The Acid Tests (Sorting real Tops from fakers)

The Acid Tests (Sorting real Tops from fakers)


Note by DrSpankenstein over 2 years ago


This is an article I wrote for 'Power Lines' back in 1998, it's somewhat dated now but I'm still surprised how many requests I get to repost it. Since I have space here to do it, I thought I might as well for convenience sake. It still expresses some philosophies and opinions I hold personally valid.

Introduction

The term ‘Acid Test’ is an old prospecting term. A powerful acid can dissolve most base metals in a matter of minutes. However, gold will stand up to most acids. So the ‘Acid Test’ was an easy way for people to make sure they had a real nugget of gold and not a lump of the ‘fool’s’ variety. In the same way, these tests are meant to be quick ways to identify fake Doms. Passing all these tests is no guarantee either, there is no replacement for getting to know your prospective partner as well as possible before you even meet in person.

Now most of these tests are designed in mind for a submissive female trying to sort through men claiming to be Doms online. They are largely based on the many questions I get asked by my female friends still searching for a Dominant partner. Some of them can probably be used by male subs as well, but for the most part, these tests are best for ferreting out male fakes. Vanilla males are usually after ‘easy sex’ and this motive makes them easier to identify than a lot of the fake Dommes out there.

Step One: Do the Math

Various estimates and surveys have placed the ratio of real (i.e. natural) male sexual Dominants to female sexual submissives at about one to ten. However, a quick count in any given BDSM oriented chat room would lead you to believe that male Doms outnumber the subs at about two to one. Now if there is actually only one male Dom for every ten female subs, that means that 19 out of the 20 “Doms” you see online have to be fakes. Keep this in mind. There is a 95% chance that any man you talk to online claiming to be a Dom is no such thing. This leads us to our first rule, a rule that all statisticians and scientists already know by heart: “When in doubt, throw it out!”
Your search for a suitable Dominant partner (especially if you are seeking a serious long-term relationship as well) could easily take years. That’s hardly surprising, most people spend years looking for that special lover, be they ‘vanilla’ or otherwise. So don’t be disheartened by all these drastic ratios. But don’t waste your time either. If any of the prospects you are chatting with online makes you feel uncomfortable for any reason, drop him. Don’t give him ‘three strikes’ or ‘extra chances to win.’ Block out his screen-name and move on. There was only a one in twenty chance he was legitimate anyway. Trust your instincts!

Step Two: Know Your Enemy

We call them Snerts. We call them HNG’s (Horny Net Geeks). We call them Wannabes. We call them Control Freaks. And sometimes, tragically, we even find some that can only be called rapists and predators. They are all your enemy. Don’t bother thinking they are anything less. Even a more or less well meaning Snert can land you in a hospital. Real BDSM is not for dilettantes or amateurs: Not, no, and never! Even if he turns out to be a more or less nice guy, if he’s not a Dom, he’s not going to give you what you really need. He will likely give you many things you don’t need, like medical bills and other assorted headaches.

Snerts are basically looking for easy sex. They are counting on the (highly inaccurate) assumption that sexual submissives are simply sexually promiscuous. Nothing could be farther from the truth, but that doesn’t deter them at all. They are typically middle aged to somewhat older men. They are often married. They are usually trying to bolster their flagging vanilla sex lives with some casual screwing around. They target submissives because they think that they won't make demands on there sexual prowess (another bad assumption). They can be easily spotted because they almost always demand or at least emphasize sexual intercourse being a part of their ‘scenes.’

HNG’s are usually the most harmless (and yet often the most annoying) of the enemy types. Most are teenagers and young men looking for some quick cyber-sex or even phone-sex. They are usually pretty sophisticated about their BDSM jargon and the ‘scenes’ they describe to you can be pretty elaborate. Geeks do their homework. They scour the porno sites for ideas, and hang out in BDSM chats for hours on end learning the lingo. The are most easily spotted because they want to move on to cyber-sex and phone sex very quickly. They like to offer online collars, and spend hours on end in chat rooms ‘playing’ with their ‘subbies.’ Don’t waste your time with them.

The second most dangerous type of enemy is the Control Freak. Control freaks are what most psychologists and therapists call ‘controlling personalities.’ They are basically obsessed with control of everything around them, especially the people in their lives. They want all their family, friends, and even coworkers to behave exactly as they say. They are extremely manipulative people. These men can be dangerous because many really have convinced themselves that they are Dominants as a way to justify their dysfunctional lives. Many inexperienced submissives find themselves ‘naturally’ attracted to these men because outwardly they seem so ‘in command’ of things all the time. The truly ironic (and sad) thing is, a controlling personality is actually the closest thing to the opposite of a sexual Dominant.

Controls Freaks can be spotted because they often talk about ‘taking care of you’ and also ‘knowing what’s best for you.’ They almost always try to play on your emotions; especially guilt. They also usually criticize and even resent the advice you get from other people. They often talk about 24/7 BDSM relationships without going into any details about what kind of actual scenes they play. They are fond of telling you that they prefer the ‘mental aspect’ of Domination and submission. They tend to be both demanding and argumentative. Nothing you do will ever be quite right. While all this may seem very repulsive and easy to avoid, be on your guard, the average control freak often seems very charming initially. Once they have their hooks into you its very hard to get untangled.

The last and most dangerous type of enemy is the rapist or predator. These are the men most likely to damage or even end your life. The truly frightening thing about these evil men it that there is NO easy way to spot them. Rapists can be anything from bums to bank mangers, and anyone from family members to total strangers. One in four women has suffered an attack from this vile creature, and one in seven men as well! Their motive is violence. The best defense is never make yourself too vulnerable.

To defend yourself from predators, learn all the ins and outs of setting up a good Safety Net. Follow these procedures religiously. Most important of all take your time getting to know your prospective play partners. This is good advice in any case. If you know your partner well, you’re more likely to have a good time with him, because you will feel more comfortable during that first scene. Predators are more likely to move on in search of easy prey, they do tend to be impulsive. If a ‘Dom’ you have been talking too suddenly seems to loose interest in you after a period of time, you may have just saved your own life. Don’t go chasing after anybody. A true Dom doesn't need to play ‘hard to get.’

Step 3: Know your goal!

Take the time to figure out what you want. It’s often hard for newbie subs to do this because sometimes they lack knowledge of what choices are available to them. So arm yourself with knowledge! There are many fine publications, books, and internet websites that cater to sexual submissives. So start reading! Learn about the different types of play and how they should be conducted. Learn everything you can about how to set up a Safety Net. Learn all the dos and don’ts of meeting others and playing safely. Decide what your Limits are and set them down on paper. This may seem like a lot of homework to do in the name of fun, but also keep in mind that that it’s your ass that’s (literally) on the line here.

Know what a real Dom acts like. Remember, you are probably a sexual submissive because you are in control the rest of the time. You are strong! Likely even ambitious as well. You have a career, or goals, or a lifestyle that demands this high level of energy and control. So giving away your control is a beautiful respite from everyday life. Your power and energy are things you only want to give to someone you trust, and in intimate situations at that. It’s a very personal thing to you!

Well guess what, sexual Dominants are usually the compliment of this. We are often strong people too, and we do tend to be intelligent. We are often highly trained professionals or skilled craftsmen. However, we tend to avoid lifestyles and careers that demand we be in control all the time. We tend to be easygoing. I have never in my life met, or even heard of, an uptight sexual Dominant. We like being in control in intimate situations. It’s a respite from the way we live our everyday lives. We are not really the opposite of you, but we are the ‘puzzle piece’ that fits next to you snugly. In another words, don't look for a Dom that’s exactly like you. You won’t find him. Don’t look for a Dom that wants to run your whole life; he doesn’t exist.

Above all, if you’re prospective Dom seems like a generally nice guy, you’re likely on the right track! Take the time to get to know him. Don't let the five control freaks on the other side of the chat room demand your attention. A real Dominant isn’t likely to make ‘demands’ until its time to play.

Step 4: Memorize the Acid Tests!

Test #1: When in doubt, throw it out! Don’t waste your time with people that make you feel uncomfortable. Even if the guy was a real Dom, if his personality makes you feel uncomfortable, he’s not going to be fun to play with.

Test #2: “You’d better call me Sir!” is the mating call of a HNG or control freak. Real Doms don't have to ask for titles, we earn them. Most real Doms will say things like “please, call me Mike…”

Test #3: “I want you to take my collar before you play with me.” This is another common demand of fakes, most often made by control freaks. They have to isolate you from other people and their advice, and sometimes a little ole “cyber-collar” is just the thing! Cyber-collars are worth less than the leather required to make one.

Test #4: If you get an Instant Message that says something like “On your knees you [slave, slut, bitch, whore, etc.]” This is the mating call of the HNG. Use some common sense here. Why waste time with somebody that’s not even polite? There’s a time and a place for these endearing terms, and it isn’t online!

Test #5: “I don't have to answer that question!” or “It’s not proper etiquette for you to ask a Master that.” are examples of some the dangerous lies that control freaks and snerts use. This is the Acid test I personally think is the most important! A Dom had better be ready to at least try and answer every question you have, and honestly at that! It’s literally your ass that’s on the line! Never forget this!

Test #6: “It’s my way or the highway!” or words to that effect, are the mating cry of the common control freak. Doms can have Limits too, but it’s your Limits that count FIRST. Don’t let any would-be ‘Dom’ tell you differently. Don’t let any of the wannabe subs tell you differently either. Where Male Dom/Fem sub play is concerned, it’s always lady’s choice!

Test #7: Don't bother with online collars. Don't make decisions about a prospective partner based on his online play style. It’s a very simple test if you think about it: would a real life Dominant waste much time on cyber sex? Please take my word for it; the answer is no. Forget it, once you’ve done the real thing, cyber is just too damn dull
.
Test #8: Ask your prospect if he’s ever made any mistakes during a scene. If he says ‘no,’ run for your life! If he says, ‘very rarely,’ at least be suspicious. Everyone makes mistakes, even if they are experienced and skilled. Sometimes submissives have Limits they don't even know about, and even the most careful and skilled Dom the world will trip over these occasionally. Remember, according to our good friends of the Christian faith, the last perfect guy to walk this planet got nailed to a tree for his trouble. So expect competence, but not miracles.

Test #9: “I’m a [bank president, captain of industry, combat photographer, self-made millionaire… yadda yadda yadda.]” Wouldn’t it be nice to meet a rich Dom too? Sure it would! But use some common sense too. How many captains of industry have hours to spend in an AOL chat room? Also, think about this personality profile; if this super successful, always-in-control person is really into BDSM, he’s likely a submissive! Worse yet, it could very likely mean he is a control freak. I have met a lot of submissives that fit this ambitious profile, but not one Dom yet!

Test #10: “I’m 33 years old, and I’ve been a Master for 15 years.” Gimme a break! What are the odds? When you ask about a Dom’s level of experience (and it’s a good idea to do so) remember to do the math as well. 18 year-old boys don’t care about the intricacies of BDSM; they want to get laid. Trust me on this one Ladies, I was an 18 year-old boy once! I personally believe that people do become what they are (be it gay, straight, Dom or sub) very early in life, but it takes maturity and training to be a Master. What are the odds a person became a Master when they were still using clearacil?

Test #11: Ask for references! Especially if he claims to be ‘very experienced.’ Talk to the references on the phone. Lots of HNG’s have female screen-names set up to act as ‘references’ for them! I notice that a lot of newbies seem to have trouble with this concept. Which is understandable since in the vanilla world it’s considered rude to talk to a guy’s ex-girlfriend. However, in the BDSM Scene it’s the opposite, experienced Dominants should accept and accommodate this kind of request gladly
.
Test #12: “I have three real life collared slaves right now, but you can't
talk to them.” Okay, when you consider the ratio and all, this sounds possible. What makes this an acid test failed (and failed miserably at that) is the last part. I have met couples (and even triples) that really were looking for an extra person to add to the mix. This is not uncommon at all in the Scene. But these couples were looking together. If a ‘Dom’ has anyone already collared to them, you probably ought to talk to her first!

Test #13: “I don't need safe words.” Well of course he doesn’t! If he said this he’s likely a snert and therefore he’s never really been in a scene! Of course he might be a predator too, and then he wouldn't need safewords either. Need I say more?

Test #14: “My slaves trust me to set their Limits for them.” If you hear a ‘Dom’ say this it’s most likely because these slaves only exist in his mind. Or worse still, his ‘slave’ is simply the victim of spouse abuse. Even so called TPE (Total Power Exchange) and other sorts of 24/7 (i.e. full time) BDSM relationships should involve careful and thorough negotiation.

Test #15: 'I'm Married, my wife can't know about us' If I have to explain this one too you, you've got problems. I have played with many married submissives in my time, but only with the express permission (and more often than not, participation) of their husbands. Safe BDSM requires complete honesty. You can't build a good Scene on lies. There are plenty of people that will be willing to tell you differently; but please note, they will all turn out to be adulterers (and hence, liars) themselves.

Test #16: Insert your own Acid Test here: You will learn much from your mistakes and missteps. If you form an online contact with a 'Dom' that falls through, analyze why it fell through. Don't make the same mistakes twice if you can help it.

Step 5: It’s not just the men you have to screen!

Finding some female submissives to be buddies with you on your quest is a very good idea. Especially if they are experienced players; they can give you unique perspectives, emotional support, and even references to legitimate Doms to play with. They can also, most importantly, provide a Safety Net for you during those first meetings with the men you meet. The benefits of teaming up with other women in your search should be obvious!

However, be just as cautious about what you hear from other women online as well. If you are so inclined to search for a Domme for instance, the Acid tests should apply just as well. Be very cautious about the women you meet online that claim to be submissives as well. There are a great number of female HNG’s who live their BDSM lifestyle in the vacuum of cyber-space. Their advice and experiences are not only useless in the real world, they can be dangerous. Another class of “female enemy” is even more tragic and dangerous; the Victim.

A Victim is just that; a victim of physical and/or mental abuse that uses BDSM as an excuse to continue denying the reality of her tragic situation. These people are disturbingly common as well. They are dangerous to you too! These women are not just full of very dangerous advice, but they are usually very vehement about telling you that their lifestyle is the only “real BDSM.” They can fill your head full of doubts faster than one of the male enemy types.

Spare little sympathy, tell them to get help, and stay the heck away from them (in exactly this order). It may seem mercenary, but it is in fact the right thing to do. This is my training as a CASA (Citizens Against Spouse Abuse) volunteer talking. An abuse victim can only save herself, and then only when she is ready to do so. If you let her vent her frustrations and fears on you, she will then go back to her familiar little hell, leaving you emotionally drained and likely scared too. Your quest for safe play partners is going to be tough enough as it is. Avoid Victims completely if you can, and if you can't, urge them to get help. It’s not your job to save the world, keeping yourself safe and happy is enough work.
In Closing

This all seems like a lot of work. It is. Some of it sounds awfully scary too. It should. So why bother with this quest at all? Why not just stick “cyber only” in your profile and BDSM? Why not just drop it all together? I can give you only one good reason; when it is done safely, and it suits your needs, it can be the one of the most profoundly fulfilling experiences in your life! I used to cringe at terms like “sex magic,” but now that I know the spells, I’m an unabashed Wizard! Besides, any student of psychology can tell you that denial has its own dangers too. The easy roads are not the ones that lead to interesting places. So arm yourself with knowledge, find yourself some trustworthy friends to share the journey, and start walking. Just don’t forget to bring your Acid Tests too!

GLOSSARY

BDSM - an acronym that combines abbreviations for Bondage and Discipline, Domination and Submission, and Sadism and Masochism (B&D + D/s + S&M = BDSM). It is meant to be an all-inclusive term for these related erotic fetishes.
B&D – abbr. for Bondage and Discipline.
Collar - a symbol of possession used to denote some sort of committed relationship between a sexual Dominant and a sexual submissive.
Control Freak - slang for a person with a dysfunctional personality type usually referred to as a “controlling personality.” See section 2, paragraph four.
Credo, The – (a.. k. a. the BDSM Motto) The BDSM Credo is usually taken to be “Safe, Sane, and Consensual.” All of these ideals are generally considered to be of equal importance and interdependent. It is worth noting that the Credo’s definition of Sanity, rather than delving into psychology, goes thus: The only Sane reason to do BDSM is for the mutual enjoyment of all people involved.
Cyber - slang for being online. Often refers to Cyber-sex.
Cyber Sex - interacting with another person online for the express purpose of sexual arousal.
D/s - abbr. for Domination and Submission.
Dom - abbr. or slang for a (usually male) sexual Dominant.
Dominant - (i.e. Sexual Dominant) A person that derives sexual and mental satisfaction from taking control of intimate erotic encounters. They are often simulated by using techniques such as sexual sadism, bondage, domineering role-play, and generally taking a commanding role in intimate situations.
Domme - abbr. or slang for a (usually female) sexual Dominant.
HNG - acronym for “Horny Net Geek.” See section 2, paragraph two.
Limit - something that either partner in a BDSM relationship will not do, or does not like. Basically, a specific preference concerning BDSM play. The submissive’s Limits should always take precedence over the Dominant’s. Limits should always be discussed and set out before a Scene ever starts. Respecting Limits is not an option, it’s a requirement.
Master - A title of honor for a (usually male) sexual Dominant that usually denotes either a high level of experience or competence. Also used (voluntarily) as a title of respect for Dominants that have served the BDSM community as a whole. Alternatively used as a term of endearment for the Dom in a Scene featuring “Master/slave” role-playing, or in the context of a long-term relationship. Similar titles include Sir, Lord, and Daddy, etc.
Mistress - A title of honor for a (usually female) sexual Dominant that usually denotes either a high level of experience or competence. Also used (voluntarily) as a title of respect for Dominants that have served the BDSM community as a whole. Alternatively used as a term of endearment for the Domme in a Scene featuring “Mistress/slave” role-playing, or in the context of a long-term relationship. Similar titles include Ma’am, Lady, and Momma, etc.
S&M or S/m - abbr. for Sadism & Masochism, or Sadomasochism.
Safe Word - a code word used by the submissive to signal his/her Dominant partner to either stop, slow down, or even completely end a Scene. “Safe Signals” must be substituted when the submissive is gagged or cannot otherwise speak. These are not an option for safe play, they are a requirement.
Safety Net - a person or persons who take the responsibility to make sure that your real life meeting with a prospective play partner is safe. This can range from actually “chaperoning” the meeting to setting up “safe calls” and so forth. This is a requirement for submissives, not an option, as it is the only defense they have against predators, rapists, and con artists. Learn how to set one up and set them up religiously. Even vanilla women should learn to do these things when going on a blind date!
Sexual Masochist - a person that can experience profound arousal and/or euphoria from controlled doses of pain and other extreme stimuli. Such stimuli outside the context of a consensual or erotic experience are not usually enjoyable to a sexual masochist.
Sexual Sadist - a person that can experience profound arousal and/or euphoria from inflicting carefully controlled doses of pain and other extreme stimuli on sexual Masochists. They DO NOT generally enjoy inflicting pain for its own sake. Nor do they enjoy using such stimuli on people that do not find it enjoyable.
Slave - a title of endearment and ownership given to sexual submissives that are participating in Master/slave lifestyles or role-playing. This usually signifies that the submissive wears the “Collar” of a particular Dominant. Alternatively used (voluntarily) as a title of respect for submissives that have served the BDSM community as a whole. Similar titles include, boy, girl, or sissy, etc.
Sub - abbr. or slang for a sexual submissive.
Submissive – (i.e. Sexual Submissive) A person who derives sexual and mental satisfaction from having control taken away from them in intimate situations. They are often (but not always) sexual masochists. They often derive pleasure from bondage, and generally taking a subservient role in intimate situations.
Scene - slang for relating to BDSM. As in “Yes, she’s a legitimate player in the Scene.” Also slang for a specific session of BDSM. As in “I was in this wonderful Scene last night.” Often used as a verb in the same case; “They Scened at the party last night.”
Subbie - common endearment for a sexual submissive, usually (but not always) for a female submissive.
Vanilla - slang for things that are not “kinky” or not related to BDSM and similar fetishes.
Victim - a victim of abuse that claims to be in a BDSM “lifestyle” to rationalize/legitimize their tragic situation. See section 5, paragraph 2.
Wannabe - derogatory; most often refers to a person that pretends to be a legitimate real life practitioner of BDSM, while actually having little or no practical experience.

My official pussy inspector....

Hello TGIF Again!. The day for shaved legs, sweet lips, dropped panties lewd and lascivious behavior.. me likey lookie..waite.... TGIF very much......and..Finally Hooooorah!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
I think I am going to write a book...."The art of ignoring your Master"....if I don't get spanked tonight.....pussy be damned! I have already been far too busy during the past week wrapping my lips around the sacred canon.
Ostensibly humorous catchphrase that I brought up this morning... translated by hubby into “complete the task.” order or else....from Master hubby...Some like pleasurable sex, while others need to feed off of humiliation, surrender! and sexual predictment and...As of Wednesday...he became my official pussy inspector.....with a Badge to prove it....( didn't know they made one...or there was a market..or who makes that kind of badge Granted..Men are the inovators of the world.. ......And here is a picture of it...http://thesubmissivelife.blogspot.com/2011/04/thoughts-on-being-submissive-wife.html and No...I am not going to post a pic of my belted pussy just yet...
And finally for some of my own lashing......After the Republicans...comes my dig at the Loathsome Feminists.....Nasty creepy crawlers....Like the Republicans....Who given a chance...would ruin everybody's weekend if they could...
I have been hounded and bullied all week by Republican men and feminist women and their coat-trailing pussy whipped 'new men.'....How much of a turnoff can that be.... A lot really...

----------------------------------------------------------
Sadly, my mostest fun gf who knows about our kinks is leaving for another job (actually, to get the hell out of her current sucky job). We’re the only thing each other has to keep us sane, and have decided we’ll have to call each other on the phone to insult each other. Yes, we are quite a cunt that way….

----------------------------------------------------------


describe your first time in five words?
braided:
isabelthespy:
nezua:
jhameia:
maevele:
jamesfrancoisacunt:
coldbitterness:
kittenunderwear:
kinoona:
daesungimnida:
ronronhani:
jinkerbell:
weixini:
professortreeoak:
weird, before the football game
i think he felt obligated
“do it before I puke”
“why are you so hard”
“let’s get under the coats”
“do you wanna lie down?”
kindergarden, under the swing set
In a K-Mart parking lot
game of spin-the-bottle, shamefully enough
Older guy, at bus stop
Hurricane took out the electricity.
Mistook for spitting attack; dodged.
after we dropped the L-word.
Had braces; sort of bitey.
to make them shut up

Darwin Hrarmless....

Darwin Harmless

Opinion and Whimsy from an Outspoken Bisexual Atheist

• contact Darwin
• Links
• About
  • Welcome to the Mind of Darwin Harmless

Voicing the conviction that God is a fiction.

Argumentum ad Consequentiam

Posted: February 25th, 2011 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | No Comments » If there is one argument for the existence of God that always strikes me as particularly stupid it is the argumentum ad consequentiam, the argument that we must believe because not believing will have bad consequences.  Not believing will make people behave badly.  Or not believing would be too frightening.  Too scary, mommy.  I hear this argument frequently.  In it’s most common form it sounds like this:  But if I didn’t believe in God I’d have nothing. 
Okay.  So you’d have nothing.  What’s your point?
Aside from the fact that this isn’t true – atheists find many things to believe in and feel joyful about, usually things that are reasonable to believe or things for which there is at least a little evidence – even if it WERE true, what’s their point?  Don’t they care even a little bit about truth?  Or have they decided that reality just gets confusing when they think about it, so why bother.  Believing something because not believing it is scary seems so very strange to me.
The argumentum ad consequentiam pops up in many forms and variations.  I heard it in “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed“ , the hate fest pseudo-documentary promoting Intelligent Design directed by Nathan Frankowski and hosted by Ben Stein.  In that disgusting bit of intellectual pandering to the lowest common denominator, the argument was presented as:  We must not believe Darwin’s theories because to do so will lead to atheism and atheists contributed to  fascism, the Nazi Holocaust, communism and the Gulag, eugenics and everything else that’s been evil since Darwin was born and before.
Ignoring the hate propaganda, and the obvious lie, it’s hard to find a stupider argument for not believing something.  The intellectual integrity of the movie matched it’s moral integrity perfectly.  It truly saddens me to see how much money that piece of sputum generated at the box office, grossing $2,900,000 in its first weekend.  Proof yet again that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the public.
I also hear the argument from consequences from religious relatives who tell me they can’t abandon Catholicism because… well, where would I go?  Where would you go?  Well, maybe go to some other belief that isn’t killing people in Africa by discouraging condom use, persecuting gays, or protecting child raping priests.  Or don’t go anywhere.  Just be.  Why on earth do you feel you have to go someplace?  And anyway, that’s not the point.  You don’t believe things just because it’s uncomfortable not to believe them.  That’s called delusion.  If you do it on purpose, that’s called willful delusion.  Or maybe denial.
The latest Jesus and Mo takes a look at this argument, inspired by an article by Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie.  As always, the strip nails it.
So what’s the counter to this argument.  You can’t believe things just because you want to believe them, or not believe things just because you don’t want to believe them.  That would seem the logical thing to say, but I’ve never seen it affect a believer or change a belief.  Ideas, anybody?

---

What’s With Modesty?

Posted: February 21st, 2011 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: How Weird is our Culture, Opposing bigotry, separation of church and state, The Conviction That God is a Fiction | No Comments » Chatting with a friend the other day he mentioned that he respects Muslim women who have made a choice to wear the traditional garments because he appreciates their modesty.  If others see it as oppression of women, he says, then those people have a problem with the way Muslims dress.  That got me thinking about modesty.  What is modesty all about?  I’m afraid I’m not much of a fan.  Our acceptance of human skin is so very culturally conditioned.  Hang around with naked people for a fairly short while and you stop reacting to skin as if it’s gross.  One starts to take the body for what it is, just something we all have in various shapes and sizes.
When I was a child, I wasn’t allowed to come to the dinner table without a shirt on, even in the heat of summer.  My mother explained that other people didn’t want to see me with no shirt.  So what is the message there?  That there’s something wrong with a child’s body?  That somehow the child is ugly unless draped in cloth?  Once we internalize this attitude, we end up with modesty.  A desire to stay hidden, lest we be ugly or otherwise offend.
I remember a famous journalist and television personality, Pierre Berton, who commented that he would never show shame about being nude in front of his children.  My father was outraged.  My father could never articulate why he was outraged, but the notion that nudity was OK was just unacceptable to him.  Poor fucked up old dude.  I see it all as part and parcel of the Christian attempt to deny that we are animals, to say that we are somehow different from animals, created in the image of God.  What a concept.  So I have no problem with people dressing any way the feel like dressing.  If they’ve been brainwashed to think that modesty is important, that their body should never be seen by anybody, probably including their husband or wife, that’s fine by me.  But I do think they are a bit sick in the head.  And I sincerely feel sorry for them.
I read once that most people would rather die than be embarrassed.  Thinking about this, I realized that thousands of people DO die every year, rather than be embarrassed.  Somebody has a problem with their butt hole, but it’s just too embarrassing to talk to the doctor about it.  So they hope it will go away, until it gets to the point where they simply have to do something  Then the doctor shakes his head sadly and tells them that, had they come to him a few months earlier, there might be some hope.  Go home and put your affairs in order.  You’re about to leave the party.  What a stupid reason to die.
There are times when I just hate my culture, any time somebody pushes modesty at me like it’s a virtue.  What a fucked up, stupid, denial of our humanity that is.  Show me a person who doesn’t fart or shit or occasionally have bad breath and I’ll show you a corpse, and that will get smelly pretty soon too.  Each one of us is, in the words of Douglas Adams, an “ugly bag of mostly water”.  Get over it.
Have I always been like this?  No of course not.  It’s taken years of reflection and introspection to get to the point where I could walk out on stage without a stitch on, or show my asshole to the world.  In high school I didn’t like sleeveless shirts, because I had an armpit hangup.  I remember my gorge rising at the sight of my female German teacher’s hairy European pits.  I still marvel over the fact that eyebrows are okay, even attractive, but nose hair is somehow gross.  But now I don’t give a flying frog.  Take the most beautiful man or woman in the world and get real close to him or her and you’ll find the same bag of body fluids and nastiness that all animals must have.  Covering it all with a business suit or a full burqa is not going to make much difference, except to our illusions.
The issue of the burqa, and various attempts to ban it in France and elsewhere,  is bound up with anti-Islamic feelings, Islamophobia, and xenophobia.  That’s on the bad side.  On the good side, it’s tied into concerns over the oppression of women and the efforts to ghettoize a population, prevent assimilation, and maintain patriarchal power.  Anything I’ve every heard from Muslims about their attitude toward women sound fucked up and sick to me.  If somebody is forcing a Muslim woman to wear the burqa, she should rise up in revolt and I’ll do everything I can to support her.  I will tut tut with the rest of the world when athletes are executed for wearing shorts, surely the scariest extreme to which a demand for modesty can go.  But I’m not about to start telling people what to wear.

---

What Would Jesus Do? He’d Think of Something.

Posted: February 18th, 2011 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: How Weird is our Culture, The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | No Comments » I have a relative who sends me religious crap.  I think it’s now being sent just to wind me up.  Recently this delightful Power Point presentation landed in my inbox.  MIRACLE_IN_EGYPT
A short time ago I would have written this off as a parody invented by a non-religious person to see if they could suck in some believers and go viral.  I’ve changed my mind about this after reading on Greta Christina’s  blog about an orthodox Jew who can’t tuck in his seven year old daughter’s blanket without performing a purification ceremony, and refuses to touch a woman or spar with one even though he’s a martial arts instructor, for fear of getting woman cooties.  So if people can let that kind of bullshit run their lives, they will believe anything.  Maybe this really did come from believers, and not scoffers trying to suck them in.  Of course SOMEBODY had to make this up.  We know that much.  And the story as invented says a lot about the limits of Christian imagination, or the imaginations of those who would promote Christianity, or some nameless hoax writer.  The whole Jesus story is hardly bullet proof  plot structuring, what with the death that isn’t really a death and the sacrifice of God’s son that isn’t really a sacrifice, but it’s super real and powerful compared to this.
This is what the hoax slayer site (http://www.hoax-slayer.com/egypt-murder-miracle.shtml) says about about “Miracle in Egypt”:

####### start of Hoax Slayer assessment ########

“This widely circulated email relates the story of two little Egyptian girls who survived 15 days buried alive due to the intervention of a supernatural saviour with white clothes and bleeding hands who is later identified by rescuers as none other than Jesus Himself. ©iStockphoto.com/Joshua Blake
There is no credible evidence whatsoever to support an email story claiming that two young girls survived for fifteen days buried alive because Jesus visited them in the grave every day and fed them. (No evidence? Well, no shit, Sherlock. – DH)  As well as circulating via email, the piece has also been posted to innumerable religious forums and blogs where it has generated substantial and often heated debate.
According to the story, a Muslim man in Egypt murdered his wife and then buried her along with his still living daughters, one 8 years old, the other still an infant. However, Jesus came to the children every day, feeding the eight year old and “waking” the dead mother so that she could nurse the baby. It was not until the children were discovered alive and rescued from their premature grave 15 days after being buried that the miraculous experience came to be told. Or so this wildly fanciful tale would have us believe.
Not surprisingly, there is not a single shred of evidence to support the story. I could find no credible news reports about such a miraculous rescue, nor any information about an Egyptian man who murdered his wife and buried his children alive. Naturally, if true, such an amazing event would have certainly garnered a great deal of media attention, not only in Egypt, but around the world. And a miracle like the one described would also have been thoroughly investigated by both Muslim and Christian organizations. The total absence of any credible confirmation of the story along with the absurdity of the claims mean that the story is surely a work of pure fiction.
Even if entirely fictional, religious parables have their place and can serve to strengthen the faith of believers and effectively illustrate a particular worldview. However, rather than being a parable designed to reinforce a Christian ideal, this particular piece of nonsense seems more intent on denigrating and undermining the Muslim faith. In a world troubled by faith-based violence and misunderstanding, false stories such as this can only add to existing divisions and circulating them will serve no good purpose.”

#############end of Hoax Slayer assessment##########

You’ll notice that Hoax Slayer seems sympathetic to religious myth making in general, as if inventing nonsense stories that “serve to strengthen the faith of believers” is a good thing, and doesn’t address the central absurdity of this story.  While believers have no limits on their imagination when it comes to making up stupid stories, with racist, divisive overtones and not so subtle threats – He who denies me before men,  I will also deny him before my Father in heaven? – they have a severe limitation on their imaginations when it comes to creating credible superhero actions. I mean, what would Superman have done?  Or Batman?  Or even the very human Green Hornet?  Here we have an all powerful deity who visits these poor children, trapped underground in a grave, so he can feed the older child and bring their mother back from the dead to nurse the baby.  What?  He brought her back to life?  How many times?  To feed her baby?  That is just creepy.  But he doesn’t do anything to get them out of the hole!!!???  He doesn’t tell anybody about them!!!???  For an all powerful superhero who “is still controlling and turning the world”, he’s pathetic.  If he were real and a human, he’d be charged with something.  I don’t know.  Contributing to the abuse of minors?  Accessory after the fact?  Lawyers could nail him with something, surely.  Jesus the doofus. 

And the believers think spreading this poisonous nonsense will help their cause?  No, it has to be a parody.  Even believers can’t be that stupid.  But… okay, there’s evidence that they can be that stupid.  Solid evidence.

---

Sauce for the Goose

Posted: February 3rd, 2011 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: How Weird is our Culture, Opposing bigotry, The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | No Comments » What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.  Such a wonderful archaic expression.  I’m not even sure what it means, but I’ve heard it used in the context of : Any rule for a woman’s sexual behavior should apply to men too.  That’s not what brought it to mind on this occasion.  I was reminded of the phrase when thinking about Tony Perkins and his rant about the terrible terrible oh so terrible results to be expected from the repeal of Dont Ask Don’t Tell.

Headlined: My Take: Ending ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ would undermine religious liberty,  the argument is so specious, and so well refuted by all the comments beneath it, that it needs no comment from me.  But I’ve been provoked and can’t resist. Here’s what it boils down to: The good Reverend Perkins is upset because the government wants to take away the “right” of good Christians and the military to call us evil and to marginalize LGBT people.  Taking away this right will somehow undermine their loving Christian ability to practice their religion.  Duh.

Like so many on the religious right, Mr. Perkins is all for freedom, as long as it’s only for him and his bigoted beliefs.  The pity of it all is that he can get any national attention. Of course he only gets a front page on CNN because of the reaction as reflected in the comments – outrage and disbelief that anybody could be such a horse’s ass.  If he were spreading quiet reason and thoughtful opinion, he’d be ignored.
There’s a concept.  Let’s all ignore him.  Starting now.
Thought inspired by one of the comments below the Perkins rant:  Threatening an atheist with hell is like threatening a pro wrestler with a pool noodle.

---

The Power of the Placebo

Posted: February 2nd, 2011 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: How Weird is our Culture, The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

I just read a post by Random Ntrygg, and as these things so often do, it reminded me of a post I wanted to make myself.  Random Ntrygg is going on about placebos.  I have an experiment I’d like to try, except I’m too lazy unless the right circumstances fall in my lap.  But if anybody out there sees the opportunity to try this, I’d really like to hear the result.  Here’s the concept:

At a psychic fare or similar event, which attracts the committed woo woo crowd, you set up a device that looks a bit like a vibrator crossed with a kitchen colander on a custom designed pole stand so that the device is about five feet off the floor.  Beside the device you put up a poster with a write up about what the device is, and what it does.  It’s a good vibration maker, a spiritual synchronizer.  At it’s core is a specially tuned pyramid, and in layers from the core are various materials – a copper layer, a zinc layer, an iron layer.  The claim is that this invention resonates with the earth’s magnetic flux and the cosmic rays that are bombarding us all the time.  It neutralizes the bad effect of the cosmic rays, and magnifies the good effects of the earth’s natural spiritual energy, giving anybody in its vicinity a feeling of great peace, serenity, and harmony with the universe.
We could borrow some language from the Sedona energy vortexes:
“In Sedona vortexes are created, not by wind or water, but from spiraling spiritual energy. The vortexes of Sedona are named because they are believed to be spiritual locations where the energy is right to facilitate prayer, mediation and healing. Vortex sites are believed to be locations having energy flow that exists on multiple dimensions. The energy of the vortexes interacts with a person’s inner self. It is not easily explained. Obviously it must be experienced.”
Or this from the Love Sedona site:
There are several energy centers, or vortexes of subtle energy, located in the Sedona area. (In Sedona, the energy centers are referred to as vortexes rather than vortices.) The energy from these vortexes saturates the whole area in and around Sedona, and can be noticed in a subtle but general way anywhere around town. If you actually go to one of the vortex sites, which is where the energy is strongest, it can be a very uplifting experience. The energy you take in at one of these energy centers can stay with you and affect you positively for days afterwards.
     In addition to being a beautiful and serene place, Sedona has long been known as a spiritual power center. This is because the power that emanates from the vortexes produces some of the most remarkable energy on the planet. This energy is the reason Sedona is full of people that are “on the path”, that is, people who have made a commitment to grow and become as much as they can spiritually. It is also the reason that such a large New Age community has sprung up in the Sedona area, bringing with it a variety of spiritual practices and alternative healing modalities, and it is the reason Sedona has sometimes been called a spiritual Disneyland.
     We have personally found the energy centers at Sedona both exciting and growth inspiring. If you are at all sensitive to the more subtle things, the experience of standing at one of these vortexes, and letting the energy flow into you and through you, can be almost overwhelming. People come from all over the world to experience this.”

############end quotes from Sedona websites##############

I can tell you, if you’ve never experienced a Sedona vortex you are really missing out on the spiritual side of life.  Not.  But to get back to my concept, once the devices is on display, with the description and hype on a poster beside it, the next step is to lay out circles, or semi-circles if that’s all the space allows, around it.  Maybe this could be done with tape if there would be a problem using paint or chalk.  With each line there should be an instruction for the visitor to pause and consider how they are feeling, before stepping to the next line closer to the device.  The lines should be labeled with adjectives suggesting increasing levels of calm, comfort, serenity, peace, and bliss.  Of course the device is completely hollow, and does nothing.  But I’d love to find out how many orders you would get from the crowd.
That would be fun.
I’m not suggesting that anybody should pull this off as a real money taking scam.  That would be to join the enemy.  But there would be no harm in taking orders, and building a case for the incredible gullibility of the woo woo crowd.  Could be a term paper in this idea someplace.  Or at least a great hoax to publicize.
Before I leave this subject, I should point out that I actually believe that very few of the people at psychic fairs are con artists.  I think most of them, maybe even all of them, really believe what they are doing or selling is real.  It’s like the dowser crowd.  The Amazing Randi has done scientifically controlled tests of dowsing, and offers his million dollars to anybody who can demonstrate that it works.  The dowsers always fail.  But James Randi reports that not one of the dowsers believed that the test invalidated their belief.  They all had a reason why the test failed, but were steadfast in believing that dowsing is a fact of life.
I have little doubt that my placebo demonstration set up would work for a huge number of people.  Were I the type who could believe my own hype, I could probably sell a lot of home made devices at psychic fairs.

---

The Power of Prayer

Posted: January 26th, 2011 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: How Weird is our Culture, The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | No Comments » I have a fundamentalist friend who sometimes sends me jokes intended to tickle the funny bone of the believers, and, apparently unintended, to further convince all us unbelievers that the whole religion thing is a total crock.  The last batch he sent me included a joke that I found VERY funny, because it’s very true, not necessarily true in fact as a real event, but certainly true in principle:
Joke:
In a small mid-western conservative town, a business owner  began to construct a building for a new bar. The local  Baptist church started a campaign to block the bar from opening with petitions and prayers.  Work progressed, however, right up until the week before opening, when a lightning strike hit the bar and it burned  to the ground.
The church folks were rather smug in their outlook after that, until the bar owner sued the church on the grounds that the church was ultimately responsible for the demise of his building, either through direct or indirect actions or means.
     In its reply to the court, the church vehemently denied all responsibility or any connection to the building’s demise.  As the case made its way into court, the judge looked over the paperwork at the hearing and commented, “I don’t know how I’m going to decide this, but as it appears from the paperwork, we have a bar owner who believes in the power of prayer, and an entire church congregation that doesn’t!”
Yes.  Exactly.  That’s how believers feel about prayer.  They don’t really expect it to be effective, and actually know that it isn’t.  But it gives them something to do that quiets their minds when they have concerns, problems, or crisis.  It gives them the illusion of taking action, even when no effective action is possible.  When prayer doesn’t work, which, illusion aside, is all the time of course, they have their excuses ready: “God always answers prayers, but sometimes the answer is no.”  When the laws of probability allign with their prayers, they gleefully tell us that prayer works, and to praise their Lord.
     The psychological value of this cognitive exercise is pretty obvious, and one can see why a believer would be reluctant to give it up.  That would mean they would have to accept the great “what is”, and stop trying to impose their puny human desires on reality.  That would be the true surrender they are always going on about.
What a strange collection of dementia, illusions and self-deception is this thing called religion.  I hold the theory that, in their hearts of hearts, the believers recognize the power of prayer as totally nonsense.  This is why they object so strongly when we point the nonsense out to them.  The most obvious indication of cognitive dissonance is anger.  The believer doth protest too much, methinks.

---

The Banana Argument

Posted: December 28th, 2010 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | No Comments » This post is again inspired by Jesus & Mo.  In this strip, Jesus is blathering on about how the banana is so perfectly suited (read designed) for human consumption that it could not possibly have happened by chance.  In the comments under the strip I pointed out that the banana is a human invention.  The original was inedible, and it was only when two varieties were crossbred to produce a sterile offspring that the modern banana was born.  That sterile offspring can only reproduce by runners, so all the bananas we eat are from that stock.

One of the arguments I hear most frequently for the existence of God, and a world created specifically for human beings, is that so many things seem to be just so perfect for us.  Like the fact that most liquids contract when they freeze, but water doesn’t.  Water expands when it freezes.  Isn’t that fortunate.  If water did contract when it turned into ice, instead of expanding, then the oceans would be solid ice with a thin layer of water on the top and life as we know it would be impossible.  Must be God putting his hand in.  How else to explain it.  How else to explain our incredible luck in finding ourself on a planet which seems so perfectly suited for our existence.
     But as Daniel Dennett pointed out, this is a strange inversion of reasoning.  The planet is not perfect because it was made for us.  It’s perfect because we were made for it.  And don’t go jumping on that word “made”.  I only mean that we evolved in this world, so naturally we find the place salubrious.  If we’d evolved in a different place, say in a deep ocean thermal vent, we’d probably marvel at how perfect that environment is for us too as we metabolized hydrogen sulphide.
     The argument that the world is perfect for us, therefore it must have been created for us, gets everything backwards.
Update:  thanks again to comments under Jesus & Mo I was directed to RationalWiki for a complete exposure to the banana and the banana as proof of God argument.  Didn’t know that peanut butter got involved as well.  YEC sure do get silly.

---

Epiphany after Epiphany

Posted: December 15th, 2010 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | No Comments » Yes, another epiphany hit me this morning.  A flash of insight.  A realization.  I’m always trying to find perspective on reality, and this morning I had a reality shift, prompted by the first comment on my post about Howard Tayler by a former Mormon.  A former Mormon?  That’s what hit me.  There is such a thing as a former Mormon.  I realized that I’ve been treating all believers as, fundamentally, fixated and beyond the reach of logic, reason, or common sense.  But most atheists, myself included, were born into some kind of indoctrination, some kind of religious wacky wacky woo woo.  In my case it was Anglican, Church of England.  Most atheists are former somethings.  So the flow isn’t all going one way, with more and more people being sucked into religious beliefs and cults.  There’s a flow the other way too, as the indoctrinated youth hit the age of reason, and start to question the nonsense they’ve been taught to chant.  So maybe the Jehovas Witless couple who knock on your door are so committed that there’s no point in talking to them but people do shrug off the blinkers of indoctrination and start to question and to think.
     It also seems that few atheists get there in one step.  Most have to investigate some other harbour of nonsense.  But seeing their own religion for what it is really helps to see the nonsense in any other religion, so the natural progression seems to be from believer to investigator/searcher to agnostic to atheist.  I remember in my teens sitting on a hill and watching a native American religious dance and celebration with great reverence.  Suddenly it hit me, another epiphany.  Why was I watching their bullshit with such reverence when I had such contempt for my own cultural bullshit.  Sorry folks. There is no Thunderbird.  No Great Spirit.  No Raven who spat out the first human.  No woman delivered from the sea on a clam shell.  Get real.
It’s all too easy to assume, when one runs into the brick wall of stupidity while talking to a believer, that they are all beyond hope.  That’s certainly the reason I no longer debate with the missionaries at my door.  But while there may be no point in arguing with the fanatics, there is certainly a point in proclaiming the belief that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and God are all wishful thinking fantasies.  As Greta Christina says, if we say it often enough maybe somebody will be listening.

---

Fundamentally Dishonest

Posted: December 13th, 2010 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: How Weird is our Culture, science and technology, The Conviction That God is a Fiction | 1 Comment » A got an email this morning.  Subject line:  Fwd: EAA and the newest version of the flying car.  The link in the message took me to a video about a machine that is under development, and as the subject line suggested it’s a flying car, a slick little job that seems to drive very well on the highway and contains, packed in its roof, a fabric wing that turns it into an ultralight airplane.  The car’s inventor, a colourful character named Steve Saint,  mentions in the video as an aside that his father, Nate  Saint, the founder of Mission Aviation Fellowship, was one of the four  missionaries killed in Ecuador many years ago.  The tribe that killed them adopted and raised young Steve, who now appears to be a man in his fifties or sixties.  Now there’s a biography worthy of a Hollywood publicist on a serious bender.  Steve Saint is justifiably proud of his little flying car, which he describes as “primarily a car but it flies”.  The goal is to get it into production and mass market enough of them to bring the price down low enough that they can be used for…. oh damn: Missionary work.

 
     I happen to be a total ultralight freak, though I don’t own one at the moment.  The first time I laid eyes on an ultralight airplane, at the PNE in Vancouver, Canada, I just about creamed.  It was,  bar none, the most elegant and beautiful machine I had ever seen.  I flew as a passenger on a two seater ultralight out of the Flying Crocodile Resort in Costa Rica, and decided I loved ultralights even more.  It was like riding on a motorcycle that could leave the ground.  We flew over the ocean, and watched a turtle paddling away from the shore.  Magic, or as close to magic as an atheist can ever experience.  Some years later I watched a video demonstration of a paramotor, in which young men climbed a mountain with the machines on their backs, unpacked their backpacks, unfurled the wings and flew away.  I was in love.  Next thing I knew I was the proud owner of a paraglider wing, taking short flights off the local trash heap reborn as a park.  A short while later I bought the motor and a trike to mount it on.  And that was all a disappointment.  The video had made flying a paramotor look so very easy, and it wasn’t.  Controlling the wing takes practice and the perfect conditions.  The motor was very very heavy, and hard to handle, even for a big strong guy like me.  Controlling the wing and the motor at the same time never actually happened for me.  I never got off the ground.  Which brings me back to the flying car.
     If you watch the video, you might notice that there are two things left out of the very exciting and dramatic shots.  The first is deploying the wing and taking off, and the second is packing the wing up again.  We do get to see the machine in the air, so these things are obviously possible.  But I can promise you that they are not easy.  Just a little bit too much wind, a cross wind, or no wind at all can make this machine very difficult to operate as advertised.
     I clicked on the links that took me to the company website, and to the website of Mission Aviation Fellowship:  “Our Mission:Sharing the love of Jesus Christ through aviation and technology so that isolated people may be physically and spiritually transformed.”  Uh, okay.  I wandered around in this website for a while becoming more and more depressed about the stated goals of these fundamental fuckheads.  That’s when it hit me.  The video is a perfect reflection of the people who made it:  Fundamental Christians, fundamentally dishonest.  There is no honesty in fundamental Christianity.   Sad.  I love Steve Saint’s little machine, and I think I see it for exactly what it is.  But the way he presents it matches the intellectual integrity of Christians, which is to say no intellectual integrity at all.

Addendum:  I went to bed last night vaguely troubled by this entry.  It didn’t help that my partner, and the only person on the planet (I hope) who knows my real name, described my prose as “inelegant”.  I’ve now slept on this post, so to speak, and want to explain:  It isn’t the lack of elegance in my language that bothers me.  It’s the thought that I’m being unfair to these kind, good hearted, sincere people who, after all, actually might be doing some good in this world.  It’s a difficult conflict for me.  I admire many things that Christian missionaries do.  It’s just hard for me to swallow my contempt for their dogma, and for the idea that they spread pernicious nonsense to cultures with very few defenses.  They arrive with their overwhelming sophistication of technology and resources, armed with their absolute certainty that they have the ONE answer, that all the gods before their God were a silly myth and a mistake.  They bring material aid and medical help.  They bring “education” and a vision of a larger world.  And then they poison minds with concepts such as “original sin”.  Fundamentalist Christians in Africa are promulgating homophobia, and directly or indirectly inciting draconian punishment of gays, up to and including the death penalty.  So calling them all, collectively, “fuckheads” seems completely justified.  I do wish they weren’t, mostly, such nice people.  I’d prefer them to be totally despicable.  
     A fundamentalist sees the world in black and white.  That’s one of the attractions of fundamentalism.  I just can’t go there, so I have to live with this discomfort, and accept that otherwise very nice people can be complete dicks.

---

News Flash – Pope Modifies his Position

Posted: December 9th, 2010 | Author: Darwin Harmless | Filed under: How Weird is our Culture, Opposing bigotry, The Conviction That God is a Fiction, Uncategorized | No Comments » For a minute I thought I would have to ease up on my criticisms of the Ratzinger.  I heard that he’s said condom use is okay, and that lead me to think that he might be pulling his head out of his ancient ass and joining our century.  Alas, this is not the case.  The Pope has said that condom use MAY be permissible under SOME circumstances.  For example, if you are a male prostitute and already headed for Hell because you suck dicks for money, there’s not really a lot of harm in using a condom though it is still “not moral”.

According to Fox news, the pontiff makes the comments in a book-length interview with a German journalist, “Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times.” The Vatican newspaper ran excerpts of the book Saturday.  Church teaching has long opposed condoms since they’re a form of artificial contraception, as opposed to “natural” contraception like abstinence or the rhythm method.  (That’s natural???!!!) The Vatican has been harshly criticized for its position given the AIDS crisis.  Benedict said that for male prostitutes — for whom contraception isn’t a central issue — condoms are not a moral solution. But he said they could be justified “in the intention of reducing the risk of infection.”
     So this is a very conditional approval.  Condoms are not approved because they help to solve the world population problem, or to help stop the spread of disease in the general population, or to protect women against men who might be carrying very deadly viruses.  Condoms are only for those who are going to hell anyway.  If you’ve got a shot at heaven, don’t stick anything on your dick when you fuck.
     I should be sad to see that this is really no improvement, but I must admit that a part of me rejoices.  I’d hate to have to give up my favourite whipping boy.

---

The New Repulsive Republicans: Featuring Cheney's Chamber of Horrors!

By Rev. Dan Vojir       

opednews.com

 

 
Actually, not much of a difference.
Republicans now have another descriptive adjective. In the last 8 months, they've grown: stupid, arrogant, stubborn, bloviating and even weird. Now the newest: repulsive.

Yes, repulsive. As in bloodthirsty kind of repulsive. Slimy repulsive. Yucky. Worse than "Bill the Cat" repulsive. More and more, they're looking like malicious Gremlins or the creature in Alien breathing, repulsively, on Segourney Weaver. And there are different kinds of Repulsive Republicans. For instance, there's the "we're all just torturers in arms" repulsive: several days ago, conservative commentator Lou Dobbs of CNN ran an accusatory piece on Senator Chuck Shumer running two videos, one where Shumer opposes torture and another (2004) in which he seems to be pro-torture (see below). He then asks viewers a leading question ascertaining if America approves of torture.
The REAL Republican Platform
Crooks and Liars:

...and asks whether they would "personally employ torture to save American lives and prevent an attack on this country?" And surprise, surprise...the overwhelming answer is...YES! Looks like all that fear mongering is paying off well for you.

This is the same Lou Dobbs, you will recall, who was so enchanted by Obama Waffles during the Values Voters Summit that he bought several boxes.

No doubt somebody at the RNC thought it would be a clever idea, since Nancy Pelosi is feuding with the CIA, to run an ad comparing Pelosi to a James Bond villainess up against the superspy -- as in Bond's many screen-credit sequences wherein he blasts away at various villains.

The RNC is hoping that one of Palin's Rally people will take a tip from it.
And there's the "Dick Cheney's Right" kind of repulsive that even now has some "Republicans" disgusted:
Think Progress:

[McCain on Cheney's "National Security" speech]:
And then he got acerbic: Cheney, he says, “believes that waterboarding doesn’t fall under the Geneva Conventions and that it’s not a form of torture. But you know, it goes back to the Spanish Inquisition.”

Of course, no definition of repulsive would be definitive if it did not include "The Boss has spoken" kind of repulsive. This would be portrayed in Rush Limbaugh's off-hand ridiculing of Ted Kennedy's cancer and lifespan (hear it below to believe it).

And lastly, there's the "we're so sanctimonious" kind of repulsive embodied by Mucho Macho Rick Santorum:

SANTORUM: The other thing we have to do is we have to stand up and say, look, America — Conservatives believe in the stewardship of patrimony. In other words, there are things in America that are really good, that work, have worked for 200 years. And we have a guy named Barack Obama who’s trying to fundamentally rewrite everything, change our economy, change our social structure, change our economy to something new.

In other words, screw women - physically and figuratively. The Patriarch only matters.This coming from the man who has the weirdest looking family to ever lose a campaign.
Still the creepiest family portrait.
I actually feel sorry for the few Republicans who are moderates and want to achieve solutions to the nation's problems by cooperation. The new Repulsive Republicans, however, are bringing out the worst in liberals. I Googled "Bloodthirsty Republicans" today and there was a link to a pdf file:

Republican Conservative Christian Blood Thirsty Murderring Christian Kills 8 Stupid Republicans in Red State Hillbilly Nebraska, Loser Bush Country...(Irony: sounds more like stupid Republicans than stupid Republicans. The grammar and spelling are just as bad.)

And from Flickr, I received this gem of Walt Whitman's:

There is no week nor day nor hour when tyranny may not enter upon this country - if the people lose their confidence in themselves - and lose their roughness and spirit of defiance.

 1  |  2

Overt racism aside, the RNC is now running an ad that targets Nancy Pelosi - literally. This is the "kill them all, God will take care of his kind"* kind of repulsive:

http"//thedevilanddanvojir.blogspot.com

Rev. Dan Vojir is has been writing/blogging on religion and politics for the better part of ten years. A former radio talk show host (Strictly Books �" Talk America Radio Network) and book publisher, Dan has connected with some of the most

Rev. Dan Vojir is has been writing/blogging on religion and politics for the better part of ten years. A former radio talk show host (Strictly Books €" Talk America Radio Network) and book publisher, Dan has connected with some of the most interesting people of our time: Steve Allen, William F. Buckley, Alan Ginsburg, Armisted Maupin, Anne Rice, Grace Slick, Bishop John Shelby Spong, Patricia Nell Warren, and Betty White.

He is also an ordained minister in the ULC and has studied extensively on the subject of the Bible and homosexuality. Additional articles can be read on his blog, The Devil and Dan Vojir and in the San Francisco Bay Times under the column, The Devil's Advocate.

Future goals and activities: a new ministry focusing on reaching personal spiritual levels without the outside influence of proselytism or evangelism called The Church of the Inner Preacher. This ministry will be included in a new website The Devil and Dan Vojir.

Vojir's main goal: to root out hypocrisy in religion and politics. "If only one person is saved from being killed or bashed by inane bigotry, then I'll have accomplished what I was put on earth to do: To Live and Help Live." http"//thedevilanddanvojir.blogspot.com

(about the author)

Letter From Freed Slave to Former Master

In August of 1865, a Colonel P.H. Anderson of Big Spring, Tennessee, wrote to his former slave, Jourdan Anderson, and requested that he come back to work on his farm. Jourdan — who, since being emancipated, had moved to Ohio, found paid work, and was now supporting his family — responded spectacularly by way of the letter seen below (a letter which, according to newspapers at the time, he dictated).

Rather than quote the numerous highlights in this letter, I'll simply leave you to enjoy it. Do make sure you read to the end.

(Source: The Freedmen's Book; Image: A group of escaped slaves in Virginia in 1862, courtesy of the Library of Congress.)

Dayton, Ohio,

August 7, 1865

To My Old Master, Colonel P.H. Anderson, Big Spring, Tennessee

Sir: I got your letter, and was glad to find that you had not forgotten Jourdon, and that you wanted me to come back and live with you again, promising to do better for me than anybody else can. I have often felt uneasy about you. I thought the Yankees would have hung you long before this, for harboring Rebs they found at your house. I suppose they never heard about your going to Colonel Martin's to kill the Union soldier that was left by his company in their stable. Although you shot at me twice before I left you, I did not want to hear of your being hurt, and am glad you are still living. It would do me good to go back to the dear old home again, and see Miss Mary and Miss Martha and Allen, Esther, Green, and Lee. Give my love to them all, and tell them I hope we will meet in the better world, if not in this. I would have gone back to see you all when I was working in the Nashville Hospital, but one of the neighbors told me that Henry intended to shoot me if he ever got a chance.

I want to know particularly what the good chance is you propose to give me. I am doing tolerably well here. I get twenty-five dollars a month, with victuals and clothing; have a comfortable home for Mandy,—the folks call her Mrs. Anderson,—and the children—Milly, Jane, and Grundy—go to school and are learning well. The teacher says Grundy has a head for a preacher. They go to Sunday school, and Mandy and me attend church regularly. We are kindly treated. Sometimes we overhear others saying, "Them colored people were slaves" down in Tennessee. The children feel hurt when they hear such remarks; but I tell them it was no disgrace in Tennessee to belong to Colonel Anderson. Many darkeys would have been proud, as I used to be, to call you master. Now if you will write and say what wages you will give me, I will be better able to decide whether it would be to my advantage to move back again.

As to my freedom, which you say I can have, there is nothing to be gained on that score, as I got my free papers in 1864 from the Provost-Marshal-General of the Department of Nashville. Mandy says she would be afraid to go back without some proof that you were disposed to treat us justly and kindly; and we have concluded to test your sincerity by asking you to send us our wages for the time we served you. This will make us forget and forgive old scores, and rely on your justice and friendship in the future. I served you faithfully for thirty-two years, and Mandy twenty years. At twenty-five dollars a month for me, and two dollars a week for Mandy, our earnings would amount to eleven thousand six hundred and eighty dollars. Add to this the interest for the time our wages have been kept back, and deduct what you paid for our clothing, and three doctor's visits to me, and pulling a tooth for Mandy, and the balance will show what we are in justice entitled to. Please send the money by Adams's Express, in care of V. Winters, Esq., Dayton, Ohio. If you fail to pay us for faithful labors in the past, we can have little faith in your promises in the future. We trust the good Maker has opened your eyes to the wrongs which you and your fathers have done to me and my fathers, in making us toil for you for generations without recompense. Here I draw my wages every Saturday night; but in Tennessee there was never any pay-day for the negroes any more than for the horses and cows. Surely there will be a day of reckoning for those who defraud the laborer of his hire.

In answering this letter, please state if there would be any safety for my Milly and Jane, who are now grown up, and both good-looking girls. You know how it was with poor Matilda and Catherine. I would rather stay here and starve—and die, if it come to that—than have my girls brought to shame by the violence and wickedness of their young masters. You will also please state if there has been any schools opened for the colored children in your neighborhood. The great desire of my life now is to give my children an education, and have them form virtuous habits.

Say howdy to George Carter, and thank him for taking the pistol from you when you were shooting at me.

From your old servant,

Jourdon Anderson