Society @ MindSay 
love
There is a part of me that's somewhat resentful that I can't give blood to save people's lives, but I'm able to sustain mosquitoes for another day.
Actually, I'm not sure what the time works out to. If I let a mosquito bite me, just let it, without the reflexive smacking, and it takes its full and rather drunkenly flies off (the mosquito, in my opinion, is one of the most poorly-designed fliers in the Midwest. Itty bitty whiney wings, six long legs and a long face that just hang down and drag at the air. They are made for landing, and biting, not for flying), how long does that particular meal last it? An hour? The rest of the day? Enough time to find a male mosquito and lay enough eggs to rival the stars on our side of the Milky Way?
On the subject of male mosquitoes, they are non-biting - the mosquito society is somewhat comparable to the Amazons. Males are necessary to mate, of course, but aside from that, they're really a disgrace to the species, as they don't do what mosquitoes are made to do. The females only put up with them because finding enough food to lay all those eggs is a rather hazardous and time-consuming practice, and thus they haven't found a way to artificially produce mosquito sperm.
Hang on a sec. What exactly do male mosquitoes eat? They don't feed off people. Do they just eat enough junk as larvae to sustain them for their One Great Lay? Actually, I have no idea how many mates a male will take in his leggy lifetime. I speculated that their primary ambition was to produce offspring, but for all I know, male mosquitoes are brilliant writers who spend much of their time learning the great philosophies of previous generations. They contentedly spend their days closed up in their personal libraries (which explains why we never see them), and their attitude towards the females is more of a mild annoyance at being interrupted from their studies. "Ah. You're wearing THAT. Oh, very well." For them, it's more a sense of duty than anything else, and they'd really much prefer to be left alone with their books and cigars.
I picture the females as being rather aggressive, the males quite a bit calmer. If they had voices (perhaps they do), one of them is certainly far more strident and demanding. The one sees the other as a necessary affliction, and the other finds the first to be a mildly attractive irritation.
Although, really, if I knew that the only reason that someone hadn't decided to off me was because they didn't know how to produce whatever they needed from me, I'd probably spend a good amount of time making sure that I kept a monopoly on that item's production. Maybe male mosquitoes keep a close eye on their scientists, and whenever anyone starts in that direction, they find themselves having a little chat with the mosquito mob, and soon they're sleeping with the larvae.
Dude. Maybe that's it. Larvae eat adult mosquitoes that have been tossed in the water, and pick up other blueprints that way.
"Hey. Are you guys sure we're supposed to have all these legs? They're supposed to be this long?"
"Uh, I guess so. Hey, Jakey - remember when they threw your dad in here? What'd he look like?"
"Shut up."
Buzz buzz buzz.
The country I live in, the country I was born in, the country I love and keep coming back to, is a lie.
We have billboards up all over the place: "Keep our country green and pristine!" "This is our land! Keep it Clean!" Great words, good show. We have those fancy enviriomental acts and agencies and private companies and charities, all aimed at making a 'greener' world. The vast majority of citizens here believe in this and commend these wonderful people for what they're doing. But don't recycle or limit themselves.
We have protests and riots all the time of the economical situation and trials. People running their mouths about how the government isn't giving them enough money. Government officials put forward bills that might cost us a little in the short term but could really help. And our people praise them! But don't give any money.
We have parenting groups running around screaming about the number of children born out of wedlock never knowing who their father is. Complaining how they don't have money for school supplies and the like. But don't stop popping out the babies.
And its not just here. I've lived in the States. We are a Bare Minimum society. We blame our government but rarely do our parts. Its almost like we all believe, for ourselves, that the 'great' idea to try to conserve fuel, reuse what we can and recycle is all for someone else to do. For the government to do. But if the government did try to limit our gas or whatever, we'd have hissy fits. If the government doesn't do that and we all fall further into the economic hole and waste our natural resources, its the government's fault.
Its a two-way street people. And in countries as large as the US, its more like a highway.
A writer by the name of Peter Singer makes the following proposition: ‘speciesism’, so to speak, is no different than racism – as the former is a belief that claims that those of us belonging to a certain species, just like those of us belonging to a certain race in the latter ideology, are superior or more important than those belonging to a different species or race.
I contend that there is a major flaw with this argument, for, the two are not the same: the belief in superiority of races is, for all intents and purposes, unfounded. The belief in superiority of certain animal species is not.
After all, the American civil rights movement would have been a sham if those equal rights were not inherently deserved. Most of us believe that race separates us no more significantly than by appearance, and in some cases, culture and language (though it should be noted that, while they may often seem to correspond, they are actually quite irrelevant to race itself) – therefore, the concept of all races deserving equal rights is not a difficult one to grasp. On the other hand, other animals are, indeed, quite obviously inferior to humans. How inferior, exactly, depends on the animal, but the point remains: different races deserve and require equal rights; but it is neither necessary, justifiable, nor feasible that animals should receive equal rights to humans.
Should inferiority infer the stripping of all rights whatsoever? To me this question is far more important, and for the moment allows us to escape from Singer’s extreme theoreticals to the relatively more conventional beliefs that drive animal rights activism.
Personally, I am against cruelty to animals, but I look at it from a somewhat different perspective: I believe allowing or encouraging acts of cruelty against animals leads to a society that thrives on, well, cruelty. It seems that many of those who commit terrible crimes against other human beings have often committed similar acts against animals earlier on in life, and even if this is not actually the case, it is intuitive that a link would be present: after all, cruelty is cruelty, and a general disregard for a living being or delight in its pain seems quite easily transferable to other humans. I believe that those who commit such acts against animals need to receive some sort of punishment, simply to reflect how society views such acts, and to reflect the danger that such a person poses to the rest of society until they receive some form of rehabilitation. Therefore, my reason for opposing cruelty to animals is simply for the sake of human society, and the actual rights of the animals in question are irrelevant to my perspective.
Is my view flawed? I don’t believe so. I believe that we must put our own species first, simply because it is impossible not to do so without disadvantaging ourselves. This is not just about making a decision to no longer eat meat – how could we fight parasites, or seek medical research, if other species’ welfare was to be considered as important or important enough to be relevant? Yes, it is true that even the most extreme animal rights activist probably has little interest in the protection of protozoa, but these too are living creatures, just smaller and less complex than other animals, who in turn are smaller and less complex than us. It is hypocritical to clamour only for the rights of mammals and not insects, or indeed the animal kingdom as a whole, because doing so is little more than ‘speciesism’ at a broader level.
So, how do we measure a species’ importance, and rights? I believe that the only logical answer must be to realise that the human animal is the only one that deserves ‘rights’ from our (human) society: not necessarily because of innate superiority even, but simply because this is the species that we are a part of, to which we belong – a discrimination that, unlike racism, is quite relevant and, indeed, necessary.
So Amanda steps out of the shower tonight and I notice she is lobster red. She wasn't when she stepped in, and the bathroom wasn't a mess with steam so I know she didn't have the water on scalding like she sometimes does (usually in the winter). So I ask, "Are you ok? Why are you so red?"
"It's from my salt scrub."
"Salt scrub? Why the hell do you scrub yourself with salt?!"
"So my skin is soft." And the million dollar line... "I do it for you, baby!"
Ok, hold up the guilt trip train! I have never asked you to tear your skin off for me. As a matter of fact, this whole tearing off your skin with salt thing is a recent affliction. Women have gotten along fine for thousands of years without tearing off their skin, and somehow they remained married. Imagine that. So you aren't doing it for me.
Sometimes I think women are masochists and use men as the front for it. Ladies, here a few thoughts on beauty from a man.
1. Stop tearing off your skin with salt and sugar scrubs. Unless YOU enjoy doing it, of course. Amanda told me she likes the way the water pools up and runs off her skin. So, like a freak, I decided to try this shit out to see what it really does. And yes, I am secure enough in my sexuality to admit that I stink to the high heavens of ylang ylang now. Sure enough, it wasn't exactly comfortable, but the water did pool and run off my skin like rain on a freshly water sealed deck. Which was freakishly unnatural, I might add. But back to my point. There is no man on Earth who would ask you to rip your skin off in the name of looking good, and if there happens to be a man like this and he ISN'T single, then at least one woman really is a masochist. Lotion will do you just fine. And it isn't painful.
2. Ladies, shaving your legs can't possibly be that much of a pain in the ass that you're willing to dump hot wax on your flesh and rip the hair out. Amanda has done this, not often thank God, but she's done it. As someone who enjoys touching her legs, I noticed the hair didn't stay away any longer than it does when she shaves. She still had to shave again in three days. Most women I've met admit this is the case. So why do you do it?! It makes you no smoother and doesn't take away any of the trouble you go to. So, why? And btw, don't even suggest to your man that he wax his face. We won't do it. There is no good reason to.
3. You know how much men care about your eyebrows? Do you have two of them? Fantastic! But again with the waxing. And God help the plucking. If you feel this is needed, then please don't pluck OUR eyebrows, too. Amanda tried that one day after nagging the shit out of me for weeks and she got one hair out before I put my foot down. Nothing is worth that, I'm sorry (she got one right over my eye lid and it frickin' killed!). Also, ladies, PLEASE stop removing your eyebrows and then drawing them back on. It doesn't look natural and it sure doesn't look good. You can always tell they were drawn on, even if you are good at it. And when you are bad at it... I met a woman once who drew them so they arched like a cartoon character, so she looked like an angry cat. Actually, my first thought was Sarge from Beetle Bailey when he's angry. Then there is the more common "constantly shocked" look most get. But the worst curse against nature is women who use a friggin' Sharpie to draw them back on. Just don't!
4. Just stop waxing all together. Amanda got her... lady area... waxed once. And she threw the "It's for you!" thing at me. Well, no it wasn't, because she was in so much pain I couldn't have sex with her for over a week. She wouldn't let me touch her at all.
5. Let's put it this way. Yes, men like you to look good just like you like us to look good (and don't deny that... the whole plucking your man's eyebrows thing is case in point). But most normal men won't ask you to be in pain for beauty. Hell, I don't even like the amount of make up Amanda wears. I'd prefer she wore none because I think she looks great without it, but it makes her feel better, she claims. Those shoes hurt? Take them off and throw them away. Waxing hurts? Stop doing it. Can't breath in that outfit? Don't wear it. Ladies, believe me. A good man won't ask you to hurt yourself to look good for him, and if he does he should be single. If you stay with him and hurt yourself to meet his needs and desires and he doesn't hurt himself looking good for you, then it is your fault, not the fault of all men who walk the Earth. A good man will love you if you use lotion instead of tearing off your skin with salt or sugar. A good man will love you even if a few stray hairs are seen in your eyebrows (trust me, we won't even see them). A good man will love your legs if you shave instead of wax. A good man won't mind the muffin top tummy as long as you keep eating because ladies... it scares us when you stop eating in some attempt to get a stomach like a super model. And men in general don't really care if you have pubic hair or not. As long you have what's supposed to be there and you let us see it once in a while. :)
Showing 1 - 5. [ Next ]