From ‘Meditations’

In the end, what would you gain from everlasting remembrance?
Absolutely nothing. So what is left worth living for? This alone:
justice in thought, goodness in action, speech that cannot deceive,
and a disposition glad of whatever comes, welcoming it as necessary, as
familiar, as flowing from the same source and fountain as yourself.

– Marcus Aurelius

10/16/16: Tiny spacing alteration, kept the font cuz it’s cool. (housekeeping)

Pearl of Wisdom

“It was far easier for you, as civilized men, to behave like barbarians than it was for them, as barbarians, to behave like civilized men.” – Spock

Analysis: Civility is the selective control of impulses, not the fear of them.  Something which some people don’t realize, perpetuating their view of tranquility and maintaining their ignorant self-satisfaction.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

The Thunderous Sound Of Delicacy

“You know, if I were you, I’d make a point of taking an hour or so away from all the noise and insanity of this place.”

(I should do that.)

“…And I’d make sure everyone knew I didn’t want to be disturbed during that hour or so of solitude. Because that would be *my* time, my own private time, which no one – if they had any sense of self-preservation at *all* – would dare interrupt.”

– ‘A Civil Action’

Interpretation

“There is addiction to indulgence of sense-pleasures, which is low, coarse, the way of ordinary people, unworthy, and unprofitable; and there is addiction to self-mortification, which is painful, unworthy, and unprofitable.” -Buddha

Simplification: Moderation.

Thoughts:

Since the cause of suffering is desiring what one does not have, there are two ways to remove suffering.  One, to have everything one wants.  Two, to want nothing.  Since neither of these courses are logically feasible, one must decide what is obtainable and what is not.  Having done so, desire what you may have and disregard what you may not have.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

The Book Of The Void (Excerpts)

“What is called the spirit of the void is where there is nothing. It
is not included in man’s knowledge. Of course the void is
nothingness. By knowing things that exist, you can know that
which does not exist. That is the void…

…People in this world look at things mistakenly, and think that
what they do not understand must be the void. This is not the true void. It is bewilderment…

…Polish the twofold spirit heart and mind, and sharpen the twofold gaze perception and sight. When your spirit is not in the least clouded, when the clouds of bewilderment clear away, there is the true void…

…if we look at things objectively, from the viewpoint of laws of the
world, we see various doctrines departing from the true Way.
Know well this spirit, and with forthrightness as the foundation
and the true spirit as the Way. Enact strategy broadly, correctly and openly…

…In the void is virtue, and no evil. Wisdom has existance, principle
has existance, the Way has existance, spirit is nothingness.”

SHINMEN MUSASHI

10/16/16: Edited for visual continuity, no change to content. (housekeeping)

Sounds Pretty Good To Me…

“He is a seemingly arbitrary man, this is because he knows what he
is talking about better than any one else. He…has, I believe, an absolutely open mind. This, with an iron nerve, a temper of the ice-brook, and indomitable resolution, self-command, and toleration exalted from virtues to blessings, and the kindliest and truest heart that beats, these form his equipment for the noble work that he is doing for mankind, work both in theory and practice, for his views are as wide as his all-embracing sympathy.”

How Did I Know This Would Happen On VampireFreaks?

“Alyssa is a super kewl girl .. she is in jail and i wanna make a cult so every one can make her a sign and I will be posting her poems and
updates about her .. please help her by making her signs or writting
her poems ,, i will then forward them to her.”

Cult on Vampirefreaks.com

Oh yeah, goths are harmless.  Unless they list their hobbies as cutting and killing people.

Again, there are some “real” goths on VF, and this isn’t meant to denigrate them…but the majority are angst-ridden adolescents or post-adolescents (Or in some cases VERY-post-adolescents) with tendencies toward psycopathy, sociopathy, serial killers, and other warm and fuzzy subjects.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

10/16/16: I don’t know who “Alyssa” is, I don’t know what she’s allegedly done, I don’t know if she’s guilty or not. And there are certainly plenty of decent people on VF. But there ARE a large amount of fcked up scumbags. (housekeeping)

2/6/2012 – Boston V. New York (Sporting Events, Update by Puppy)

Championships in what most Americans consider the four “major” sports…Football (NFL), Baseball (MLB), Basketball (NBA), and Hockey (NHL).

Football:
New York Giants/New York Jets: 5
New England Patriots: 3

Since New York has two teams and Boston only one, this would
indicate a virtual tie. Although New York does win the “If you
predict a Super Bowl EVERY year eventually it’s bound to happen”
Rx Ryan positivism approach.

UPDATE: Ditto.

Baseball:
New York Yankees/New York Giants/New York Mets/Brooklyn Dodgers: 35
Boston Americans/Boston Braves/Boston Red Sox: 8

Utter domination by New York.

Basketball:
Rochester Royals/New York Knicks: 3
Boston Celtics: 17

Utter domination by Boston. In fact, the ratio against New York here is even more than the ratio for them in baseball.

Hockey:
New York Rangers/New York Islanders: 8
Boston Bruins: 6

Since New York has two teams and Boston only one, this would
indicate a virtual tie…actually, it would indicate Boston as doing slightly better, but hey, who’s counting?

So basically, what we have is a draw. So all stupid, ignorant,
obnoxious (as opposed to real) New York sports fans should really
get their story straight… is it who’s better NOW, or in the past?

When the Yankees win, it’s who’s better now. When they lose,
it’s who WAS better. When the Knicks lose, it’s…ummm…wait til next year. When the Jets lose, it’s…ummm…well…wait til next year.

In fact, statistically, Boston has won more championships per team on the average than New York.

New York Total: 10 Teams, 51 Championships.  That’s 5.10 per team.

Boston Total: 6 Teams, 34 Championships. That’s 5.66 per team.

UPDATE: After the Giants win, NY only needs 5 more to (almost) tie Boston. Keep reaching for the stars!

Oh wait! Anticipating the “New England isn’t just Boston!” comments…

That means Boston has 5 teams, 31 Championships. That’s over 6 per team.

UPDATE: You can include Buffalo teams, too…if you want to see even more of an edge for Boston. I mean, it’s just sad that some people base their own lives and self-confidence on a false belief of sports “Supremacy”.

10/16/16: Signature removed. Holy font resize for consistency Batman. “Or who cares?” (housekeeping)

Worshipping the Inevitable – Satire by Puppy

DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to apply to real goths, nor is it meant to “attack” one “group”…it is a satirical commentary on a flawed principle using one example.

I’ve heard people claim that they have a “fascination” with death, darkness, things of that ilk, etc…

Now far be it from me to deny anyone’s right to be “fascinated” with anything…but the reason given, on occasion, seems to me to be a bit lacking in substance. 

That is, it is pointless to deny the inevitable, and instead of fearing it, we should embrace it.

Well, I would suggest that a nasty case of diarrhea is inevitable in every person’s life, at one time or another.  As good as you feel now, even if it hasn’t happened YET, sooner or later you’re going to be running to the bathroom with intense urgency.  It is inevitable.  Does that mean we should spend time sitting around thinking about the tragic inevitability of messy bowel movements?  I mean, if you want to, go right ahead…but it seems a bit silly to me.

The point is that just because something is inevitable does not inherently make it worthy of worship, reverence, study, interest, etc…

Yes, death is inevitable.  As far as I know, noone has ever avoided it.  But I prefer, instead of “resigning” myself to my “fate” and doing whatever I “feel like” because, hey, life’s too short…looking upon the inevitable as the final moment in my life.  Life, after all, being nothing more than a succession of moment after moment (Thank you, Yamamoto Tsunetomo).  Therefore, I choose to live each moment according to my design.  Therefore, I choose to live each moment as I believe I should, being master of my own self and my own self “will” (Thank you, Aleister Crowley), rather than a being ruled by random impulses, addictions, and/or fascinations.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Why I Like Tim Tebow

Because he’s one of a very small number of people that realizes how LUCKY he is to get PAID lots of money for playing a GAME.

I don’t understand people wanting him to fail. 

Is he a good quarterback?  No, he’s a horrible quarterback.  I knew that when Denver was winning despite him (because of their defense) and I know that now.

But it doesn’t matter.  He’s sincere in his belief, he’s a genuinely nice person, he doesn’t treat the game as his life, he takes all the insults and jokes aimed at him (some good-natured, some vicious) and shrugs them off because he’s a TRUE believer.

He doesn’t thank God when he wins and curse when he loses.

He thanks God because he BELIEVES.  He believes in hope, he believes in people, and he believes that how you conduct your life is more important than how well you throw a football.

Only fervent Atheists, complete scumbags, and the pitifully Envious have reason to hate him.

Peace.

– Puppy >.< Yip!

(Truly) Inspirational Quote

“I’m not an atheist. I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. The
problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the
position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books
in many languages. The child knows someone must have written
those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the
languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a
mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know
what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.” – Albert Einstein

A simple quote for a simple Puppy!

“…I have found strength where one does not look for it:
in simple, mild, and pleasant people, without the least
desire to rule—and, conversely, the desire to rule has
often appeared to me a sign of inward weakness: they fear
their own slave soul and shroud it in a royal cloak…”
– Friedrich Nietzsche

“Let’s play…Master and Servant…” – Depeche Mode

“Whatever happened to Depeche Mode?” – Puppy

-Puppy >.< Yip!

An Interesting (Liber-AL) Thought

“…men that are free, well-born, well-bred, and conversant in honest companies, have naturally an instinct and spur that prompteth them unto virtuous actions, and withdraws them from vice, which is called honour. Those same men, when by base subjection and constraint they are brought under and kept down, turn aside from that noble disposition by which they formerly were inclined to virtue, to shake off and break that bond of servitude wherein they are so tyrannously enslaved; for it is agreeable with the nature of man to long after things forbidden and to desire what is denied us.”

– Francois Rabelais

I like this…

“At its core, meditation is about touching the spiritual essence that
exists within us all. Experiencing the joy of this essence has been
called enlightenment, nirvana, or even rebirth, and reflects a deep
understanding within us. The spiritual essence is not something that
we create through meditation. It is already there, deep within,
behind all the barriers, patiently waiting for us to recognize it.
One does not have to be religious or even interested in religion to
find value in it. Becoming more aware of your self and realizing your spiritual nature is something that transcends religion. Anyone who has explored meditation knows that it is simply a path that leads to a new, more expansive way of seeing the world around us.”
– Aaron Hoopes, ‘Zen Yoga’

Good News (For A Change!)

Every day, good things happen and horrific things happen.

Contrary to the propagandic vitriol of the Nihilist, focusing on the good is not being ignorant to reality. 

It is choosing Light over Dark.

If you want to cry and yell and scream over horrific things, there are plenty of places to do it, and plenty of people to help you along on your self-destructive journey.

If you prefer to focus on the good that does exist, check out the “Good News” site every day.

Ignore everything else?  No.  But the proponents of Logical Positivism (such as myself) have, for the most part, found that anger, bitterness, hate, and the fervent attempt to destroy anyone else’s happiness that some people thrive on leads only, eventually, to harm one’s self, one’s loved ones, and one’s life.  Therefore, as a logical being, I choose to (attempt to) rise above such things when possible, and TRY to be happy.

Be a good person, live a good life…try to be happy.

It’s a choice by a moral person, not a demand of a cowardly nature.

Emotional Cowards are those that seek solace in the ephemeral, fleeting, and meaningless because they’re afraid that those are the only things they can depend on.  And by the nature of most Nihilists, given how they treat other people, they’re probably right.  For them…not for me.

And now, smile!  Cute animules!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/16/cat-and-dog-hugging-kissi_n_1154015.html

-Puppy >.< Yip!

In Your Darkest Hour

From someone who’s been there, and back, more than once…

However bad you may feel, never give up hope.

You may be helpless to change your situation, now…

But nothing’s ever hopeless.

It’s hard to remember that when you’re curled up in a ball, wishing you could cry, but even that effort is beyond you.

But it is true.

– Puppy >.< Yip!

Further Thoughts on Atheism

The systematic attack of spirituality and belief by fervent Atheists seems to take place in much the same way that Albert Einstein noted when he said that most fervent Atheists are simply intellectuals and quasi-intellectuals rebelling against forced belief with active disbelief.  As if because one thing was wrong (as forced belief is) it somehow makes the equal and opposite reaction correct.  To force one to believe in any form of Spirituality is incorrect, but to force one to disbelieve in any idea of possible Spirituality is incorrect, arrogant, and just plain stupid.

“During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries…The term ‘atheist’ was an insult. Nobody would have dreamed of calling himself an atheist.” – Karen Armstrong

As to historical injustices performed in the name of Religion versus those performed in the name of Atheism, the fact that Atheism has only been widely ALLOWED to be an even POSSIBLE belief system explicitly disavowing the existence of anything at all “Divine” for less than 300 years makes the comparison irrelevant, although the Pol Pot’s and Stalin’s of the world have certainly done their best to make up for lost time.

– Puppy >.< Yip!

On Palahniuk

“traffic in the half-baked nihilism of a stoned high school student who has just discovered Nietzsche and Nine Inch Nails” – Laura Miller on Palahniuk

Puppy: I think that’s not accurate.  “Half-baked” and “stoned” imply use of drugs, ostensibly to amplify creativity, and I see none of that in Palahniuk’s ‘Fight Club’.  They also imply that the writer in question is not fully in control/command of their writings, which is doing a dis-service to every half-baked work ever made, by a high school student, college student, professional writer, or anyone with half a brain that is literate.  Invoking Nietzsche and NIN, besides bringing up two vastly different talent levels, degrades the at-least-well-meaning nature of those who are fascinated by them and write inferior works in an attempt to live up to them.  Palahniuk is different.  Here is a grown man, clean and sober, intentionally writing high-school level chaotically uneven I-guess-you-could-call-them-“philosophical” rants about vastly different subjects and somehow attempting to link them, and he is working at the HEIGHT of his talent level.  Sad, really.

“Until you can create something that captivates people, I’d invite you to just shut up.
It’s easy to attack and destroy an act of creation. It’s a lot more difficult to perform one.” – Chuck Palahniuk

Puppy: Let’s analyze this.

“Until you can create something that captivates people”.

Puppy: The use of the word “Until” states that IF the conditions FOLLOWING the word are reached, THEN the person quoted is in fact giving their approval for the action being criticized to be TAKEN, in fact with their blessing since no other caveats are made.

So, IF “you” = anyone that wants to blast Palahniuk’s “creations”, and I think it does, since he expands to a broad scope later in the quote…

It follows that if anyone in the world “can create something that captivates people”, they thereby have Chuck Palahniuk’s blessing to trash Chuck Palahniuk’s work, if they so choose.

Semantically speaking, anyone “can” create something that captivates people…just because they haven’t DONE it doesn’t mean they CAN’T…but let’s assume he made a semantic mistake intentionally or was just really peeved.

something = anything

people = more than 1 person

Therefore…

IF anyone creates anything that captivates more than one person, THEN they can trash his work, by his own admission.

So, Justin Bieber has every right to criticize ‘Fight Club’.

And everyone that put a video on YouTube that got 2 or more “Likes”.

MOVING ON…

“I’d invite you to just shut up” – Well isn’t that grown-up of him.  NYAH NYAH!

“It’s easy to attack and destroy an act of creation.  It’s a lot more difficult to perform one.”

So Chuck you’re saying her criticism has destroyed your works?

I think “act” is the definitive word here, as Chuck’s “performance” on ‘Fight Club’ is pandering to the mindset mentioned by the critic.  Nothing more.  That some other people buy into such transparent horsesh1t is a testimony to the fall of the novel as a means of great expression.

“It is easier to destroy than to create”.

Also, 1+1 = 2

Sad.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Inspirational Review

MTV Unplugged in New York [DGC, 1994]

Not only did Kurt Cobain transcend alt-rock by rocking so hard, he transcended alt-rock by feeling so deep. On this accidental testament, intended merely to altify the MTV mindset by showcasing the Meat Puppets and covering the Vaselines, Cobain outsensitives Lou Barlow and Eddie Vedder in passing. His secret is sincerity, boring though that may be–he cares less than Barlow without boasting a bit about it, tries harder than Vedder without busting a gut about it. The vocal performance he evokes is John Lennon’s on Plastic Ono Band. And he did it in one take. A (Robert Christgau)

Perhaps

“X is the image of the arrested adolescent.  Entirely self-oriented.  Still intimidated by the people around them and attempting to prove themself superior to them.  Through sexual conquest they can, for a time, quell their constant feelings of inferiority and failure.  Indeed the idea of a non-sexual relationship is completely foreign to them.  As the years pass, and their physical attractiveness diminishes, they’ll be doomed to a life of loneliness, and despair, unable to give or receive Love.”

– Adapted from D. Chambers.

12/21/11: Update:

“Am I insinuatin?”  “No, just dancin”

– Adapted from M. Howard and C. Howard

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Analysis of “Goths – Analysis of a Subculture (By Puppy)”

Goths.  Yes, goths.  What are they?  Well, even THEY don’t really know.  Most of them, at least.

– This isn’t entirely accurate.  It was meant more of as a slam against the pretentious, angsty, “rebel-without-a-clue”, and/or truly nasty people that revel in the lifestyle without caring that it’s all just bullsh1t to them because they’re using it for fun and they don’t actually believe in sh1t.

7/9/12: It is in fact accurate.  However, it is not precise.  My point was to say F you to that portion of the “goth” community that is described below.  I’m not saying it NOW…now, I just ignore them.  I wouldn’t walk up to a cockroach and insult it, by the same logic.  There’s really no point, and it would be a waste of (even a single) moment.

First, a historical and unbiased cultural appraisal.  Second, my experience with those that choose to label themselves “goth”.

– If you want this, look up “Gothic Subculture” on Wikipedia.  It’s irrelevant for my purposes here.

7/9/12: Or, if you want to, talk to some of them.  A person’s true nature usually comes out after brief initial pretenses that some have.  This is an option to consider, not a suggestion.

So, if all this is taken as true, a real “goth” is someone that
recognizes that we all have a dark side, isn’t afraid of that side, and
is disturbed by those that pretend they are somehow “better”
because they follow different ideals, dress differently, etc.

– You don’t need to dress in black and listen to mopey music to despise hypocrisy.  Come to think of it, EVERY subculture hates hypocrisy (supposedly, as is the case here).  We all know (except for the fanatical Puritans amongst us, of which there are FAR fewer than you would be led to believe) that everyone has a dark side, we all know some people who embrace it, some who deny it, some who just control it, some who are somewhere in the middle…it’s got nothing to do with gothique, sorry.  Gothique is a fashion statement, a trend, like 80’s new-wave hair and acid-wash jeans, nothing more.

7/9/12: Perhaps I went a little too far near the end.  But I believe my point is made fairly well.

This is, of course, propaganda.

– Why did I even need to say this???  That’s like saying “1 plus 1 is, of course, 2.”

7/9/12: Repetition.  The key to analysis.  Repetition.

In my experience with self-proclaimed “goths”, I have found that at
least 90 percent of them are either stupid, ignorant, malicious, greedy,
selfish, manipulative, users, abusers, addicts, “victims”(that is,
those that revel in being hurt, the “victim mentality”), fakes, or a
combination of two or more of these elements.

– MONTHS later…ditto.

7/9/12: I didn’t actually make a mathematical study out of it, but this is also accurate, if not precise.

Most “low-ranking” goths I have encountered like to dress in black
because it hides their bellies and emphasizes their bosom.  I mean, if
you weigh 250 pounds, a corset is BOUND to produce some cleavage.

– Ok, this is just mean.  And I’m not insulting overweight people.  I’m insulting the 90+ percent of the female “goths” that are overweight, because they’re all the nasty things listed above…not BECAUSE they’re overweight.  They simply can’t stand being ugly on the outside because there’s very little on the inside.

7/9/12:  See above, and if you have a feeling of Deja Vu when reading the last sentence look up “Jim Jarmusch” on Wikipedia for the explanation.

The “high-ranking” ones are those that have discovered the joys of
reality, be it via a real relationship, a family, etc…and they are a
bit amused by their past, seeing it as more of a post-adolescent angst
period than any real stage of development.

– Yup.

7/9/12: Or, they’ve incorporated the non-abusive/manipulative aspects into their lives.  Just as good.

The true goth, of which there are some, adheres closely to the
definition given above…that is, they admire darkness as well as light,
for are we all not dark in some way? 

– Uh huh.

7/9/12: 20,000 Leagues Deep.

I believe I can summarize the “goth” population as follows-
10 percent like George A. Romero’s ‘Night of the Living Dead’
because it is a bitter, biting social commentary on man’s tendency
to fight amongst ourselves and within ourselves.
90 percent like George A. Romero’s ‘Night of the Living Dead’ because zombies eat human flesh and it looks really cool.

– HAHA…yeah.

7/9/12: Not really all that funny, but I wanted to type “HAHA”.  And ‘Land’ is better.

-Puppy

– Yip!

In the interests of not-being-a-rat-unless-someone-betrays-me, I won’t state any names, but…

The predictable response to this will be “Well, you’re just jealous”. 
In a way, I am.
I find “goth” women, by and large (no pun intended) to be absolutely beautiful.  Physically.
However, when I’ve actually ventured into their minds, I’ve found
twisted car wrecks that inevitably out-wreck even my own…quite a
feat, since I’ve been institutionalized.
So yes, I’m jealous that so many beautiful female bodies are inhabited by so many UGLY “spirits”.  Quite sad, really.

– Oh well.  There ARE exceptions…but then again, not ALL human beings are born with a spleen.  Exceptions, you see.

7/9/12: More than that…but not all THAT much more.

The next response will be “Well, they don’t want you anyways”.
This is not true.
I spoke to several “high-ranking” goth women, who assured me they
viewed their “followers” as nothing more than amusing toys, and that
if I wanted to, I could rank quite highly among them.
I’m sure this would lead to lots of sex, drugs, and rock n’ roll…and, probably, happiness.
But only at the expense of morality and by using and abusing the weak, scared, hurt, and confused.
I don’t do that.

– Let me correct something…if someone is scared /weak/hurt/confused and is ALSO a scumbag…well…that’s a different story.  You can’t do fcked up sh1t and then go crying home to mommy…grow the hell up, ok?

7/9/12: This is concerning those that abuse/manipulate those that are “easy” to, but turn into utter cowards when confronted with a challenge.  “I don’t run away from bullies”.

I mean, I dated a “goth” that was a pure psychopath (unbeknownst to
me at the beginning) and justified this by saying “Well, I’ve been
horribly hurt, so I get to do it to others…”
This is tripe.  Michael Tripe.  HA!
I’ve been more hurt emotionally than the vast majority of these posers, but if I do something wrong, I take responsibility.
It’s called “growing up”.

– Not exactly accurate…and Michael Stipe isn’t as bad as I thought.  Musically.

7/9/12: Comparing pain isn’t really proper.  And I don’t know the man.

Many “goths” also tend to be Anarchists, Satanists, or LaVeyan Satanists.

– Not exactly accurate, and I forgot Atheists…but that’s neither here nor there.

7/9/12: Replace “Atheists” with “Crusading Disbelievers”.

Anarchists in the pure sense believe in complete and total individual freedom.
In practice, they believe in pretending to believe this to get what they want.
Much like Stalin used the idea of Communal Living “Communism” proposed by Karl Marx to enforce his Totalitarian will.
So most anarchists are exactly the opposite of what they claim.

– Again, there are exceptions…but real PURE “Anarchists” are about as common as “Pure” Psychopaths…that is, less than one percent.

7/9/12: I would say this is fairly accurate.

Satanists believe that everyone is their “Own God”.
That we don’t know what exists after death, so we must be true to ourselves and do what is right, here and now.
In practice, most Satanists believe that they are stronger than others
either physically or mentally, and so if religion is done away with
(e.g. ‘1984’ or ‘Brave New World’ or ‘Animal Farm’) then others, with nothing to hope for, will bow down before them and serve their goals,
which inevitably tend towards greed, manipulation, meaningless sex,
abuse, domination, cruelty, etc…

– This is not correct…it is in fact LaVeyan Satanists (see below) that believe this.  Real Satanists actually worship Lucifer, for reasons I understand but think are stoopid.  It’s not beyond me…I just think it’s stoopid.

7/9/12: “I’m glad you approve.” * “I do NOT “approve”…I understand.”

LaVeyan Satanists are those that are either REALLY stupid and
believe that you should BUY a MEMBERSHIP CARD to a religion
that advocates INDIVIDUALITY (Insert laugh track here)…
Or…
They are the ones collecting the money, thereby making them frauds, manipulators, and abusers of “weaker” minds.

– First comment dead-on funny…second one a bit over-reactionary, since it was meant as a joke and if someone WANTS to buy a joke, hey, there’s one born every minute…just ask LaVey.  And one positive point about LaVeyans: They believe that while you shouldn’t love everyone, you should be loyal and protective to/of those you CHOOSE to love, those that you deem worthy.  I agree.

7/9/12: The True believers, that is.  True believers are very difficult to find.

Basically most powerful “goths” prey upon people that have been
hurt or abused, telling them that they really care about them, and
inviting them to join a group…ANY group, because any group is better than nothing.

– Yup.

7/9/12: Repetition.  The key.

Sort of like Ed Norton’s character in American History X. 

– Bit of a stretch there…more like Cam.

7/9/12: Or, if they’re not very clever, the big fat guy.

Luckily, he woke up.

Oh…how many Hispanic, Black, Asian…ummm…Non-Caucasian “goths” are there?  Not many…
What does that say?  Oh, I dunno…
“Be tolerant of us!!!! You aren’t tolerant of us!!!!”
“Can I join???”
“No way man you’re black!”

– Uh huh.

7/9/12: There are a token few allowed “in” for plausible deniability purposes.

I mean, “goths” despising Society for the “Evils” perpetrated on them…
Well, should black people despise society for having been enslaved 150 years ago?
Should Jews hate society for Millenia of persecution?
I mean, grow the heck up, ok? 
Get over it.
Yeah, you’ve suffered.  A single tear rolls down my cheek.  GET OVER IT!

– Ditto.

7/9/12: The key.

Anne Gwish is a goth woman that has her own strip in the later part of the series. Her name is a pun on the word “anguish.” Her storyline is completely unrelated to Johnny’s, though she lives in the same fictional universe. The strips featuring her are largely a satire on goth culture’s tendencies towards pretension.

In most of her strips, you can find puns and parodies on gothic subculture. Like “Johnny the Hamicidal Maniac” (with Johnny as a
pig), “Ditchspade Symphony” (a parody of the band, Switchblade Symphony), “The Shmoe” (a rather obvious parody of The Crow, who proclaims “I stole this look from KISS”) and “The Dirtman” (a Sandman joke).

Vasquez ends the Anne Gwish strip with an aside comment,
“With just a touch of self-mockery,” due to his personal goth
lifestyle as well as the cultural category his comic books are
placed in.

In the back of the JTHM: Director’s Cut, (naming her
AKA “bitch”) it was revealed that Jhonen Vasquez liked the idea of
Anne Gwish being the “most physically attractive” of his characters,
as it “only frames more distinctly how HORRIBLE a person she is inside.” 

 (That’s Jhonen Vasquez, “hero” of the “goth” community, saying what he really thinks of most “goths”)

– Peace

7/9/12: Out.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Why It’s Completely Absurd To Advocate A Lifestyle Of Total Logic – Analysis Of A Trend (By Puppy)

If you’re reading this because you agree with the title, are bored, wanted a potential chuckle, etc…Great.

If you’re reading this because you disagree with the title, I would suggest the following…

Any argument I can make can probably be out-argued by you, because you’re so much smarter than I am in that “useless beyond-genius no-real-value Rain Man” sort of a way.

So just think about the following two quotes, and continue to worship Stephen Hawking as your Deity.

“You don’t understand, and you never will.” – Diane Chambers (A fairly logical character)

“Computers make excellent and efficient servants, but I have no wish to serve under them.” – Spock (Also, fairly logical)

-Puppy >.< Yip!

The Pointlessness of Pointless Sex – A Logical Argument

It has been argued that humans are inherently poly-amorous, that all people truly want to have sex with as many people that they find attractive as possible…that “relationships” are only entered into by those that cannot succeed in routinely obtaining sex from more than one attractive person, that wish to allow themselves to not have to “keep up their appearance”, because of societal pressures, because it’s the “easy” thing to do, and so on.

This argument is just as blatantly flawed and self-serving (as it is made, of course, by those that are NOT in committed “relationships”) as the argument that it’s “wrong” to be with more than one person even if noone is hurt, that you shouldn’t have sex outside of marriage, that homosexuality is wrong, that one must wait 7 dates before having sex…and so on.  These arguments, of course, are made by those that adhere (or at least pretend to adhere) to the “wrong”-ness of choice.

Every Human Being is different.  To suggest that it is IMPOSSIBLE to truly WANT to be with only one person, for the sole reason of that is truly what YOU want, is absurd.  Simply because one cannot “understand” that desire, because one does not feel it themself, does NOT by definition mean that it cannot exist and that anyone that says that’s what they want is just “pretending” or “kidding themselves”.

The most ridiculous part of the argument AGAINST voluntary fidelity is that the people making it are completely disdainful of the other-side-of-the-coin argument (that you MUST be in a heterosexual, monogamous, married, etc etc etc relationship).

The reason I (And many people) don’t have random sex with any other attractive adult possible is NOT, as some might suggest, because I’m “repressed” or “afraid”. 

I’m not afraid of “Sinning”, I’m not worried about my ability to obtain sex, I don’t feel that it’s “wrong”, I don’t care about public perception…and so on.

The reason I don’t have sex with every attractive adult I COULD have sex with is because, quite frankly, I don’t want to.

From a logical perspective, I think everyone except those bent on sexual “conquest” to prove their virility would agree that the POINT of sex, apart from procreation, is PLEASURE. 

Therefore, the aspect to be considered is…what do I derive the most pleasure from?

Having had meaningless sex in the past, I’ve found that the empty, awkward, rather dull feeling that comes (no pun intended) immediately after the act is completed is FAR worse than the act itself is more pleasurable than just THINKING about it.  It just doesn’t make sense to spend SO much time trying to obtain something that, once obtained, becomes meaningless and leads you to think “Ok, who’s next?” if the feeling arising from the “success” of the attempt is, in fact, BAD.

Not to suggest that meaningless sex doesn’t feel GOOD…sure it does.  But the period and amount of pleasure achieved, for me, is just simply not worth the post-meaningless-act depression over the sheer meaningless-ness of it, the resources (Time, money for *insert foreplay meetingplace here*, etc) wasted, and so forth.

Sex with someone that I actually CARE about, at least somewhat, lacks these negative results and is therefore something to be strived for as a vastly superior option.

From a purely logical standpoint, for me, meaningless sex is just plain stupid.

It also displays an appalling lack of self-control, which, if you’re doing something you know will just make you feel worse afterwards, is akin to doing hardcore drugs (I assume, never had the urge to try) only this is a VOLUNTARY addiction, and hence lacks ANY sort of reasonable justification outside of the inability to control one’s most base animal instincts. 

I mean, if a wolf can be platonic, can’t a “superior” human?  It’s not a sign of weakness or herd mentality, it’s a sign of Self-Control, Logic, and Love.

Of course, if you actually feel GOOD after having sex with someone you care nothing about, and you both want to…go for it!  I won’t make the same pretentious, inane assumption that critics of Fidelity make by criticizing other people’s emotional  choices, as if I have any idea what it’s like to be inside their head.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Advice

Anyone that tells you that “the only constant, dependable thing in Life is change” is either trying to sell you something or get something from you(physically, morally, financially, emotionally, etc).

Semper Fidelis

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Gore Film Afficionados – Analysis of a Subculture (By Puppy)

Recently I’ve been trying to re-analyze and re-assess my views of people that have an affinity for particularly gory films.

The important distinction here is between “gory” films and gore films…that is, movies that have incredibly disturbing scenes (‘Land Of The Dead’, ‘Saving Private Ryan’, ‘Schindler’s List’, ‘Platoon’, ‘Seven’, etc…) but that include them for a non-obligatory point, and also feature brilliant acting, character development, and intelligent scripts; and movies that exist, it seems, merely as a means for people to voyeuristically watch disgusting things happen and (more often than not, in my experience from contact with such people) cheer for the one doing these things.

I think the second category has four types of fans:
1) Those that admire the “ingenious” ways in which these things happen,
2) Those whose lives are so boring and dull that they rely on these movies for their excitement,
3) Those that are viewing them as instructional videos, and…
4) Those that secretly wish they could do these sorts of things, lacking the basic morality to care if they “should” or not, but also lacking either the intelligence or the courage to follow through.

As with my “goth” analysis (Although my percentages there need adjusting in a positive manner, admittedly) I find that the majority fall into either 2, 3, 4, or a combination thereof.

I mean, are there people who watch films from a coldly clinical viewpoint, taking no “sides” and feeling nothing for the characters (good or bad)?  Sure.  A few.

Most people, in my experience, feel emotions from/towards a film and its characters.

So it follows that the vast majority of the people that intentionally sit down in front of ‘Saw 15’ are doing so not because they “like being scared” or out of “admiration”…

They’re doing so because if your life is monotonous and dull, if your senses are dulled by prolonged exposure to things so extreme that you need to keep upping the ante to get the same effect (See “Heroin”, only without the addiction excuse), watching “normal” films just doesn’t do it for them any more.

Of course there are the Psycho/Socio-Paths that watch them for ideas, I assume…but since pure Psychopaths are very rare and pure Sociopaths even more so, I think this percentage is very small.

On a slightly lower level are those(Trust me, I’ve met them, unfortunately) that are secretly (or in some cases, not so secretly) cheering for the lunatic because it gets them off in either a strange sexual way (See “Extreme BDSM”) or because it fills them with a sense of power/vengeance/defiance because (get the tissues out) they’ve had horrible things happen to them and so relish in seeing the same happen to others.  Although, as previously stated, the vast majority of these people stop at this point.  They’re NOT “dangerous”…I’m not suggesting that at all.  Most of them, at least.  In order to be dangerous they’d have to be extremely intelligent, somewhat courageous, and/or totally lacking in any sense of morality.

The intelligent part isn’t that difficult.  Even the lack of morality isn’t THAT hard to find…

But the courage is.

Again, it’s difficult to find True believers, even in the sickest sh1t.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

5/10/16: In all fairness, if one has been traumatized in some way by the unfair actions of another(s), then to feel anger and bitterness is not only natural, but completely acceptable: You have every right to be angry and bitter at people who have unfairly fcked you over (for unfairly fcking you over). And, speaking as one with major depression (among other things), a person is not “better” or “worse” because of their feelings and moods…since to a large extent, for some people, these things are out of your control.

Where the DISTINCTION comes into play between decent people and scumbags is in what you choose to DO with these (justified or not) feelings and moods. So if you get some sort of vengeful joy out of seeing nasty things happen in movies, that – BY ITSELF – doesn’t mean anything.

It’s what you choose to do with that, as always, that means something.

If you simply indulge those feelings/moods in ways that are purely non-harmful to anyone, I can’t (I don’t think anyone can) rightfully say you’re doing anything “wrong”, or that there is something wrong with YOU because of said indulgences. If you disagree, ask yourself (where applicable) “Why do I WANT to watch two men try to hurt each other?” (MMA, Boxing, Hockey Fights, Etc…) or “Why do I WANT to see the results of a car wreck?”, or a number of other similar questions.

HOWEVER…

There is a MASSIVE difference between indulging in fictional activities – that were consented to by all involved – that cause NO harm to ANYONE ELSE (Gore movies being just one example)…

And indulging in REAL activities – that were NOT consented to by all involved – that cause REAL harm to one who DID NOT CONSENT to such harm.

THAT is the difference between “harmless cathartic indulgence” (e.g. watching graphic gore movies…works of FICTION) and “harmful, vicious, self-centered indulgence” (taking the step from fantasy to reality in any way harmful to a non-consenting other).

So, in THAT sense…I was wrong. There’s nothing wrong with someone for enjoying pointless gore flicks any more than there is for watching and enjoying pointless agreed-upon violence (boxing, etc)…AS LONG AS such actions remain as such: harmless, FICTIONAL, cathartic indulgence.

The moment they become in any way REAL – cause real harm to another or in any way alter one’s BELIEFS and/or ACTIONS in any sort of real-world sense as opposed to simply one’s cathartic FEELINGS – is the moment they become deplorable and unacceptable.

And, as we see from real events, there are many people that CANNOT make that distinction, and abide by it.

And that is why it is inherently more dangerous to receive catharsis from such things than from, say, inspirational movies, Disney movies, positive-bent movies/music, etc…

One who “snaps” and incorporates cuteness, positivity, etc…into their real lives is a LOT less dangerous than one who snaps and incorporates a desire to see gore, to see people suffer, etc.

And that’s not a MORAL “self-righteous” judgement…it’s a logical statement.

All that being said…it is fair, in my opinion, to state the following as truth: “Enjoying watching gore movies simply for the gore does not make one any less of a person.”

It just HAS TO STOP there…as fantasy.

To paraphrase D. Vinyard: “(Show) a little self-(control) (for Chrissakes).”

Excerpt from a Philosophical Discussion

Here is my honest appraisal:

To say that Humans do not have Free Will is, to me, a copout. It is a convenient excuse for those that choose, for one reason or another, to act in a manner deemed improper by the majority of society. If a person is completely insane, then yes, perhaps. But the vast majority of people know EXACTLY what they’re doing, and why they’re doing it, even if only on a semi-conscious level.

Most people choose to do things because they want to…out of weakness.

Be that weakness lust, greed, envy, laziness, maliciousness, arrogance, etc.

Personally, I think the notion that “Good” behavior is only done because it’s programmed or learned or “accepted” is false, at least as a general label. Yes, there are some people that do “Good” things because it makes them feel better, to get something back, etc…

But me, personally…I do “Good” things because I believe in them. I’ve done things I’ve found uncomfortable, things that have actually hurt me in some way and in no way, physically, mentally, or in any other way, benefitted me. I did them because I believed they were the correct and proper things to do.

Are MOST people like that? No. I think most people are greedy, selfish, self-centered, and somewhat cruel. But this is a choice, not a condition.

Using sexuality as an example is incorrect, to me. No, we cannot determine what we WANT to do…but, just as in every other area, we CAN determine what we DO do. I couldn’t choose to change my desires, but I could choose to change my actions. In terms of sexuality, that simply makes no sense, so I never would…but I “could”, hypothetically.

I also totally disagree with your view on charity.

I think you’re minimizing the HUGE numbers of people who don’t WANT charity, but require it in desperate times. There’s a huge difference between sending money to help someone from starving to death because they’ve been the victim of a natural disaster and need a one-time aid before they can recover, and walking by a homeless person every day and giving them 100 dollars.

Also, the term “friend” would become completely meaningless if charity was considered a “bad” thing…I help my friends because I believe they deserve it, not because I want something back, or because I feel obligated, or even because it makes me feel good. I have clinical depression, sometimes NOTHING makes me feel good. So I can either be a random scumbag and just do whatever gets me off, or I can show a little self-control and do what I believe in. I’ll go with the second one.

– Puppy >.< Yip!

Anton LaVey Vs. John Doe (Referee: Puppy)

Contrary to Occultist (and undeserved Cult Figure) Aleister Crowley, whose drug-induced “revelations” have about as much credibility as “Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds” (Yes, I know about the drawing), Anton LaVey actually tried to put forth an intelligent intellectual argument in his conglomeration of mostly other people’s ideas known as ‘The Satanic Bible’.  John Doe, from the film ‘Seven’, would likely take issue with LaVey’s stance that the “Seven Deadly Sins” in fact reflect man’s inherently carnal nature and should be embraced, not avoided.  Granted, John Doe was an incredibly sick and disgusting character, but what makes ‘Seven’ so scary is that he is perfectly lucid in his explanations, which are rather more articulate than LaVey’s…e.g…

9/6/12: I’m big enough to admit when I’m wrong…I didn’t really understand Crowley when I wrote this.  Although I put no faith in his spiritual/theological arguments, nor do I “oppose” them…they are, at least, genuine.  Unlike LaVey.  And Crowley, while in my opinion quite flawed and, at times, completely incorrect in his non-spiritual musings, was from what I now understand an extremely intelligent man whose one-line philosophy doesn’t mean what many people think it means.  As a wise(r) man once said, “Those things that are easily understood are rather shallow.”  Unlike LaVey, Crowley was NOT shallow.  Now, onward…

Lust: 
LaVey: Believed it should be embraced in whatever (consensual, legal) way you wanted, including extramarital affairs and relationship infidelity.
Doe: Although he objects based on the morality of the marriage contract with God, he also seems to think it’s wrong to have sex with someone after you’ve promised someone you supposedly Love that you will always be faithful to them.

Winner:  Doe

Pride:
LaVey: Believed that one should be Proud of their accomplishments and abilities, and that Immortality is achieved by performing great deeds on Earth, and being thus remembered.
Doe: Believed that, as was taught in Medieval Times, Pride is a “Sin” even if you don’t believe in the concept of Sin because becoming too full of oneself often leads you to underestimate others and overestimate yourself, and has caused more amazingly stupid defeats than can be counted on all digits (INCLUDING toes).

Winner: Doe

Wrath:
LaVey: Believed that it was proper and just to exercise one’s Wrath upon one’s enemies, assuming (supposedly) it was within the constraints of the Law.  A bit of a contradiction, since violence is rarely lawful.  Then again, the law hasn’t exactly always been in keeping with truth and justice (See “Slavery”).
Doe: Believed that exercising one’s Wrath upon another was a weakness, something only God had the right to do, and would inevitably lead to your own destruction in one form or another.

Winner: Call it a draw…Revenge rarely leads to happiness or closure, but the law itself is a form of revenge against those who do wrong.

Envy:
LaVey: Believed Envy was a driving force in man trying to achieve one’s goals and obtain things desired.
Doe: Believed that everyone should be content and happy with their place in life, and not want for anything they were not provided with.

Winner: LaVey.  From a purely logical standpoint, he makes sense…in moderation.

Sloth:
LaVey: I’m not quite sure how Anton justifies endorsing doing absolutely nothing as part of the basic nature of man.  Sad, really, if he believes it is.
Doe: Believed that Sloth (Apathy, laziness) was wrong as a form of omissive destructiveness.

Winner: Doe…I mean, come on.

Greed:
LaVey: Again, as with Envy, believed Greed motivated people to better themselves.  Or, to quote Gordon Gecko – “Greed is Good”.  Sounds a bit too Capitalistic.
Doe: Believed that Greed motivated people to do things they knew were wrong simply for monetary gain or other relatively meaningless factors.

Winner: Doe.  I’m not a BP fan.

Gluttony:
LaVey: Believed that one should indulge one’s appetites as one wished, that it was every person’s right to consume anything they wished (within legal means)
Doe: Believed that it was wrong for people to eat WAY too much food when millions of people are starving to death.

Winner:  Doe, although this only applies if the excess food is in fact given TO the people that actually need it.  It does no good sitting on store shelves.

After Se7en rounds, the bout goes to Doe, 5 rounds to 1, with one draw.  Still a twisted little thing, though.

-Puppy >.< Yip!