Our Idiot Audience

I watched the movie Our Idiot Brother.  Paul Rudd is a happy go lucky bio-organic farmer who mistakenly trusts a cop, sells him weed and subsequently gets in and out of jail.  Then his farming girlfriend dumps him for a caveman-esque hippy so he moves into the lives of his sisters.  He routinely says things that shouldn't be said in the most inopportune moments and relocates with various sisters.  The stereotypes are soooo played out and so tasteless in this film that I had to take a literary shit on it.  This movie is for our idiot audience.  I'll start with the trusting law enforcement part.  The policemen tricks Rudd into selling him weed by continually begging him, saying he's had a bad week, he can barely pull through, the usual excuses WE ALL MAKE to get people to give us things.  This film tells you that you can NEVER trust a cop, they are only to be mistrusted; what a great lesson.  Also, he gets a quality conversation going with some hot girl and is shot down, but not in a funny way, more of a humiliating way.  The supposed moral taught by Rudd is that if you give people the benefit of the doubt things will turn out alright.  Shit never turns out right for him until he decides to end his earth-loving lifestyle (after getting arrested by his parole officer) and meet a female dog lover, because he looooves his stupid dog so much.

There are three sisters, Deschanel, the party crazy bi-girl, Mortimer the depressed house wife, and Banks the empowered and immoral working girl.  Each has issues that Rudd helps bring to the surface though little is solved.  Does Mortimer learn from manipulating Rudd into getting her interview, no.  Deschanel get pregnant by cheating on her girlfriend with a guy and doesn't learn anything.  Mortimer dumps her husband because he's a dork and learns what? nothing.  If a movie has dry humor it's because there's an undercurrent of knowledge flowing through it, but what was there to learn?  That respect for people and the earth is for stoner pussies?    Perhaps we can learn that our audience will sit through this Hollywood shit and eat it up; regurgitating stereotypes until all we consume is Desperate Housewives and Ice Road Truckers. Paul Rudd I love you man but you get -10 points for this movie.  I won't even call it a film, more like the most boring propaganda movie ever, ever, made.  Go watch Hesher and drink a thirtysix pack instead.

Money College

I feel money is the fundamental thing that keeps us "in-check" if you will, at work.  We believe we need it to live because it allows us to get the things we want or think we need.  We give our time for money; time is money if you spend your time making it.  We trade allot of our time for material objects.  Some that even absorb more of our time like television, the internet, and all that late night sexting.  This given time can't be brought back, as cheesy as it sounds.  When we work at whatever it is we work at, we give out conscious attention (most of us) to the task at hand.  Most of us aren't doing what we would like to be doing.  Some are and good for you, but the rest of the pizza hut, cubicle, construction worker, grocery clerk suburbanites out there that compromise the working class, give their attention; their lives.

College credits are similar in that you give your time for something in return, credits instead of money.  Of course those credits are just to make money anyways.  But back to school credits.  They remove the student from the "reality of the moment" by making them reassure themselves that the future will make there current reality worth it.  Like working at some job that you hate but put up with because you feel you need the retirement it offers.  The consequence is that your'e aiming for a predetermined goal that sacrifices your own personal views.  Every little thing we put up against our will slowly builds until we get used to taking orders and not questioning the reason for the things we do.  The drive for money and college credits removes us from ourselves, perhaps it's the source of cancer in that our consciousness truly is elsewhere, leaving a body that isn't cared about and begins to go hay-wire.  Yeah, maybe not, but it sounds nice.

Poverty is somewhat of a fallacy because we weren't born with money, it's a man made artifact.  Money has become the foundation of survival in the modern world even though humans have lived without it for a long time.  If we removed all currency would that make us all poor?, no.  Yes you need money in a city to survive or you'll steal to eat.  But when people feel that they are less of a human because they are poor and should therefore beg, the illusion is in full affect.  Ol' Oscar Wilde said we are basically "amusing the poor" by supporting its image.  If he's right, money itself is what keeps it afloat because wealth is poverty, obese is starving, green grass is dead grass; you know, the haves and the have nots.  The full spectrum of society (money, property, ownership, class status, etc.) is an illusion supported  by itself.  What are we doing with all this money and stuff, year after year, era after era; looking back in history all I'm left with is HOLY FUCK!  

Phallic Cross

This book is about the origin of religion. It's dry and wordy.  In short it says that the original concept of worship was simply male and female idols.  These gradually took on characteristics as males and females divided labor and partitioned the purposes.  From this we started incorporating nature into worship, trees, fruit, and animals.  These concepts where embodied in symbols that became language.  From this we continually partitioned and compartmentalized humans and the world around us.  Throughout history we have gone back and forth from male and female worship, currently were in an all male tri-fecta of father, son, holy spirit, though a female has also represented the holy spirit too.  Christianity is an entirely male concept, male god, male prophets, etc, females there just to progress man's seed.  The cross was originally representative of a tree; the tree of life, which itself has had many alterations that are far from Jesus and redemption.  Interestingly, when the supreme god idea was a women, it proponents claimed that a woman would have a virgin birth.  This claim is the story of Mother Mary.  The book destroys religion.  It's a bit sexist though.  I don't believe one sex is superior to the other, but she was coming from a time of extreme sexual prejudice soooo I'll let it slide.  I don't believe we can simply remove language and go back to nature people, that's ridiculous.  We can however hold this in our heads that society, religion, language, came from sexual worship.

Perhaps the karma sutra was considered lame at the time, kinda like someone reading a "how to dance book" would appear today.  It's derived from tantra,  it's original methodology is different than most people believe.  It involved a controlled enjoyment of life's pleasures.  They would drink/smoke, eat and have sex, all in moderation with the goal of uniting with their partner, usually led by some master.  This was heavily practiced by ALLOT of people for a good thousand years or so.  It's main point was to enjoy life, that by uniting with it in physical enjoyment you become "one" with it, ya know.  Meditation and denial of life's pleasures, like many associate with Buddhism, is exactly what this is not, though it is focused with moderation.

Back to the creation of language from symbols from sex.  This is why words do have power, they personify the unified natural world we came from and still partly inhabit.  I bet it's also why wholesome, felt things, like comfort food or simple movies convey so much feeling, or black and white photography/movies.  The ideas are simpler and thererfore embody a large expanse of our conscious reality.  A complicated story line might partition life more then bring it together, maybe.

Objectively Altruistic

I believe altruism is mostly started by rich people who feel guilt and have the comfort and luxury to write about  it, and of course it's approved by other guilt ridden rich people who where probably the only people who knew how to read and write.  Objectivity usually comes from down trodden people who have only felt control, like the usual Ayn Rand and all those other ex-commies.  So I'm using Kant and Rand for this.  To be altruistic you first have to be objective.  I say this because you first have to take care of yourself to take care of others, your not good to yourself or anyone else if you're not good to yourself first.  If you only care about others as your first priority you would die; you'd lay down your life for someone else before you saved yourself.  And if we all only followed Rand and only cared about our own goals we'd conflict with everyone else trying to do their own and kill each other.

So perhaps an objective perspective that recognizes everyone's objective approach would account for this.  It's being objective to be altruistic to be objective; ying/yang.  I think bacteria operate similarly with their" signal molecules" and the awareness it gives them to operate interdependently.  There's a balance to this, you first, others second.  Everyone wants someone who stands up for themselves and has their own opinions.  If you sacrifice yourself for the group you'll end up a shell of a human, open for manipulation and dangerous to a world that is ripe with lies and corruption.  It all must stem from necessity, true to yourself so you're true to everyone else.  

Comedy is Gay

I watched The Longest Yard and Blades of Glory today and I'm sure their both very, very gay.  I'm not against gays of any kind, I just think I'm seeing a whole other perspective in films that would only be seen if you where gay .  Sooo I'll start with The Longest Yard.  Everyone in it is gay by association.  Nelly is gay.  Adam Sandler is gay, yes, he's very gay.  Burt Reynolds is flaming.  Kevin Nash and his wrestling buds are gay, a la the Kliq.  Sandler and the inmates are battling against the man; the guards preventing their gay freedom.  The warden is gay.  The Colonel Sanders looking dude wasn't in the first version of the film.  He was in the new version though and is introduced with the line "Colonel Sanders has been eating his own chicken", or as I interpret it, having sex with men, because he's always with the warden, always.  During the final game  they enter and try to talk to the cheerleaders, when they're pushed away by guards and then are given the guys dressed as cheerleaders; gay.  Adam Sandler is a pussy, he's weak and represent's the repressed gay man.  And I'm positive gay dudes fantasize about prison, I know I would love getting sent to a woman's prison, well, I like to think so anyway.  But Chris Rock? I don't know.  I think he opted out so they killed him before the game, or it represented how the fight for sexual freedom is similar to racial freedom, that the man attacks all minorities.

Blades of Glory isn't so streamlined gay.  Jon Heder wants a straight girl.  Will Ferrell is supposed to be the sexiest man alive.  He mocks everything and is a joke.  He stands for nothing but falling to temptation, like Kumar in White Castle.  Their fight for skating together is a gay fight.  Their opponents, whatever their names are, represent the small narrow minded people that find homosexuality offensive.  When Heder gets left by his dad, it represents a gay kid being left by his unapproved father.  Heder is saved by his long haired trainer along with his flamboyant serial killer stalker who gives him the idea to skate with a man, who almost always plays a gay character in his movies.  The choreographer is gay.  But now everything is starting to seem gay.  Everything is feminine.  It's all from another, dryer, intellectual perspective, they're looking down on us.  All of these comedies are mocking what they're making a joke of.  What is comedy but making fun of society's insecurities in a comfortable way that is humorous but not too offensive(why certain cities are more permitting and get different types of comedians)? This is why smart people seem can so dull, they see through the shit and laugh at those that are laughing, but then they get laughed at because they're the only ones laughing, fuck the world.  Why don't straight people see this?  I'm sooo straight but all I see is gay innuendo, girl, fuck the world.

ADD

I misplace stuff all the time, like yesterday when I almost put the scissors in the fridge.  It got me to thinking about the probability of objects being placed in the correct spot.  Scissors have a definite use.  Sure you might be able to scrape some paint or stab something but for the most part scissors, as well as fridges, have specific uses.  So it would seem logical that good compatibility between objects would help streamline everyday life.

Then I thought about artistic surroundings, like a paint brush and paint or drumsticks and drumset.  You can do no wrong with the paint since its subjective by nature.  With drums or any instrument, accidents aren't bad if the  context allows it, and that's completely dependent on the player.  Anyways, it seems like our surroundings can dictate our performance.  The more specific the object, the higher the probability of failure.  Conversely the less specific, the higher rate of success.  Perhaps ADD is a condition of someone being around to many objects with specific purposes.  I feel the struggle of choice is the source problem.  People who are diagnosed with ADD are really just gifted people in the wrong surrounding.  Maybe if children weren't surrounded by specifics and instead open ended things, like the arts and all that liberal commie shit we'd have a better a world!

And another thing about putting stuff in the wrong place.  The longer something stays out of order, the more it becomes the new reality and is more easily acceptable.  For instance the longer someone avoids repaying somebody the easier it is to sweep it under the table.  Or the longer something is left out of place the more we get used to it and don't care.  I suppose any idea will continue in its path until acted upon by an idea of equal or greater force.  And that brings me back to ADD.  They are bombarded with compartmentalized ideas and are literally getting knocked around by ideas of equal or greater force. just a thought

So, next time you want to be creative or spontaneous try to surround yourself with the things that you want to do and get rid of all else, like a zen master was running Clean Sweep on your place.

Using the Word Ubiquitous

My Dad has this crazy immune disorder that leaves him with swelling skin that bursts into "black holes of nothingness" as my little cousin calls them.  This has left him in "I will try anything" to fix myself mode.  One recent interest of his that also caught mine was raw milk.  The general idea behind the benefits of raw milk are the the enzymes that aren't removed when pasteurized.  These enzymes are there for the purpose of digestion.  He fen-angled some and I must say that I have avoided milk most of my life but this stuff didn't make me feel bad at all, real talk.  But this isn't your average rant about intolerance

He then took the dairy fascination  a step further and made kefir, it's like those yogurt shakes.  It's made by adding a bacteria or something like that and then it thickens and becomes the kefir. I noticed that there are many other process like cottage cheese or buttermilk etc. that are made from varying degrees of milk as it ages, as if it never goes bad bust just keeps becoming another dairy product at our grocery store.  What's really interesting and why I started to write this is that raw milk and the various bacteria laden milk products like cottage cheese, kefir and such don't go bad.  I think the milk can sustain itself and resist molds because it is complete; has all it's enzymes.  Our milk is pasteurized because we supply our massive cow farms inferior grains with hormones and additives and the like.  The result is milk that will mold if left out because it was made by weak cows, so they pasteurize it.  Then they ban raw milk because they, "the MILK MAN" wants to keep making more money at the cost of our health and the poor girl cows.

I'm never done.  Beer is a natural process formed by yeast, which is everywhere, or ubiquitous in nature.  This is why alcoholics have been around since the dawn of man, yeast digested some sugary based substance in standing water an alcohol formed.  From that the brutes caught on and refined their tastes to honey, grapes, you know, sweet things.  The point is that naturally occurring alcohol is stable in open air, like raw milk.  Vinegar is the same, it's actually the process that breaks down alcohol even further.  Naturally occurring vinegar is stable in open air.

If a plant catches diseases it's usually because it's sick and in a weekend state.  I heard that the smell of a flower is a representation of its health.  Would it be fair to say that most things that smell bad are usually sick or dying?  I know there's that one huge flower that smells like shit, but what about old people?  Old people have that "I'm going to die soon because I'm old" smell.  Lazy animals that sit around indoors all day smell.  Rotting vegetables stink.  Death stinks. Healthy things don't stink.

Interestingly in other parts of the world manure, or shit, isn't neccesarily gross at all.  It's seen as a valuable product or gift, that can only be produced by that animal, usually the cow because of its insane stomach.  The basic point being that poop isn't neccesarily bad.  Look at it like a machine. The product is only as good as the materials it starts with.  If your poop smells gross because it's full of shit.  However poop is recognized as a natural gift in remote parts of the world because the animals are eating good quality natural food.  Now being smart in society is being crazy in society, it's unavoidable.


Fear of bacteria is a hoax.  If things are catching diseases it's more likely that they are weak then disease is strong.  Of course theirs malaria and aids and such.  Native Americans weren't weak when they died at the hands of Wuropean bacteria, they where out of touch, bacterialy speaking.  I don't mean ANY disrespect to Native Americans, it just seems like the logical explanation.  I feel that people who die from common sicknesses like the flu or colds, or get sick from staying up to late is from malnourishment. Hippy talk yes, but it still makes sense.

During the black plague there where supposedly these dudes who would rob the houses of the dead and not get sick because they drank super special vinegar.  The idea is that alcohol is first formed by using the yeast that is ubiquitous in the air.  This means the yeast was surviving during the black plague.  The yeast breaks down sugar and produces ethanol, the ethanol then uses acid bacteria, also ubiquitous and co-existing in the air during the plague, which then produces vinegar.  If the thieves really did do this, then this would be why it worked, the bacteria they ingested worked like any other beneficial bacteria and gave them an immunity others didn't have. 

All I'm saying here is that bacteria is beneficial when supported by healthy living body, whether plant or animal.  If we're running from bacteria we're running from ourselves.  I eat at Carl's Jr. and smoke a cigarette here and there, I'm not a health nut.   I don't think the four thieves where either.

A

  the internet is a crystal ball of human emotion

and I'm shitting on this digital wasteland :)