Mood: Huzzah!
Currently listening to: El Distorto De Melodica - Everclear

Ah, another wet and windy Malaysian Sunday... perfect for napping, which probably goes some way to explain why i only managed to wake up at 2pm in the afternoon... ;p

So anyhow, Saturday was a pretty quiet affair since all i basically did was stay at home doing my assignment. Went for a family dinner at SS2 and then went out with Joa and Julian to Bar Savanh for Joa's farewell from her workmates as planned. It was all right, save for the fact that i spent most of my time drinking half a bottle of wine, smoking and staring into space. Yes, i'm a bit of a loner and what can only be termed as anti-social at the strangest of times so sue me... If people want to strike up a conversation i'm more than willing but if not, well i wouldn't give a damn about your existence - i've got a list of enough random thoughts to occupy my mind for hours on end! Still, the alcohol was welcome... :)

And as for today? Well, i've got this assignment to keep me occupied... Had another bizzare thought (dream?) last night which i think i might try to write down in its entirety later today. Basically involved some Victorian-era prudes with bamboo sticks and an unholy addiction to soppy stories of the period. Yes, it sounds kinky. No, it is not supposed to be (at least i think not - psychosexual analysis anyone?). Think its time i started jotting some of these things down so i might put it up later tonight if i have the time...

Watched the preview for Super Sapiens just now and, man, i can't wait to watch a Hellboy movie! Now, i'm not pretending that i've been a huge follower of his series (pathetic lack of funds on my part saw to that) but from what i HAVE read about him follows along that same theme of the unwanted hero, cast out and reviled by the rest of humanity for just merely looking different (ok, so looking like the devil doesn't exaclty help i warrant) despite having a most noble and charitable sense of character (most of the time anyway). That, and his sense of making his own destiny (which is apparently to destroy the world i believe) and not conforming to anyone else's wishes is very appealing. "Fuck 'em" indeed.

So what's the movie about? (From Penny Arcade) "Let me see if I cannot tantalize you with a synopsis of the movie. It concerns the collusion of Nazi Clockwork Assassins and Russian Wizards in an effort to puncture space and draw in sleeping, ancient Gods while the paranormal wing of the FBI, assisted by a demon child, does their best to thwart this procedure. It's essentially pornography for nerds and it opens today."

Couldn't have said it better myself! ;p

Oh yes, and if you're someone who's not familiar with the whole Hellboy thing there is a free online comic about him here entitled 'The Corpse'. A great taster to ease you into the dark, morbid and supernatural world that is Hellboy! (Note: you might want to pre-load the images first - it's a damn sight faster. Option is the last one on the menu.)

Erm, and yes it IS on the Playboy website so try not to have 'net nanny' on ok kids? ;p

On another note i've been spending some time reading a (rather long) document that i found thanks to Mac Hall and which has been circulating around 'courtesy' of Dave Simm. Anyone remember him? He's the author of Cerebus which is about a small, gray, anthropomorphic and chronically ill-tempered aardvark by the same name who makes his living as a barbarian. More about that can be found here.

Anyhow, back to the main topic. Welcome to Tangents - a 20 page essay on male vs female gender roles. Yes folks, we're talking about rabid anti-feminism (this ones for you Ryan! ;p). Granted its a long piece of writing and i've only just finished reading the second tangent (there's five) but he does have some points here - i'll give him that much - although i wouldn't endorse most of his other more crazy and even downright loathsome views. Still, its an entertaining and thought provoking (or just provoking) read so i would heartily recommend that you do so for wont of having anything better to do! ;p

Here's some excerpts (thus far) from the first tangent which caught my eye to give you a taster - make of it what you will:

a) women want to be raped by rich, muscular, handsome doctors b) women are completely self-absorbed and, thus, see themselves in everything around them and c) feminism is no different from communism in that all of its literature is founded upon convoluted syntax, bafflegab and academic jargon which paints a false (albeit attractive) picture of an unattainable utopia which can be achieved - easily! - by everyone in the world simply and simultaneously (in both feminist and communist literature the "crux point" is invariable) changing their basic nature overaight.

All women are feminists and all feminist evidence is anecdotal. Ask them a question and they will tell you a little story. Ask them a question to clarify what you infer is the point of the story and they will tell you another story. When they do attempt to draw a conclusion or a larger inference from an anecdote they will often ask, "Does that make any sense?" And the answer, of course is (almost invariably) no, it doesn't make any sense. And since I wasn't trying to get any of them into bed, I would say so (if you're trying to get them into bed, you always say "yes, that makes perfect sense" or manufacture some sensible interpretation that has nothing to do with what they said). Telling them that they don't make sense, I found, is like telling them that not only do they not win the trip to Hawaii, they don't even get the Samsonite luggage. They become forlorn and uncommunicative.

I discovered, through celibacy and the avoidance of masturbation that sexual desire is a lot like a rash. If you keep "scratching it" you make it worse and, thus, "scratching it" comes to seem like an urgent, toppermost of the poppermost, central necessity in your life. If you learn to leave your penis alone, I discovered, your penis will learn to leave you alone.

As a global civilization, here in the first nanoseconds of the 21st century the present consensus would appear to be "yes, no and/or maybe". Half of us believe that abortion is in no way comparable. Half of us believe that it is. To me, all that is relevant is God's opinion and - since medical abortion evolved well after the death of God's Last Messenger and Seal of Prophets, Muhammad (peace be upon him) in 632 CE - that is unknown to us. It is unknown to me and it is unknown to you and it is unknown to Pope John Paul II, his predecessors and his successors. Likewise with God's opinion on condoms (ribbed, coloured or plain) and birth control pills.

It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be "women only" environments from which men are excluded.

It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the tirne that she married a baseball player eaming $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 mlllion for each year of the marriage and probably more.

For feminists, for wives, for women, for Emotion-based beings, it is a win/win/win/win situation. Either her husband a) capitulates to her views and, thus, places himself and his assets under her jurisdiction or b) portrays himself to her as having capitulated to her views and, thus, places himself and his assets under her jurisdiction or c) removes himself from her jurisdiction and surrenders half of his assets to her voluntarily or d) removes himself from her jurisdiction and is forced to surrender half of his assets to her by the courts (Did you hear about the new Divorced Barbie? She comes with half of Ken's stuff).

Women are the chauvinists, not men. Nicholas Chauyin was a devoted soldier and overzealous supporter of Napoleon Bonaparte and all things French. Chauvinism is defined as "Unreasoning (italics mine) attachment to one's race, group, etc." To celebrate, herald and champion one woman publicly for doing what hundreds and thousands of men are doing in obscurity is chauvinism: unreasoning attachment to female achievement out of proportion to its contribution to society, just as Chauvin's devotion to Napoleon and all things French was drastically out of proportion to the limited importance of Napoleon, the limited importance of the French.

And there y'go! For those inflammatory types out there just try and remember that reading an opposing view once in a while is not necessarily a bad thing - at the end of the day its not like you HAVE to agree with what is being said - just consider all the angles of a given question or issue rationally and thoroughly and you will do justice to your own opinions in future.

There! My 2c! ;p

Later y'all...