[I wrote this on September 13, 2006--PSR]
I watched NBC's latest episode of "To Catch a Predator" this evening. For those of you who may not be familiar with this recurring Dateline series, it is the televising of a sting operation, in which perverts are lured on the internet to drive to some house in the middle of nowhere to have sex, or so they are led to believe, with an underage teen. Once these perverts arrive at the house, expecting to have a night of decadent bliss with a fresh ingenue, Chris Hansen pops out and confronts them with the logs of their truly scuzzy chats and thereby makes them feel really, really ashamed and scared shitless about being exposed on national television (and their impending arrest). After they have confessed and expressed a minimum amount of remorse for their total depravity, Hansen tells them they are free to go. Well, no. They are free to leave the house, but once outside, they are tackled by a squad of badged thugs who always seem to be especially brutal for television cameras.
Now, Dateline advertises this series as a public service. After all, they are helping to lock up these monsters so they can't prey on the innocent young, and by televising the stings, Dateline is deterring perverts from shopping the internet for their victims. Well, not exactly. A good many of the scuzzballs caught in tonight's installment actually had seen past episodes of "To Catch a Predator" and trolled for teenage twat anyway. One must be capable of some reason to be deterred, but the total depravity of original sin kills our reason. We live in a Calvinist country after all, and Calvinism says we will sin no matter what. We're told all the time that abortion is legal because there is no way to deter abortion. Fine. Dateline has shown that pedophilia can't be deterred either. Let's legalize it then. Either that or we kill anyone who demonstrates pedophiliac tendencies.
Dateline is televising the stings of these twisted individuals simply because totally depraved sex sells. "To Catch a Predator" is in the tradition of Cecil B. DeMille's religious epics, which got away with going to town with all sorts of lurid depravity just as long as there were a few scenes of Charlton Heston's righteous indignation. So, we can have our perverse thrills at the thought of doing it doggiestyle with a curious, rebellious teen free of parental supervision as long as we agree with Chris Hansen that such thoughts are too disgusting even to be typed out on a keyboard (much less aired on National Television!).
Most of the men caught in these stings are pathetic losers who desperately want feelings of power. If they just wanted sex with young bodies, they would go after eighteen year olds (or sixteen year olds if they live in, say, Iowa; current age of consent laws are just stupid). But they go after underage teens because underage teens finally provide these powerless schmucks with a comfortable power differential. It's precisely why I like to play chess with people who call the knight "a horsey". These guys suck at fishing, and so they want to shoot fish in a barrel and steal candy from babies.
Part of the problem must be that capitalistic society has made everything into a competition, even affection. To be happily married with a loving family, one must make at least $50,000 a year, if not more, and one has to have power to reach that level. In other words, only the powerful deserve affection. And so the poor schmucks try to find affection from people who aren't yet cynics who know the price of everything and the value of nothing, and those people are the callow and exploitable underaged. But the powerful, too, become pedophiles because somewhere in the back of their minds they know that their wives just married them for the money and are, thus, simply respectable whores, and, so, the American Dream becomes just as morally repulsive as, say, doing it doggystyle with a thirteen-year-old, but with this difference: the thirteen-year-old won't nag.
No, I am not defending these perverts. I am saying that in this country we worship power just as much as the neo-cons and the Huntingtonites say the Muslim fascists do. They worship the power of the sword, and we worship the power of the Almighty Dollar, and our beatific visions are measured in profitable exploitations. Exploiting nature so that it will be more profitably efficient, perpetual wars to enrich the military industrial complex, the pornography industry because sterile sex must bear its fruit in lots and lots of cash, and killing human life at its very beginnings for spare parts. Is it any wonder, then, that some men in this already sick society would apply its depraved logic to the innocence of the young? The powerful exploit the less powerful for gain, and that's all what these perverts do.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
DocManJay
DocManJay is the screen name of one of the most popular bloggers on MySpace. That he is shows that the intellectual level of the surreal world that is MySpace is very low. My intelligent quotient excreted point after point as I read just one of his incoherent rants. My mind suffered diarrhea.
Even though I am thoroughly ashamed that I have exposed myself to such dreck, I cannot resist pointing out just one of this man's idiocies, even though doing so is as challenging as, say, beating Sarah Palin at Scrabble or, well, tic tac toe. DocManJay in the aforementioned entry on his weblog kvetches about us Bush Bashers undermining everything Bush did. Yeah, that's right. He says that our Bush Bashing undermined everything Bush did. Well, we are powerful motherfuckers, aren't we, then? We managed to stop Bush from waging illegal and unjust wars. We stopped him from torturing people and wiretapping this entire country. We stopped Bush from giving all our money to Haliburton, Bechtel, and the Banks. We stopped him from burying this country in mountains of debt.
We did all these things according to DocManJay, and he is demonizing us for having done so? He should be thanking us--if we really did undermine everything that Bush did. But we can only wish we had, and then only in our wildest wet dreams. If there was any administration that showed that Freedom of Speech and Participatory Democracy do not mean diddleysquat, it was the Bush Administration. All our protests, reasoned arguments, and moral outrage really had no effect. Iraq was transformed into a bloody wasteland, Afghanistan was given over to the murderous, pederast Warlords, torture thrived, the U.S. became East Germany, and the rich got richer and the poor poorer. We undermined nothing, and DocManJay is an idiot.
Even though I am thoroughly ashamed that I have exposed myself to such dreck, I cannot resist pointing out just one of this man's idiocies, even though doing so is as challenging as, say, beating Sarah Palin at Scrabble or, well, tic tac toe. DocManJay in the aforementioned entry on his weblog kvetches about us Bush Bashers undermining everything Bush did. Yeah, that's right. He says that our Bush Bashing undermined everything Bush did. Well, we are powerful motherfuckers, aren't we, then? We managed to stop Bush from waging illegal and unjust wars. We stopped him from torturing people and wiretapping this entire country. We stopped Bush from giving all our money to Haliburton, Bechtel, and the Banks. We stopped him from burying this country in mountains of debt.
We did all these things according to DocManJay, and he is demonizing us for having done so? He should be thanking us--if we really did undermine everything that Bush did. But we can only wish we had, and then only in our wildest wet dreams. If there was any administration that showed that Freedom of Speech and Participatory Democracy do not mean diddleysquat, it was the Bush Administration. All our protests, reasoned arguments, and moral outrage really had no effect. Iraq was transformed into a bloody wasteland, Afghanistan was given over to the murderous, pederast Warlords, torture thrived, the U.S. became East Germany, and the rich got richer and the poor poorer. We undermined nothing, and DocManJay is an idiot.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
Thursday, August 6, 2009
When I'm 64
The Atomic Age started 64 years ago today when we dropped the A-Bomb on Hiroshima--without any justification whatsoever. Well, we said that this deadly nuclear Holocaust was justified. But this was a lie we told ourselves so that we still could be naïve and innocent and believe that we are indeed The Shining City on a Hill, even if that Hill is one fucking putrid bloody landfill. I think it is needless to say that a lie, however pleasant and comforting, cannot justify the murder of hundreds of thousands of people. I hope, at least, that my fellow Catholics who are unfortunately proud of their American Patriotism (for example, Phyllis Schlafley) are nevertheless still sufficiently Catholic to know that a lie is evil, even when the supposedly greatest country in the fucking history of the fucking world tells one. I really hope so.
Anyway, the lie is this: Japan just would not surrender, and so we had only two choices: 1) invade Japan or 2) nuke a city or two. Since an invasion of an entire country would have been really, really savage, bloody, and far deadlier than the destruction of just one or two cities, dropping the bomb was indeed the comparatively humane thing to do, and we Americans always want to do the humane thing. Just ask the Cherokee or the Seminole or the Phillipine Muslims or, well, the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Right. Well, this is a lie because...oh, where do I start? We did not have only those two choices because Japan was trying to surrender all during the summer of 1945. True, they did not want to submit to an "unconditional surrender", whatever the fuck that meant. No surrender can be "unconditional" unless the vanguished agree to fulfill every single whim of the victors. What? We wanted the Japanese to lick our feet and suck our cocks or, if it struck our fancy, to be handcuffed and penetrated in every orifice? Did the Land of Wholesome Godliness, Motherhood, and Apple Pie nuke those two Japanese cities for the sake of BDSM? I hope my fellow Catholics who are too eager to salute the American Flag are, if not really Catholic, still sufficiently human to realize that unleashing the Atomic Scourge for the sake of a rapist's domination is so empty of any good or reason as to escape the bounds of language altogether.
Yes, it is true that even though the Japanese were suing for peace, they still insisted upon one very specific, definite condition. They wanted to be allowed to keep their Emperor. And we would not let them. Surely, that's because if they were allowed to keep their Emperor, the Japanese would be emboldened to start up another Empire, and then, before you knew it, they would be wanting to rape another Nanking, re-conquer Korea and the Phillippines, and plan another suicide surprise attack against us. After all, we Americans are such a nice, wholesome, kindly people, that we would not kill a quarter of a million people in one day unless there was a damn good reason to do so, eh? So, that must mean we sincerely believed that Hirohito was pure evil, and a Nuclear Holocaust, as heartwrenchingly tragic as it was, nevertheless was the necessary price to pay for finally ridding the world of that evil bloodthirsty, terrorist-inspiring, imperialist monster! After Japan's "unconditional surrender", General MacArthur allowed that incarnation of pure, unalloyed, unadulturated evil to keep his throne, and Japan has been our peaceful, acquiescent ally ever since. Oops!
The real story is that the Soviet Union was about to enter the War against Japan on August 9th, and if Japan did not surrender before the Soviets started fighting, the U.S. was facing the prospect of having to share Japan with the Reds. The U.S. did not want its Empire trammeled on in the Pacific as it had been in Europe. Also, the U.S., of course, had the Atom Bomb and wanted to show off its new toy to the Soviets and thereby notify them who now was in charge of the sandbox. If getting Japan to surrender was the reason why we nuked Hiroshima, then we would not have bombed Nagasaki as well. The Japanese were more than willing to suck our cocks after only one demonstration of our willingness to commit instant genocide. We simply wanted to show our new enemies that we now had the power of the gods and that just like the pagan gods of yore, we would use that power simply for our own fucking amusement, human misery be damned!
We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki simply because we could, and if my fellow Catholics who are American Patriots still claim to be proud of America's past, then I don't want them to be my fellow Catholics.
Anyway, the lie is this: Japan just would not surrender, and so we had only two choices: 1) invade Japan or 2) nuke a city or two. Since an invasion of an entire country would have been really, really savage, bloody, and far deadlier than the destruction of just one or two cities, dropping the bomb was indeed the comparatively humane thing to do, and we Americans always want to do the humane thing. Just ask the Cherokee or the Seminole or the Phillipine Muslims or, well, the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Right. Well, this is a lie because...oh, where do I start? We did not have only those two choices because Japan was trying to surrender all during the summer of 1945. True, they did not want to submit to an "unconditional surrender", whatever the fuck that meant. No surrender can be "unconditional" unless the vanguished agree to fulfill every single whim of the victors. What? We wanted the Japanese to lick our feet and suck our cocks or, if it struck our fancy, to be handcuffed and penetrated in every orifice? Did the Land of Wholesome Godliness, Motherhood, and Apple Pie nuke those two Japanese cities for the sake of BDSM? I hope my fellow Catholics who are too eager to salute the American Flag are, if not really Catholic, still sufficiently human to realize that unleashing the Atomic Scourge for the sake of a rapist's domination is so empty of any good or reason as to escape the bounds of language altogether.
Yes, it is true that even though the Japanese were suing for peace, they still insisted upon one very specific, definite condition. They wanted to be allowed to keep their Emperor. And we would not let them. Surely, that's because if they were allowed to keep their Emperor, the Japanese would be emboldened to start up another Empire, and then, before you knew it, they would be wanting to rape another Nanking, re-conquer Korea and the Phillippines, and plan another suicide surprise attack against us. After all, we Americans are such a nice, wholesome, kindly people, that we would not kill a quarter of a million people in one day unless there was a damn good reason to do so, eh? So, that must mean we sincerely believed that Hirohito was pure evil, and a Nuclear Holocaust, as heartwrenchingly tragic as it was, nevertheless was the necessary price to pay for finally ridding the world of that evil bloodthirsty, terrorist-inspiring, imperialist monster! After Japan's "unconditional surrender", General MacArthur allowed that incarnation of pure, unalloyed, unadulturated evil to keep his throne, and Japan has been our peaceful, acquiescent ally ever since. Oops!
The real story is that the Soviet Union was about to enter the War against Japan on August 9th, and if Japan did not surrender before the Soviets started fighting, the U.S. was facing the prospect of having to share Japan with the Reds. The U.S. did not want its Empire trammeled on in the Pacific as it had been in Europe. Also, the U.S., of course, had the Atom Bomb and wanted to show off its new toy to the Soviets and thereby notify them who now was in charge of the sandbox. If getting Japan to surrender was the reason why we nuked Hiroshima, then we would not have bombed Nagasaki as well. The Japanese were more than willing to suck our cocks after only one demonstration of our willingness to commit instant genocide. We simply wanted to show our new enemies that we now had the power of the gods and that just like the pagan gods of yore, we would use that power simply for our own fucking amusement, human misery be damned!
We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki simply because we could, and if my fellow Catholics who are American Patriots still claim to be proud of America's past, then I don't want them to be my fellow Catholics.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Sarah Palin's Valedictory
In her farewell to the Alaskan Statehouse yesterday, Mrs. Palin said that she would like to remind all those in the media that it is for their freedoms United States soldiers are overseas fighting and dying and that, therefore, the media should honor their freedoms' protectors and stop "making things up!"
Four points need to be made:
1) The soldiers who are fight and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan are hardly doing so for the freedom of the press as Mrs. Palin would have us believe. We have no freedom of the press to fight and die for. If we had real freedom of the press, then the American People would be allowed to see the real horrors of war every night on their televisions, reported by journalists not embedded with and, therefore, not beholden to the military. But that kind of reporting happened in Vietnam, and it turned people against the war, and so our government had to put an end to such "freedoms". That's why now all our war journalists might as well be marionettes.
2) If the media had stopped making things up like, say, the story that Saddam Hussein would soon be able to shoot all kinds of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons at us, our soldiers would not be fighting and dying in that "war for freedom" that Mrs. Palin so jingoistically adores. Moreover, if the media had not been so busy making things up about the Big Bad Baghdad Bogeyman and reported true things such as, say, that the Taliban were ready to hand us Osama bin Laden if we only gave them hard proof that he was indeed behind the 9/11 Attacks, then our soldiers might not now be fighting and dying for "freedom" in Afghanistan, either.
3) Our soldiers are not the ones paying the heaviest price for our "freedoms". The poor people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan are. Our "free" media should honor them by at least reporting truthfully and comprehensively about how many of them our "freedom fighters" are wounding, torturing, and murdering.
4) Even without Tina Fey Sarah Palin remains a stupid, clueless, fascist bitch.
Four points need to be made:
1) The soldiers who are fight and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan are hardly doing so for the freedom of the press as Mrs. Palin would have us believe. We have no freedom of the press to fight and die for. If we had real freedom of the press, then the American People would be allowed to see the real horrors of war every night on their televisions, reported by journalists not embedded with and, therefore, not beholden to the military. But that kind of reporting happened in Vietnam, and it turned people against the war, and so our government had to put an end to such "freedoms". That's why now all our war journalists might as well be marionettes.
2) If the media had stopped making things up like, say, the story that Saddam Hussein would soon be able to shoot all kinds of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons at us, our soldiers would not be fighting and dying in that "war for freedom" that Mrs. Palin so jingoistically adores. Moreover, if the media had not been so busy making things up about the Big Bad Baghdad Bogeyman and reported true things such as, say, that the Taliban were ready to hand us Osama bin Laden if we only gave them hard proof that he was indeed behind the 9/11 Attacks, then our soldiers might not now be fighting and dying for "freedom" in Afghanistan, either.
3) Our soldiers are not the ones paying the heaviest price for our "freedoms". The poor people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan are. Our "free" media should honor them by at least reporting truthfully and comprehensively about how many of them our "freedom fighters" are wounding, torturing, and murdering.
4) Even without Tina Fey Sarah Palin remains a stupid, clueless, fascist bitch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
