said. "You're going to still be heavy. But you're going to be much healthier if you do that," Blair said. Blair also recommends healthy eating patterns, including lots of fruit, vegetables, and whole grains. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), more than 1/3 of the US adult population is obese; obesity is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), some types of cancer, and type 2 diabetes. The CDC has also found that more than 1/2 of adults in the US do not participate in regular physical activity. Exercise can cut your risk of dying from CVD, as well as lowering your risk of stroke, colon cancer, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes. (I did not write any of this. found here | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [30 comments] |
|
| Who are we or you to judge the blood? | March 7, 2008, 1:48AM |
 by: THE_FLY |
|
i had noticed a Message that my best friend Merissa had posted due to the shock and tears that i've shed over this bulletin? i don't/won't bash her for anythign because she means more than alot to me in many ways but this message....i will share with people..... I have felt for sometime now that Obama is the one person that 'Frightens Me'. I believe the Bible has warned us that 'A man will come from the East that will be charismatic in nature and have proposed solutions for all our problems and his rhetoric will attract many supporters!' When will our pathetic Nation quit turning their back on God and understand that this man is 'A Muslim'....First, Last and always....and we are AT WAR with the Muslim Nation, whether our bleeding-heart, secular, Liberal friends believe it or not. This man fits every description from the Bible of the 'Anti-Christ'! Who is Barack Obama? Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHEIST from Wichita , Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, 'He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school.' Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that that he is not a radical. Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education. Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran. Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegiance nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches. Do you want someone like this as your PRESIDENT? Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own! Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME In All honesty? why....why does the world, society, or let alone OUR OWN PEOPLE have to come to this?! To be BRUTALLY HONEST? when i read this bulletin....not only did it break my heart, but it made me cry, because of the fact that this not only shows RIDICULOUSLY HIGH slander towards the bible (that has been re-written more times over than Rap remix songs) but it also shows that if we go towards a path of NEVER trusting our outer countries that respect the fact that WE, THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA live the way we want and enjoy our lives the way we want THEY WISH THAT WE DON'T FORCE OUR LIVESTYLE DOWN THEIR THROAT In all honesty.....it kills me in the worst way that people would actually think like this cause this truly TRULY hurts....alot A Bible (NOT EVEN AN EXTREMELY LITERAL AUTHENTIC ONE) tells you to forgive and forget, but yet BANISH those who are not worthy Why does the majority of society BELIEVE something like this?! It's wrong....VERY wrong! Whoever becomes the leader of this decrepid nation, SHOULD NOT be bashed or banished to eternal damnation JUST BECAUSE of their religion IMO? if you choose to redundantly bash someone because of their religion when it comes to helping others see a better way that will actually make them a moderately happy person, and IN LEAGUE with being acceptable about themselves or their life? THEN YOU should be banished to your personal damnation See.....Where i live? I'm beyond BEYOND sick and tired of having to tell every segregating african american that... 1-I am not a christian, or anything within relation to the "Religion Tree of Blasphemy" (in reference towards the southern-hateful families who bash/disown everyone who's not in leauge with churches) I'm a buddhist, and i was born into buddhism, along with my younger brother. But my religion doesn't pray and chant about self-greed, we chant about victory over violence, peace, ect. 2-I dress like this because of the fact that I grew up REFUSING to look like a typical stereotype that gets bashed and bothered and claimed for something else, YET i'm obliviously different from your average "black person" 3-I have a free spirit, because my family gave it to me when i was young, and i enjoy having this life 4-I'm not a "freak" or a fucking "gothic" kid cause i don't run around within a parade of ignorance and Untalented chaos JUST to get attention in all the wrong ways. Honestly? I'll vote for obama not because of the fact that he's black/muslim, ect. it's because of the fact that APPARENTLY ALONG with ms. clint? he's got a head on his shoulders Since these campaign runs have started lately? i've realized that America STILL hasn't evolved from the "common state of inner ignorance" People bashing hillary by claiming that if she goes on her period in the chair, she blows up half the continent or saying that she would tell everyone to go buy shoes with her when she's making a peace treaty or with the obama thing? claiming that he wants to bomb america from the inside-out or saying that he'll destroy us all because he's a muslim Last i remembered? -clears throat- THEY started war with other countries just to be greedy and pessimist and in this case... Being a pessimist....DOESN'T mean you're a Realist being a pessimist in this case? only makes you seem like a common enemy with those who have cared about you more than you'll ever know -I'm not bashing GOD! i bash the people who use, abuse, and mislead the world ABOUT god in the wrong way- | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [2 comments] |
|
| Don't be a Girly Man | September 3, 2007, 3:31PM |
 by: Drain-The-Blood |
|
Masculinity in Modern America is proving its self more than a problem. Each year there are countless deaths from fraternities, sororities, concerts, alcohol posioning, basic rituals and traditions that should be consedered taboo. In-grained with American society for countless years masculinity and its stereotypes are ruining the youth, are ruining society, ruining the ways of men and women. Researching Fraternities and Sororities, writting about them before, it shows how masculinity has taken a role in the lives of the "brothers" and "little sisters" of these special college groups. Brutal traditions get worse and worse each year. Because of what the older members had to go through to prove their worth for the group, they make pledges go through things twice as worse. Making them drink until they throw up and then eat the throw up while getting more alcohol. Taking beatings to prove toughness, taking mental and pyhscial abuse to gain approval of the older members of the fraternities. Despite the college life its come to my attention that Americas culture and sub-cultures are in-grained with masculinity stereotypes as well. Clearly it should of been obvious until a personal experiance. Hip hop, rap, Punk, rock, metal, in every culture and sub-culture of America, masculinity is in-twined in each of these cultures. Youth flock to each different culture in hopes of rebelling agaisn't American norms. However its redundant because masculinity is so in-grained with in America, that its even in the other cultures technically making "rebelling" useless. Men still have to fuck as many women as possible with out emotion, drink as much as they can afford, and take brutal beatings, basically the heiarchy of these cultures are no different than that of Fraternities. Every man in America must have a "shelf of masculinity" to prove his worth amongst peers with fear of being ridicueled, beaten, or called a "pussy" which in its self is a derogitory term towards women making them seem weak and helpless. Having a need to fill the shelf of masculinity, peer pressure and norms of Masculinity cause idiotic ways of proof, taking a beating while moshing, drinking a bottle of vodka and chasing it with everclear, any thing that will give one the approval of those peers to be accepted amongst them and the group. Honestly such rituals are disguisting to f*%k as many women as you can before recieving an STD with out feeling an ounce of emotion. Sex is supposed to be a bonding between two people that feel love for each other, there are even specefic chemicals in the brain that help create this bond. Masculinity is practiced as such and always will be. Espcially in a Capitialistic society that practices advertising masculinity to sell products. Basically using insecurities to make profit, as every company does in America. Advertisments like "You're a queer if you do not drink our beer!" showing pictures of half naked women crowding around a man. Making "rebelling" irrevalent if one does not know about such problems through out society in America. Most likely you'll keep filling that shelf of masculinity with trophies and badges of man-hood. In some Southern Pacific Island culture including Japanese culture and tradition, women were looked upon as sacred people. Its looked well upon families who have sons that are raised as women and house keepers that dress in drag, for boys who lose their virginity to such it isn't looked down upon either. In fact back in the day of the geisha there were males houses just like the geisha houses where japanese men could goto and it wasn't looked as "homosexual" it was actually more preferred in some Japanese men to be with men, same as the Greek cultures. America is ruining its self with stereotypes of masculinity. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [7 comments] |
|
| pages: 1
2
next
|