Submit an Article | Bookmarked Articles
Viewing Articles About All - Page 21
| Bad Writing and How To Fix It!!! | January 6, 2007, 11:55PM |
 by: singerangel710 |
|
So I read some of the articles on this site and honestly, I didn't really understand most of it. If you want people to hear you out and listen to what you have to say, then you should start using more simplistic terms so more people can understand what you are trying to say, rather than trying to just get them to read your article and be like, "Yeah, this sounds good. I'll agree with this because he sounds smart with all his fancy words and writing!" That's not the way to go about writing an essay, or article in this case. You use your writing in a way that people can relate to what you are saying by using examples that are realistic rather than droning on about nothing. It makes for a much more interesting article as well. I hate to say it, and I don't want to seem mean, but it was hard to keep myself reading some of the articles at first. They don't even pick up until about the fourth paragraph and then I finally started getting interested and didn't have to tape my eyelids open to keep me from falling asleep. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be cruel or put you down on your thoughts and opinions. I'm only trying to give you a little advice. The point of writing articles and posting them is so you can show your thoughts and express them to the world. How can you do that if you are trying to sound smart by using big words that not a lot of people can understand? In all honesty, most of the intelligent people in this world don't have a very good vocabulary and aren't going to be able to write a decent response to your articles when they can't understand what you are trying to say. I was trying to read an article my boyfriend suggested I read and I had to ask him what most of it meant and what the author was trying to say because I wasn't quite sure. Even when I thought actually I knew what was going on, I was way off. I don't have that broad of a vocabulary but I am an intelligent person and can give you a good response, if I can understand the point you are trying to get across. You want to sound smart and look good to those on the site that might be reading your article, right? Not to be rude or mean, but there are a lot of stupid people that might read that article and they won't understand what you say. Using big words are only going get people thinking, "Wow, this person talks too smart-like. I can't understand so I'm going to stop reading his/her articles because it makes my brain hurt." It's also funny to see how authors of various articles are trying to impress people in this manner and tell readers that they don't care what you think of them if you don't see them a certain way. Funny how even when you don't think you care about what people think and see in you, you really, honestly do? I have done this and said the same exact words as those and in the end I realized I was only trying to convince myself of this theory. Whether you like it or not, everyone does want to know how they are perceived in the minds of others around them. How you write is not going to matter or accomplish your "goal" of getting you to look good. It doesn't matter anyway, if people are honest when they say they don't judge people. Now it seems that all I do is whine and complain about what everyone's doing wrong when they are voicing their thoughts. Don't worry; I have some simple solutions to this mass epidemic of egotistical, stuck up writing! I have already mentioned the fact using smaller, more meaningful words can make an article more interesting and easier to read, but what else is there to consider? Well, you must first pick an interesting topic that will pull the reader in but also one that is fun for you and you know well. If you don't like the topic you are writing about and have no interest in it, how can you write a well opinionated, persuasive article trying to get others to see what you see? If you are exceptional at writing random articles that you care nothing about then go right ahead, but good luck getting others to keep on reading the boring incoherence you have just upchucked. Solution? As I have stated, pick a topic you are interested in and you think readers will have an interest in reading. So you have your topic. Now what do you do? All Language Arts teachers will tell you to write out a plan or an outline to see how you are going to go about writing your article. No offense to the schools and teachers, but I think that is complete bullshit. I hate planning out essays beforehand. I end up pulling away from my outline in the end anyway. What's the point if I'm not able to stay with the outline? I write what is on my mind at the time and how I feel; this is how you get the best article. Writing how you feel about the topic and what you think is right or wrong is what makes the most interesting piece to read. Not to mention using an opinion gets you motivated to write a lot more. Especially when you disagree on something! That gives you more options to write about and more emotion to your thesis, as Language Arts teachers would say. The more emotion you show in a piece you write, the better it will be, I can assure you. One thing that really bothers me is when people write about what they think is the truth. Who are you to say what is the truth?! The truth is just something that is formed by a point of view. Everyone has a different point of view so how can there be truth? It is also based on perception, which is pretty much the same as "point of view," it just sounds smarter! Perception is how you see things. Everyone sees situations differently because of the fact that everyone is different and is an individual. So who is to say what is, or is not, the truth? The same goes for those who talk about what "normal" is. This idea is also ridiculous and should never be written about. Normality is based on one person's thoughts and ideas, and that is stupid. Normal has nothing to do with the close you wear or how you act, like everyone thinks; which is why I don't even believe in anything being "normal." However, I do believe in truth, but this is a different story. These two ideas should never be written about unless you are talking about telling someone if they look fat or not and you tell them you are telling the truth. Then it's okay, otherwise no! Just don't do it! So you know now that you have to pick a good topic and write smaller words to make a good essay. What else is there? Nothing really. The next step is to just pour your heart out into the article. As I mentioned before, the more emotion and more enthusiasm you have in the subject, the more entertaining it will be and the more readers you will have acquired. Don't forget about the "No's!" I told you about either. If you are like me, that just really pisses you off to see who thinks what "truth" or "normality" is. I find it funny when someone tries to talk about what they think either is. Anyway, now that I have given you some useful information on how to better you writing, I hope you take it into consideration and make your articles easier to understand. That would help a lot thanks! Also, thank you to those of you who actually took the time to read this and not put me down for my ideas on this subject and actually think about what I had to say. Thank you and good luck to all writers in the future! | |
topic: Advice | |
[reply] [15 comments] |
|
| Traduction and seduction - The profile of a pedophile. | January 5, 2007, 6:08AM |
 by: Ektomorf |
|
Pedophiles don't walk around with neon arrows pointing over their heads. Pedophiles don't walk around with signs on their backs. It's easier to believe that your "toothless, old creep-next-door", rather than the clean-cut bus driver down the street, is a child molestor. These people aren't just confined to The Church. They can be found in synagogues and mosques as well. Some of them are teachers, computer engineers, mechanics, truck drivers, factory workers, and health ministers. In fact, they are to be found wherever children can be found, irrespective of age, race, income or social status. Celibacy isn't the reason Druids prey on children. Sexual attraction to children, and sexual gratification from children, are the reasons. Moving onto the meat and potatoes of this article, there is no hard and fast profile of a pedophile, but here are some general characteristics: • Popular with both children. • Appears to be trusting and friendly.. • Feels more comfortable with children than adults. Is mainly attracted to prepubescent boys and girls. Sexuality may vary. • "Grooms" children with video games, candy, toys, gifts and money. • Often dates or marries women with children that are the age of his preferred victims. • Usually through trust and friendship, he wins over the children. Physical contact is gradual, from touching, to picking up, to holding on lap, to kissing, etc. • Derives gratification in a number of ways. Some are voyeurs. Others take pictures or watch kids undress. Still others require more contact. [Shakes head in despair and disgust] • Keeps finding ways to be alone with children. • Are often, but not always, themselves victims of some form of childhood sexual abuse. • Even if the pedophile has no children, his home is usually child-friendly, with toys, books, video games, computers, bikes, swing sets, skateboards, etcetera - things to attract children to his home and keep them coming back. • A female pedophile usually abuses a child when partnered with an adult male pedophile, and is often herself a victim of chronic sexual abuse. Pedo means "child" in Greek. Phile is a derivative of Greek, Latin, and French, meaning "love." The Exclusive type of pedophile is attracted to children only. A pedophile will not stop on his own, and will not be confessional- EVER - because he does not take responsibility for his behavior and denies that he's doing anything harmful. Traducing continues until someone stops him. Pedophiles can be "treated" but never cured, because their sexual preference has always been, and always will be, children. Their urges will always be present. Therefore, treatment focuses on changing, curbing, or re-directing the acting-out behaviors of pedophiles. Knowing the profile of a pedophile, does this mean that the little league coach who has a great rapport with kids and treats them to pizza at his house is suspect? Or maybe that teacher who throws pool parties is? Fuck no! The majority of people who like and work with children are not pedophiles. It does mean that we should be observant of all the adults in our children's lives, whether they wear a white collar or a blue collar. If a child tells us he or she has been sexually abused by someone, be it family, friend, or trusted adult, we are obligated by law to report it to CPS. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [21 comments] |
|
| A paper i had to write on your actions speaking to everyone | January 4, 2007, 2:00PM |
 by: brokn_within_secrets |
|
All quotes are supposed to have significance to our life. But aren’t quotes on your actions over used? Aren’t some quotes abused or incorrect? On the base of your actions lye consequences and growth. But how do “great actions speak to all humankind”? Actions are made to reflect the way you feel or what your mind wants you to do. If you do a good dead is that good action as quickly as an ungrateful or bad action is noticed? I honestly don’t believe that good actions are shown or recognized nearly as quickly as peoples bad actions are. You look at the good people do and either way you tend to find the bad that is in them sooner. Finding the bad in all good is used for helping people in concluding a situation that could potentially hurt them or make there lives just to much drama, is it not? If I were to commit a “great action” I would assume that it would go unrecognized and if it had been noticed I highly doubt that it will “speak to all humankind”. No action can be shared with everyone. I could do something that is considered god, such as, sharing my time with the ill. No matter what I highly doubt that it would have an affect on every one. I would guess that just the sick person and maybe their family would be affected by what I may do to help. Now I must contradict myself a little bit. Actions can be shared with a lot of people. That is of course if you are famous. If you’re famous your actions are recorded and shared. Every one knows if you want dirt the tabloids make it possible. Stars are constantly being followed around and their choices are published for the whole world’s amusement. But this goes with my other point that bad actions tend to be recognized more. Since when do you hear of stars giving money to an orphanage or helping the hungry and sick? Now, how often do you hear of a stars drinking problems, substance abuse, or eating disorders? Is my point getting across? Now I’m not saying that all actions go unnoticed or that they are not appreciated but I am stating that they aren’t always recognized. It is nearly impossible for you to get your good deed told to every one. But your choices really do lead to consequences and growth in your life, and based on that you should try to do right and make it acknowledged. | |
topic: Essays | |
[reply] [0 comments] |
|
| Self-Perception and Children | January 2, 2007, 11:44PM |
by: singerangel710 |
|
Parents today don't worry enough about their children. Bad self-perception in a child can be very dangerous and detrimental to the child's future and his mental state. Parents don't realize the issues that kids have today and how much pressure is put on them. Self-perception may be the only aspect a child can rely on to keep going in life. Children don't learn self-perception on their own. It is acquired through visual learning and teachings by the parent. As they grow from infants to toddlers to children, the child watches every move the parent makes and hears every word the parent says. Parents may try to use the phrase: "Do as I say, not as I do," to keep children from repeating the bad self-image the parents have, but, in reality, visual learning is impossible to stop. Whether parents like it or not, children learn from, and most of the time look up to, at least one of the them and want to be just like him or her. So what do children do? They copy and mimic their role model. This is not safe when a parent could have problems such as anorexia that are harmful to everyone, and to children especially. Not only do children like to watch what their parents do but also what their siblings do and how they act. Siblings are another major aspect on how children see themselves. An older brother may pick on or "beat up" the little brother and call him names. These beatings and hurtful words he will always believe and will always be with him; he will always remember those words. The older brother may ask any other siblings and the parents to go out to a movie or on the town and neglect asking his brother or even recognizing him. The little brother then feels alone and rejected. He begins to re-evaluate his own self-worth and his value in the family. His self-worth is brought down drastically by these small happenings. Children pay attention to the small aspects of life and these are what matter to them. The small happenings and memories in life are what the child remembers, not the bigger pictures. Self-perception is also learned and taught from the child's surroundings and what he hears. If the child is mainly around groups of kids that like to pick on each other, or even pick on him, this is not going to be good for the child. This situation teaches the child that it is okay to make fun of others or even the names he is being called are true, especially if there is one name he is repeatedly called or one trait he is put down for. That piece of information is engraved on the child's mind. Trying to erase this perception takes a long time, if the child can even let it go at all. A good example of all these factors in a child's self-perception is myself. I grew up with my siblings beating me down with words and actions as well as anything else they could imagine. My parents didn't stop this when I tried to tell them about it; they just said to suck it up and stop being a baby. They enjoyed pulling down my self-esteem and perception too. My mother is the type of person who will not eat for a few days so she can stay skinny and look good in the media's eyes. I have also acquired this habit. All of the horrible mishaps that have happened to me have given me the self-perception I have of myself and have brought me close to the edge of sanity. Many things in my past have brought me close to suicide. Parents don't think that teasing a child like that or treating them slightly worse than other siblings can be bad for a child's mental health and how that child sees life. Parents need to start realizing that children don't learn self-perception by themselves and aren't born with it. Parents, siblings, and other children teach them by visual learning and actions. If parents don't start to realize what they are doing to their children, then they might turn out how I am and no one wants to be that way. I know, I'm living it. | |
topic: Philosophy | |
[reply] [5 comments] |
|
| Naughty, naughty, naughty. | January 2, 2007, 1:27AM |
 by: Hooks_in_You |
|
Before I begin yet another trivial utterly pointless rant, i would like to explain why i do not capitalise my i's. There are really two reasons, the first being that my most predominant (like i care if thats not the right word) characteristic is that i am completely slothful and lazy, and the second is that i actually like the little dots. You would deprive me of little dots.... you are a sick, warped sadist.... how could you?!?! Anyway, i'll pretend to have some sort of point here, i know that with all my rambling it will seem as though what i write it the complete antithesis of a point, but like it really matters.... some people choose their words wisely, others waste them, i am of course the latter. The point. I must not forget. OK, here we go. Censorship, in a manner of speaking. You have of course noticed that there is little to no profanity on television before a certain time (in britain, we have a watershed at 9 o'clock). This is of course because little children could be watching, and of course little children should never ever hear, see, or be (in any way) subjected to the horrific traumatic experience of actually hearing somebody swearing. Porn is out too before a certain time also, but i suppose thats another matter.... Firstly, are parents really so naive that they believe that their children have never heard these words before? Really? Fascinating. Truth be told, before i was 8 years of age i knew practically every profane word that is in common use, as did every other child that age that i knew. The reason, because i heard them from other children, thats the thing with life, is that you hear other peoples experiences, and regardless of how much your family tries to shelter you (barring locking you in a closet or something) you are going to hear and see exactly those things that your family want to keep you from. Its inevitable. Secondly, what really is so bad about these words? Please tell me, because i truly do not understand. Fuck, cunt, cock, dick, tits- unless im mistaken (which i usually am), those are all references to anatomy and sexual practices right? Wait, if your child is so special, and his existance, birth and conception are beautiful things then why is using words that refer to this considered wrong or ugly? Perhaps you think that these particular words are so because they are crude slang (by which i suppose i mean the unofficial words meaning cock instead of penis) terms that by demean the acts. Yet terms remain in place (of perfect acceptability) that describe sexual acts with terms other than those considered 'official' (dont get pedantic- you know what the fuck i mean) - for example in the cartoon "The Simpsons" the act is referred to as "snuggling". Why is this somehow more acceptable than fucking? Ahh i see. It's because the term fucking (as opposed to "making love" or sexual intercourse) alters (in the minds of psychotic parents) from a beautiful union of two soulmates into a sordid indulgance of physical pleasure. That however, is really more of a problem of social practices, mentalities and associations rather than a problem with the actual meaning of the word. The sound is of course arbitrary so only a complete fool would reason that a word can have an offensive sound or that one sound of word is better than another. Pickle is a much nicer word than dog because it has more syllables. Really? What fucking planet are you on? Perhaps it is the multidimensional use of the word that offends. Yes, that is surely it. Sexual intercourse could only be used with one meaning, in one context (not literally one context but my point remains valid when you reason it through in your head- stop, think and you will realise both what i mean, and the accuracy of it) whereas fuck is used within many contexts with a different (not really meaning, but rather tone and intention). We'll skip the verb usage and go right to the insult category (noun, i think i mean) and we'll bring the other words back in for a moment. Your a completely useless cock/cunt/fuck/dickhead/etc. Obviously, the prior meanings could not apply. No-one, regardless of how insane would actually accuse another person of being a penis, vagina, sexual intercourse, or to literally have a penis upon their heads (or as a head depending upon your own strange interpretation). So their meanings can be dropped, and as such it could be said that they have no wordly* (*used here because of- hell i dont need to justify myself to you) meaning, but are vocal inflections of hate, malice and distaste. However, simple distaste, even hate, pales in comparison to insulting terms such as despot, myopic (not literal use), imbecile, foolish, etc, which when used within the same context have both the same inflections (regardless of understanding) plus, their own specific hurtful meanings themselves. Penn Jillette described this act of double standards when he said "she's not against barnyard vulgarity, she just wants it in her own infantile baby talk". You see my point here.... please tell me that you do. Do you? NO? Aw well moving on then. What about that old favourite, the introduction of religion into the argument? Thats always good for a laugh or two. "Thou shalt not take the lords name in vain" (or is it vein, no im sure its vain). HAHA! Ive read the bible, not all of it granted, but all the gospels (which are essentially all the same for some obscure reason) revelations, genesis, exodus, as well as large portions of other books of the bible.... ok i admit it, i haven't read every single word of the bible, but ive read enough to realise that it seems unlikely that at any point in it God is referred to as a cocksucker, or addressed as an assmaster- what about faggot? Any of you spot that, be sure to let me know. In the meanwhile im going to assume that no-one calls him douchebag in their daily prayers. However, if you want a little sidenote, there are a variety of words in common use that (according to this rule) would be unacceptable. Heres a few: God, Lord, Jesus, Messiah, Christ, Savior, Trinity, Holy Ghost, Holy Father, Holy Son, Holy Spirit. You can probably think of more im sure. Much much more to the point however is the principle reason that they object to this perceived negativity in the first place (lets face facts if they didnt object there would be profanity in common usage on tv it would be commonly used by society as a whole {you know what i mean, stop being pedantic} and as such would not adversely affect their childs future because its usage would seem perfectly natural to others) is that they have, in their minds, the way that they want their child to grow up to be (thats why you call it raising a child rather than growing one) and that the use of profanity conflicts with their limiting perceptions of what their child is allowed to grow up to be. Forgive me if i have missed a hugely vital point here, but dont all of our concepts of law and religion centre entirely upon responsibility and free will? What? Is there an age where you have free will and responsibility and up untill that point you are the property of your parents? (Yeah its 18- shut up and stay out of this) If that is the case, if we are the property of our parents untill a specific age, then all child abuse (yes, even the seedy sexual molestation ones) claims and such would be redundant. How can you arrest someone for mistreating their own property? If i were to carve up a throw pillow or smash a vase would they throw me in prison for that? They're human beings you say? It makes a big difference you say? Ok so the property idea is completely out to lunch. We are still left with the free will and responsibility problem. Ive got it. It must mean that a child has a scaling value. Lets argue that an in animate object has a value of 0 and that a fully grown adult has a value of 1 while a child would have a value that ranges between the two according to age (and as a result, the capacity for increased responsibility). Ah, this is a little closer to your own perception i suspect. Does this mean that if i were to murder two children with a value of 0.5 that i would receive only one life sentence for it. I knew i could do it. I knew if i put that example forward i could make you feel deeply uncomfortable with that idea as well. Aw well. Back to the drawing board i suppose. There really seems to be no logical progression or even any logic at all in the arbitrary censorship and exorcism of words from a childs vocabulary. Someone said that offence cannot be given only taken, and i agree.... everything is pretty subjective, morals, offence, interpretations, even reality itself. In the event that you have read this entire thing and still have not realised what the point, neccessity or even motivation for writing this is, i'll tell you. It's a small (ha!) segment of my own insane rambling argument against censorship (in all its forms), law (in all its forms), and concepts of morality in general, but thats not really included or relevant here.... my motivations are not your concern. Oh, and if you have a problem with the grammer or punctuation (or a decided lack thereof), please keep them to yourself. Telling me why my grammer is incorrect or even pointing it out to me is the equivilant to me as someone encouraging or condoning the rape and murder of your next door neighbour by yourself, would be to you. Do whatever you want, you will anyway....What do i really know anyway, im no expert on any of these subjects... its not my place to tell you what to do, but im going to anyway, just as you will tell me what to do.... its part of out natures so fuck it... lets just enjoy the act of bossing others about, might as well. | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [0 comments] |
|
| Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice | December 29, 2006, 2:00PM |
 by: Vampire_Lycan_Bich |
|
Many pro-life individuals believe that personhood begins at conception rather than at birth or at some point in-between. This perspective is historically derived from the Christian and Islamic tradition and has influenced certain strains of bioethical utilitarianism.From that viewpoint, any action which destroys an embryo kills a human being. Any purposeful destruction is considered ethically and morally wrong. Such an act is not considered to be mitigated by any benefits to others through scientific advancement or, in the case of abortion, by ending the hardship of a woman with an unwanted pregnancy, as such benefits come at the expense of the life of what they consider a person. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are also opposed by some pro-life people based on a belief that life is sacred and must be protected even against the wishes of a person who wants to end their own life. Pro-choice activists believe that women should have access to safe and legal abortion and, equally, that women should be protected from forced abortions. Some see abortion as a last resort, and focus on a number of situations where they feel abortion is a necessary option. Among these situations are those where the woman was raped, her health or life (or that of the fetus) is at risk, contraception was used but failed, or she feels unable to raise a child. Some pro-choice moderates, who would otherwise be willing to accept certain restrictions on abortion, feel that political pragmatism compels them to oppose any such restrictions, as they could be used to form a slippery slope against all abortions. Okay so you may be asking right now... What the hell is your point? well here you go Right now all i want to do is state my OPINION on this issue. and hope for an INTELLECTUAL "DEBATE" maybe on the issue Here we go... I don't understand the view-point of people of pro-life because they don't take into consideration the event that cause the woman to become pregnant and they rarely take into consideration the fact that this issue is is world wide. So what I'm saying is would you rather get raped and then have a child that you didn't want and that could have the face of the man that raped you? What about the child. It would grow up and eventually learn that it's father was a rapist and that could just fuck that little kid up. And then what about children in poverty? If we were to go completely pro-life it would happen all around the world not just in the United States. Meaning that in Africa where women get pregnant and then have the abortion as the best interest for the unborn child? Would you rather abort the baby or have it and put it through pain and suffering for a few months before it dies because you can't nuture it? That's just fucked up to put a kid through that.... But on the other hand i can't be 100% pro-choice because i could never agree with someone trying to get an aborting in the 2nd or 3rd trimester because not only does it harm your own body you're actually killing a real live baby... There you go now please if you have nothing but retarded nothingness to say please don't comment. | |
topic: Current Events | |
[reply] [5 comments] |
|
| Prison Sex to the max. | December 27, 2006, 3:37PM |
by: Hooks_in_You |
|
While listening to Tool's Prison Sex I began to think of its intended meaning. Yes it's about prison sex, but I began to think about the purpose of the song, and I began to realise that while being gangraped in prison is the subject, it seemed to put a great deal more emphasis on the victim/rapist, do unto others theme, and the whole thing seemed to be about the perpetuation of negative behavioural patterns... how the protagonist is gangraped, then goes on to do the same thing to others, taking the role of antagonist fully, even reveling in the very things that had brought him to this point. What your goddamn point you useless contenptuous fool? I'm getting to that, be patient. Anyway, the whole thing sent me on one of those harsh and cruel journeys of exploration on the subject of behaviour and that line that divides the sinners from the saints if you will. We are constantly instructed to simply be ourselves. It seems so easy when it is dished out as advice but how can you truly be yourself. When you look inwards and examine the various factors and aspects that define and characterise yourself, you quickly become aware that much (a great deal more than you previously believed) of your own personality is someone elses. Hatred and fears inherited from friends, family, society are all engraved, etched into your skull. Love and tolerances imposed upon your mind from constant brainwashing. Even ideas and mentalities, reactions and motivations, come from people, places and things that are all alien to you. More to the point. Even were you not tarnished by the infectious breath and noxious toxins of others, you still are not your own, but rather the product of those two chance oriented factors nature and nurture (irrelevant since its already been mentioned, but nonetheless whatever). It isn't not particularly comforting that you are determined by who conceived you and who raised you, and not by your own choice or merit. Much more interesting though is not the why of it all, but instead is the how. Ok. We are not in control of our own lives. Ok, so we simply represent elements of society. All well and good, but better is that you can actually observe the process in action. You can see fathers beating their children and watching their children turn out just the same. Even if they don't they're reaction is usually such that they instinctively invert their paternal behaviour to rebel and prevent a repetition of their own upbringing. Smothered with love, suffocated by attention. Their own childs reaction? Rebellion against their theme- and turning back to the origional program of aggression. Voila! The system works and the behaviour chain remains complete. It just skipped a generation that was all. Fascinating stuff. Countless songs and stories have been written about it. Which brings me to the next point. Other than the underlying perpetual behaviour patterns, which are essentially reactionary and instinctive rather than calculated intentional perpetuations, there are the more pressing ones seen in the media and popular movies and other forms of entertainment. The moral of the story is.... Did you ever notice that the overwhelming majority of films and tv programs baring of course the wildly inaccurately titled "reality tv" contain a blatant and painfully trite "moral". The good guy always wins, the bad guy always loses. The cheeky but humourous womaniser learns the error of his ways and settles down for some serious monogomy. The stories and jokes change but the template remains the same, even in the true stories. How many films have you seen, even those "based on a true story" have you seen where a womaniser instead of learning from his errors instead changes course and begins some good old fashioned domestic violence? Where the villain butchers the hero and achieves his nefarious ends? Where the drug baron escapes the rule of the law untill the day he dies of natural causes? Very few. Even shows like Forensic detectives and FBI files seem to have this "we catch everybody, and we'll catch you too...." theme to them. Its all to convince you that there are these clear boundries of good and evil. That evil is an affront to goodness and all that crap, while at the same time to drum into your head other peoples ideas of morality. Chauvinism is wrong, marriage is right. Good always prevails.... hope faith charity.... the whole nine yards. FUCK THAT! No really. How can you expect mankind to progress, to evolve, with all these negative behaviour patterns floating around? Not just the rapist example aforementioned, nor other extreme cases of abused children going on to murder people and use their organs for upholstry and nutrition. Not even child molestors and politicians, but the righteous, the well meaning, and in particular, the tolerant (HA!). It all seems like a computer program in its layout. 2% murderer, 7% rapist and paedophile, 15% evangelist, 40% this 20% the other. A proportional representation continuing along the ages, never really changing. I doubt there are more paedophiles now than there were 1000 years ago, theres just a bigger population of people so the percentage sounds bigger once spun as a number. (example) 1673 murderers today and 500 fifty years ago doesnt mean that there has been an increase if there are a billion more people floating about. That paragraph was exhausting and confusing so clarity time here baby. My final point. A continued thesis of all i've said before is that statistics like everything else are presented to shock you. To force you to react how they tell you to react. Saying 94% of people still don't give blood in Northern Ireland sounds a great deal more shocking than saying over 60,000 people do. Over 900 people committed suicide last year in Northern Ireland. Shocking? What if I was to tell you that that is less than 0.066% of Northern Ireland's population? No quite so shocking now. Especially when you consider that 94% of that population didn't even give blood that year. Statistics are hilarious. Its just a matter of turning them around to suit whatever insane voice is in the limelight at the time, the man of the hour and all that jazz.... Don't give into the old aspects of yourself that are really your parents, or the brainwashed behaviours imposed by society, or even your own perceptions... or do. It's really your choice, the only one you've ever had. The choice to live in constant slavery to yourself, others and governance in bliss, or die a martyr in a cold prison cell or on a soapbox ignored, marginalised and hated, another dead hero in the long list of dead heroes. | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [29 comments] |
|
| Hollidays, who needs them? | December 27, 2006, 1:08AM |
 by: Drkmtl |
|
I'm not the type of person that likes the holidays. To me they are just a waste of time doing things people do every day to each other. Sure the kids love it but, why do it on a certain day? Every holiday is the same, you give to the ones you love, right? Well why cant you do it when its not a special occasion? Why do people have to be forced to give to others just because of an stupid holiday? Fact is an holiday is just a way for the economy to thrive and grow. Its just so people will go out and spend as much cash as they can, just to show that they care about someone. If the thought counts then do we all just feel so lonely that we have to make holidays and stupid idols like Santa, the Easter Bunny, and Cupid. Does it really make us feel better to celebrate a day and just give nonstop? Really cause I honestly don't see the big idea of it all. If you can explain it, please tell me, cause I don't think its all that great. | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [1 comment] |
|
| James Brown aka the Godfather of Soul | December 26, 2006, 5:33PM |
 by: XangelXmysticsX |
|
James Brown passed away on Monday, December 25, 2006 at approximately 1:45 am ET. He was hospitalized on December 24 with severe pneumonia at Emory Crawford Long Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia. He was 73. James Brown has been attributed with "stirring up" many various types of music, from soul to funk to rap all through out the last five decades. He earned titles such as "the Original Disco Man" and "Soul Brother Number One" from his adoring fans. Songs such as "Say It Loud (I'm Black and I'm Proud)", "Papa's Got a Brand New Bag" and "Get Up Sex Machine" have been blasted from eight track players, cassette players, CD players, and iPod/MP3 Players for three generations. When people speak of "classics", "Mr. Dynamite" is invariably always mentioned. With his unpolished dance moves and scratchy voice the most popular singer of all time, rivaled only by Elvis. In his extensive career, James Brown amassed a total of 98 entries on Billboard's Top 40 R&B singles charts, a record currently unbeaten by any other artist. 'A charter member of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Brown added to his collections of accolades when he received a special lifetime achievement Grammy Award in 1992' (http://www.classicbands.com/brown.html). Needless to say, the Godfather of Soul will be remembered for many years to come. He is afterall the Hardest Working Man in Show Business. Rest in Peace James Brown. | |
topic: Current Events | |
[reply] [2 comments] |
|
| Stare into the void. | December 25, 2006, 8:33PM |
by: Hooks_in_You |
|
I have a problem. Not i specifically of course. But you, and others like you. What i really mean is we. We as people, we as a society as a whole have a very obscure and mundane problem. A problem while neither unique nor origional but nevertheless very real and in its own way is dangerous and in my opinion blasphemous. What is this problem? Global warming? Governmental corruption? Serial killers and child molestors? Nope. Psychiatrists. Please hear my insane theory out. I've listened patiently to all of yours, its my turn to speak. The whole profession of psychiatry exists for one purpose, a purpose that freud should have realised, a purpose that all psychiatrists ought to realise but seem delightfully oblivious to. That purpose is to perpetuate (a word ill use ad nauseum) ignorance. Before I get to their specific role I must mention that they are not the only instigators of ignorance. People, governments, and ideas have been doing it for years. Its all to do with the system of the human being. Unique creatures that we are, with our intellect came civilisation (or what passes for such) and with it came converse and all the foul counterparts such as isolation and introspection. At some point someone realised that if you leave people isolated long enough, too much time to think.... the whole remarkable bleak reality of existence is discovered. The horrible secret that underlies the fabric of our universe. Insignificance. The common response to realising that everything that you ever say or do is totally irrelevant- suicide. The heart of the matter. Every person instinctively reaches and grasps for concepts and distractions in order to forget and ignore the truth, and why not? Imagining that the human race were to end now and all that would be left after thousands upon thousands of years of life, is a handfull of monuments of egomaniacal figures and blueprints of how to split atoms. What a fuckin accomplishment. No really thats something special in the whole cosmos of things. We should be so proud. Even if there were other life forms out there, any information derived from our ruins and remains would be almost entirely redundant. Face facts. The universe would not even notice if we were gone. We're completely and utterly irrelevant. Thats a harsh reality to face. Its no wonder everyone tries so valiently to block it out. Following insane cause after another, chasing dreams, obsessions, following ideals and concepts conceived for the purpose of keeping us from looking into the void. Psychiatrists are a different matter though. It makes our ignorance no longer psychological but rather flesh and blood. These are people filling the shoes of distraction and mental trickery. They know the inner mind so that they can exploit it for one purpose the self perpetuation of society itself. This distinction is important. Its the difference between self restraint and imposed restraint. Deception at the hands of the more adept. Prevent them from staring into that black abyss.... thats not good for them.... i know whats good for them... i am god now... i can shape their minds how i choose.... how i am told to choose... turn them into who i am told to.... turn them into me.... into you... into one.... grand..... functioning well- oiled machine. The system. You dont know about the system? Society is a system, it is the system, symbiotic in all ways, every action enticing a perfect reaction.... thought only causes problems.... This sounds paranoid i know, but im sorry to tell you that this is very real. I didn't notice this. I am not a particularly thoughtful or intelligent person.... i could never spot something like this.... no... im afraid the credit goes to the prophets.... the ones who saw it, lived it, and tried to warn us all.... Bill Hicks, George Orwell, Lenny Bruce, Ken Kesey, Douglas Adams... so if you have any problems with this theory and wish to discuss it with me, then fuck you! Don't hassle me cause im not interested.... take up your umbrage with those dead heros, im just the messenger. Though i do have something to add of my own.... perhaps you should stop. Just stop, everything, for an indeterminate amount of time. Forget about your family, your beliefs, your loved ones, your hobbies, forget your job, forget your health. Stare long and hard into the void, the abyss, that black all consuming darkness that goes on forever and realise that no matter what you do will never, ever matter. The greatest minds that have ever graced this planet have left only the faintest glimpses of themselves upon this world. The system itself has left only testaments to vanity and colourful toys upon this world. This one world of billions. This tiny speck of unimportance in an apathetic universe. Upon this speck, you are a speck... go on stare as long as you like, remember... nothing matters. | |
topic: Life | |
[reply] [0 comments] |
|
| pages: back 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 next |