Perry v. Schwarzenegger, blog 1

Much has been written (http://www.slate.com/id/2241551/pagenum/all/#p2, for example) on the idiocy of the Supreme Court's decision to bar televising the court proceedings of the current legal challenge to Prop 8. What I find ironic is that one of the reasons that propopents of banning gay marriage cite is a fear of retribution. Apparently, they are afraid that if they are seen online or on TV as promoting hate (for, honestly, that's all it is), there would be public reprisals. Of what sort? Hate mail? A strong scolding in a supermarket by a fellow shopper? A beating-to-death in Wyoming?

Perhaps when making this argument such bigots should take into account all the harrassment+ gays have been subjected to for years from those who would support Prop 8. This is on par with someone testifying in favor of Jim Crow and then pushing to have their names removed from the newspaper article about such a case. Or Brown v Board of Ed. Honestly, your political predecessors lynched people for their sexual choices, and now you're afraid of harrassment for opposing such choices in a trial? Have you no sense of shame, let alone irony?

Cyber-stalking, or just another day on Facebook?

So, I want to add a girl as friend on FB that I met 3 weeks ago at a bar, maybe 4, in the hopes that someday she'll be single and then we can date. Is this cool? or creepy? Or does the fact that facebook itself is inherently creepy negate that? Isn't it weird that we meet people now, don't get their number, but then add them as a "friend" the next day on an online social networking site? There's no pre-internet version of this--you either got someone's digits or you didn't. Well, I guess you could stalk them in class, if you were still in school, but Facebook seems acceptable, whereas following them around a school would be entirely out of control. Facebook has made a certain degree of sketchiness acceptable. We're all stalkers now.

And that's just the beginning. In the real world, you might never see this person again, but on Facebook, you can keep track of THEIR WHOLE LIVES with just a click. You used to meet someone and have them pass along, but now, you can monitor them forever. Nothing is let go, everyone is retained in some sort of weird rolodex that not only has their name and number but personality type, recent photos and relationship status updates.

Back to this girl, though. What can I really expect: that in a month or two she does break up with her current boyfriend, remembers that I friended her and hit me up for drinks? Or should I keep track and strike once she's single again, never talking in the meantime because we really don't have that much to go on? And doesn't that last option signifry that I should just let it go, and get digits next time? Alas.

Af-Pak

It is totally unfeasible, and insulting to the countries involved, but it would seem that the logical solution to the mess in Afghanistan and Pakistan would be to dissemble the two states and redraw them as three--Afghanistan, Pashtunistan, and Pakistan. Most of the world's problems with the the two states as currently configured is what is ethnically Pashtun-dominated land. The northwest section of Pakistan and southeastern section of Afghanistan are tribally Pashtun, just happen to be separated due to, once again, the lack of foresight and understanding by the British. If the world were to unify the region, and leave it alone, perhaps this would settle all disputes. We could say "This is your shithole. Govern it as you please. Just don't harbor any terrorists or bother the two adjoining states."

One would think that such an arrangement could never come to pass, but maybe we should let Pakistan collapse (while seizing control of their nuclear weapons), and then reform the area as outlined above. If you look at the conflicts in the area as an aspiration for Pashtun independence and self-determination, such a solution doesn't seem like such a bad idea after all.

Radiohead

I like Radiohead. They perfectly capture a mood. But it's a morose, pensive mood. So I like them, but I can't imagine going to a Radiohead concert. I can't picture people just up and dancing to "Karma Police" or another mopey song about loss. No one's gonna head bang or shake their arms and legs to "Fog". It's the type of music you don't want to be around others when you're listening to it, but rather sitting on the floor with your arms around your knees while wondering where she went.

Why I don't bang out more chicks that I could

Part 2. That bitch be crazy

In an ideal world, two people would lovingly come together, drunk, screw, and merrily be on their way. However, when you're a squirrelly little dude like myself, you have to talk, cajole, and weasel a lady into sleeping with you. This takes time and effort. And sometimes, when talking to a girl, you find out that she is totally insane. Or annoying. Or Christian. And wants to talk about it endlessly. And then, once doing the deed, sex with me often involves downtime. Perhaps a relationship is where you can actually deal with talking to the other person, in bed, without screwing.

As a result, like on Monday, I opt out of pursuing a chick. Maybe this is feasible in my world since my medications have stolen my sex drive. But I am still amazed at guys who can screw whatever, knowing full well they'll have to deal with them beforehand. It can be a lot of time spent with someone for what should be a 5 minute act, if she's lucky.

Why I don't bang out more chicks that I could

1. The Brian Haskell Rule

When I was studying in Paris junior year, I visited a friend studying in London. Over the course of one Saturday night, I hooked up with two of her big-tittied flatmates. (not at the same time, alas.) To this day, this feat is the highpoint of my sexual coups.

However, these two girls visited said friend back at Tufts the following semester, and had apparently put on some weight. As a result, several of my guy friends enjoyed tormenting me with the fact that I had hooked up with two fat chicks. Brian Haskell being one of them. I think they referred to them as "deuce, deuce-and-a-half".

As a result, when debating hooking up with a girl, I always worry that my friends would make fun of me for said chick. Or, if I was the friend, would I harrass them for hooking up with a chick who's gross or fat or pimply or smelly or looks like gonorrhea, taking into account that I am far crueler than any of my friends could ever be. (In my defense, though, I would like to point out that Brian's girlfriend senior year had a huge butt and I never said a word. Partially because either he or she could've beat me up.)

I think this is a valid consideration: Would I make fun of me for hooking up with this person? True, you can take beer goggles into account, and everyone needs a slumpbuster now and then, but if you were just a casual observer, and you'd point out that your hook-up made Star Jones look attractive, would you still hook up with her? Or would you just push aside those fat rolls and go for it, no matter the drubbing you'd take from your friends?

Gimme some candy!

I eat Snickers. Not only that, but I don't see th epoint of many other candies. Not just Baby Ruth, which are totally just Snicker-wannabe's. Milky Way's? That's like half a Snickers. Where's the point, when there's no peanuts? The peanuts round out the candy. And 3 Musketeers? That's like a third of a Snickers. Having a 3 Musketeers or a Milky Way is like eating crustless pizza--it's just so not close that it's not worth it. Please don't waste your money on Milky Way's...just put out Snickers for my dining pleasure.