Japanese women and artificial wedding ceremonies

Post World War II Japanese men seem to be experiencing a never-ending collective kick to the balls. Androgyny and “herbivorism” have drowned out their fleeting manhood. And an introverted culture only reinforces Japan’s apparently solitary nature. Japanese women don’t help.

Women, in general, are fantasists. They live in a world of dreamy girlhood notions and they are shameless about contriving such artificial worlds as long as the other women are doing it. Ever been to one of the Disney parks…?

Japan today, us tomorrow…

“Japan: ‘Solo weddings’ for single women”

Kyodo news agency reports that Cerca Travel’s two-day “solo wedding” package includes choosing your own special gown, bouquet and hairstyle, a limousine service, a stay at a hotel and a commemorative photo album. “This package boosted my sense of self-esteem… the effect was equal to a more extraordinary experience, such as visiting a World Heritage castle,” says Tomoe Sawano, one of the first to try out a “solo wedding”. About 30 women from across Japan have become “solo brides” since the service was launched in May. Almost half of them were married women who either did not have a wedding ceremony or were not satisfied with that experience, according to Cerca Travel.

Modern woman can now seek amusement out of the traditional man/woman marriage dynamic and look at what she hath wrought.

Posted in L2

Lame customer service ushers in another swan song for a Barnes & Noble store.

The Barnes & Noble looked lackluster from outside, like most remaining brick and mortar joints that have bled their last drop of blood for the digital usurpers of the computer age. In fact, from the parking lot, I thought it might be closed. The windows were faded and the glass tint was scuffed and faded, and it wasn’t until I reached the door that I saw there were, in fact, people inside. Whew. I breathed a sigh of relief as this was the only stop left for me to complete my Christmas shopping, and it had to be a bookstore. Barnes & Noble seems to be one of the few chain book outlets anywhere near me, and the gift I had in mind could only be had from a book store. It’s too late in the Season to order online with shipping by Christmas (at a reasonable price, I should add).

As I walked in, it seemed the store had shrunk. Its old vastness I recalled from previous visits was gone. It was as if the walls had been pushed in, and there were empty shelves and the customers seemed listless, bored, sad. Then I spotted the sign.

“This Barnes & Noble store will close for business on December 31.”

Another one bites the dust.

I was a little surprised, because even though every chain bookstore in the world is flailing on its last leg, this one seemed pretty vibrant as long as I could remember (which was at least 2 years ago). Me and my Kindle have no right questioning Barnes & Noble’s moves. I drove them out of business with my infatuation with electronic books and impatient embrace of instant, wireless delivery. I killed Barnes & Noble. This one. I used to visit often in the “old days.” I bought so many books here, so many magazines. Now, I happened to wander in looking for something that couldn’t be hurried along, into this physical store with shelves and the restrained, antiseptic smell of books and paper. I spent about half an hour browsing others items besides the one which I specifically made this trip for, and by the time I was ready to pay, I was holding a stack worth about $78.

My Christmas shopping was officially done! It is the second year in a row I have not waited until the last minute. I hate Christmas, and in the past, I passively countered all holiday obligations by indulging in the worst, most stressful sort of procrastination.

Not this year.

This afternoon, during my last visit to this store, I wandered past empty shelves and clearance areas and looked at all the physical books, lined up on shelves, their spines exposed to those who cared, which apparently, is not enough. Barnes & Noble’s great gimmick back in the day was that it provided a hospitable place for those who wanted to read books not purchased while sitting on the floor or on comfortable chairs, kind of like a library, except Barnes & Noble was not in the business of renting books, only selling them. You were free to lounge and read for free without getting angry glares from employees. It was encouraged! I spent many days during my 20′s in the big chain bookstores of the era: Barnes & Noble, Crown Books, Waldenbooks, Borders, B. Dalton. Bookstores were my refuge from a world that threatened to swallow me whole, for that period of my life was chaotic, unstable and fraught with mental difficulties that threatened to permanently derail my existence. The lush silence and serenity of bookstores was my succor. Books soothed me and while my life was a tenuous balance of shit, bookstores always welcomed my desperate visits. I haven’t been to a bookstore, independent, or chain, in ages, which speaks to the tragedy befalling this formerly thriving industry.

After I’d had my fill of the bookstore, I headed to the cashier line, realizing it would be my last time in this Barnes & Noble. Ahead of me was a very tall Chinese man. By his side was a young boy, and his daughter, of about 12, who was equally tall for her age (a tad taller than me, who is not tall for any age). The cashier finished up with the previous customer and then said loudly, even animatedly, to the Chinese gentleman, “I can help you now sir.” After he paid and left, she began daydreaming or something and I stood waiting to be called out of spite because there was no reason for me not to walk up to the counter. But I wanted to be called too. I wanted to be noticed and courted, treated like a valued customer. But she was too busy looking at something to her right. I stood there for a long time and finally, she looked up and said, “Oh, are you ready to be helped?” and I said, “Uh yeah,” trying to feign annoyance. I hate to be ignored and most times, in a vital, customer-dependent business, I will receive a customer’s treatment.

But now, I was being authentically disregarded by a woman who will lose this job within the week. She has no need for someone like me and no need to play the friendly part. Who cares if I complain to her boss? She disinterestedly treated me like someone who needed to pay for a book, not like a customer. She was dismissive and curt and without the artificial treat-the-customer-well dynamic at play, I got the real deal. I know where Amanda R stood!

It’s OK, I don’t need bookstores any more, either. Good luck Amanda R, may your travels bring you riches and happiness.

Posted in L2

Manspread has met its match: womanspread. Except the pussy media doesn’t write about that.

First of all. It’s not a fucking problem.

Yeah, I’m talking to the bitches, and to the bitches with dicks. Talking to you. To them.

It’s not a problem. I am a regular bus/train rider here in Los Angeles. Granted, our public transportation system hardly embodies the Northeastern experience, but human nature is generally consistent across geographies. The only difference is the intensity of riders. Here in Los Angeles, the Red Line tends to get very crowded during rush hour, and the riders are a good sampling of that vast economic status-space that differentiates quantitative behaviors.

During my 20-minute underground commute, I actually prefer to stand. I listen to music on my non-Apple mp3 player and I lean against the hand rails adjoining the “back door” which is closed for most of this morning commute. But still, I note the idiosyncrasies of my fellow riders and it is rare that I see men splayed out thoughtlessly, in defiance of other riders. Even when I do, at least in the Hispanic parts, women, men and children, have no problem simply saying “Pardon” in Spanish and settling in to that seat where once a distended knee rested. It’s not a problem here. I do it too.

It is just comfortable, as a man, and sorta masculine, in a King of the Jungle manner, to sit with your legs spread out.

In the primitive wild, there are no niceties or manners. It’s no coincidence that women have evolved to sit with their knees locked. Their hooch is a matter of social reticence and privacy. Women do not bare it all, and the meek legs-closed seating stance suits their constitution. The male is territorial and his aggressive pose of spacial monopoly is an innate gender qualification which no bureaucratic transportation agency needs to be involved with.

Ah, yes, but.

All things male, all qualities masculine, in the post-feminist age, have been denounced, ridiculed and trounced into submission.

Anything that remotely screams “only a man can do this” is swatted away in the most publicly shameful manner, a practice roundly exacerbated by the bothersome entrance of millions of yammering wenches who never would have thought the matter worth arguing until the #whinybitchetariat brought it up and made it a grand Twittercause.

I am speaking of manspread, of course.

It has been an issue before. Men who splay their legs in situations that require a little more consideration and personal physical compression. I see it occasionally, but it only seems to be homeless guys. Most other men do not sit like wild beasts, and if they do, they shift willingly in order to free up a space on a crowded bus or train.

Apparently, the Metropolitan Transit Authority in New York thinks this is a serious enough issue that they are waging an all out war on men with a new poster campaign asking them to sit like girls.

Taking on manspreading for the first time, the authority is set to unveil public service ads that encourage men to share a little less of themselves in the city’s ever-crowded subways cars.

The targets of the campaign, those men who spread their legs wide, into a sort of V-shaped slouch, effectively occupying two, sometimes even three, seats are not hard to find. Whether they will heed the new ads is another question.

I find it terribly amusing that the post-feminists and other ass-lickers have become so bored, so idle, that they are now tackling tough issues, like seating positions and trivialities of physical gender behavior on trains.

Feminists won, but sometimes, they seem to have lost. They are delusional and they are now acting like thugs rejoicing in blind victory.

Scolding men for sitting with their legs apart?

To borrow a feminine pose, I exclaim:

Really?!

It is not an issue. Most men do not do this and those who do are quite happy to bring their legs together to make space for your whiny ass. I’ve yet to see a man who would not withdraw his legs (other than homeless men) upon well-mannered request. The fact that NYC is printing full-color posters to play equally offensive ads across its train walls seems a bit of an overstated reaction contrived to soothe the frayed, hyperactive nerves of the offended female populace who takes the time to even voice such stupidity.

In other words, hardly anyone.

And since we are spending public effort and money to “cure” the gender-induced space issues on crowded trains, how about that flip-side of this equation we don’t hear about?

Womanspread.

Womanspread is more common than manspread. It is more grueling and offensive since it is wrought by the cultural untouchables. And thoughtless as hell.

I have never taken a tally, but I would be bold enough to conjecture than womanspread is as copious as manspread.

Of course, since our media is driven by female sensibilities and serves only to lavish support on that end of the spectrum, we will never hear about widespread female abuse of space on public transportation. I see it all the time. It is a plague. It warrants a public effort by all transportation agencies because the time has come that we no longer have empty seats on trains or buses because of these female riders, the womenspreaders.

Womanspreaders carry not just one bag, their primary purse. They also carry a bag for shoes, one for food, another big one for shopping/groceries, and another for who-knows-what.

They march into the train, their bags askew and flailing and as they walk by you, one of their bags is sure to swat you, and when they stand, all the bags create a clearance space of a 3-foot radius in all directions because they refuse to put them on the floor, or better yet, condense their travel load. And if they sit, they always, ALWAYS, litter all the seats in their proximity with said bags. Just like men with splayed legs, they will bitterly move the bags to make space for you, but the snarl on their witch-faces conveys the burden you’ve placed on their comfort.

Womanspread is everywhere and it is an epidemic.

In fact, the NY Times video portion of this story betrayed itself by imaging egregious displays of womanspread. Did anyone tell the editors they muffed it up?

In a strange video portraying a guido Youtube phenom frog named Johnny T, the archetypal macho man, as he defends manspreading, while apologizing for it. In the sequence, we see several slides of womanspreading. Then we realize the sequence is a put-on.

Johnny T, guido frog, is essentially arguing my point that women are the worst space hogs. Forget the insignificant number of men who refuse to fold their legs closer. Statistically, they do not matter. But statistics are not the strength of feminists.

womanspread 3

womanspread 2

womanspread 1

We must stop womanspread.

Now.

Posted in L5

Pinning the hack on a recognizable foe allows the U.S. to sell a progrom of clamping down on the internet.

Commenter Mark wrote:

Talk about conspiracy theory!
You’re dismissing a serious possibility.
That there are hackers glad to do their deeds for cash.
Why not? You paint a picture of all hacktivists as anarchist types. But they are
not.
It’s the reaction of Sony that disturbs me.
How easy they caved. How easy the movie house corporations caved.
I get it though. They have economic considerations. What happens if some terror attacks did happen? We all know there is the liability issue. And the lawsuits that would follow.
I will say it.
Only in Obama’s America.

No, not a conspiracy. There is nothing conspiratorial about this. Just big interests covering their ass and finally finding a way to sell their oligarchy in the digital age.

Interesting observation from GIZMODO:

“The president also characterized the internet as a “wild wild west” and called for tightened cybersecurity. “We need more rules about how the internet should operate,” he [Obama] said.”

If the United States can pin this on a familiar bad boy actor that Mr. and Mrs. Middle America can comprehend and assort into their little black and white worlds, it will be much easier to sell an internet crackdown. This is what the government and the media conglomerates want.

This hack plays into their agenda as long as the bad guy is recognizable and indisputably evil. North Korea anyone?

From CNN:

North Korea slammed U.S. claims that the regime is responsible for a cyber attack on Sony Pictures — and then proposed the two countries work together.

“Whoever is going to frame our country for a crime should present concrete evidence,” the state-run Korean Central News Agency reported Saturday.

“America’s childish investigation result and its attempt to frame us for this crime shows their hostile tendency toward us.”

Posted in L2

From its own mouth: North Korea now directly denies hacking allegations while threatening repercussions if US fails to investigate jointly.

And this is where it gets interesting.

North Korea has proposed holding a joint inquiry with the US into the hacking of Sony Pictures, claiming it can prove it did not carry out the cyber-attack.

The foreign ministry in Pyongyang denied responsibility for the the highest-profile corporate hack in history, and said there would be grave consequences if Washington refused to collaborate on an investigation and continued to blame it.

NK is calling our bluff.

And throwing some snark into the mix:

“Without resorting to such tortures as were used by the CIA, we have means to prove that this incident has nothing to do with us.”

And most amusing, they are now “owning” their threats unlike the previous threats which were made by some disembodied hacker group.

Now what, United States?

Show us the proof.

But any narrative involving North Korea automatically begins with that nation suffering under the haze of dubiousness and distrust.

Why else blame North Korea for anything if not to enact a fail-safe operation to allocate misplaced blame?

Posted in L7

The “North Korea behind the Sony hack” narrative stinks. Just what the doctor ordered to stamp out internet neutrality and freedom.

Now let’s get something straight.

I’m no North Korea apologist.

I wouldn’t be surprised if that nation is partly culpable for some aspect, some access to the entry point, of the Sony hack, and the ensuing exfiltration of 100 terabytes of data to heaven knows where. But what does this prove?

On and on we hear, Unit 121, blah blah, North Korea’s corrupt economy can still find a way to finance the development of nuclear weapons, surely it can finance the development of some rudimentary malware that brought the entertainment conglomerate to its knees.

North Korea can be all these things, but it proves nothing. Hacking and those who hack are an anarchistic assemblage of global intelligentsia that are not confined by national borders or nationalistic commitments. The hacketariat is a free-form global movement that mimics the internet’s lack of geographical boundaries. Everybody can work for everybody and the only common denominator is cash exchange and the fine art of code and deconstruction of varying sizes and intricacies of networks and the sanctity of the walls of safety that any random computer cowers behind.

But the idea that North Korea, as a nation, specifically precipitated this action, this corporate cyber breach from its Orwellian society, with infrastructure to match, fills be me with unease and skepticism.

I am not a North Korea apologist, but I am a doubting apologist. As Americans, we must absolutely doubt everything our intelligence agencies, government and media informs us regarding this hack and ensuing movie-that-was-never-aired.

I feel uneasy because North Korea has been made the nexus point of this affair, a dark, mouthless void of a mysterious country that provides little in the way of rebuttal or self-preserving testimony. The nature of North Korea is to lurk in the shadows as they fall under continual suspicions while failing to humor such suspicion by issuing any useful statements we can can hook our collective claws on. There has been absolutely nothing that leads me to believe we should be hammering North Korea for this hack. Their involvement, at the most, is incidental and auxiliary and detracts from the true nature of the narrative.

From the link above:

“However, the communications and tactics used that mirrored other “hacktivist” attacks could have just as easily been adopted by Unit 121 or another state actor to mimic a hacktivist attack, achieving the goals of the state while giving North Korea plausible deniability. Pinning the attack with certainty on North Korea will be difficult precisely because it’s the sort of thing any determined attacker, state or otherwise, could have achieved if properly motivated.”

In this argument, the reverse is also quite possible. A hacktivist attack might just as easily mimic a state-sponsored act, while giving that mute government, implausible innocence. North Korea’s reticent secrecy is the very reason we should heed, with doses of caution and skepticism, anything the elites try to force feed us about the Sony hack. The nature of hacking precludes being able to pin such actions squarely on a fixed target.

From this article which details an interview with an American hacker known as Sabu:

“Well, it [the malware being written in Korean] doesn’t tell me much. I’ve seen Russian hackers pretending to be Indian. I’ve seen Ukrainian hackers pretending to be Peruvian.There’s hackers that pretend they’re little girls. They do this for misinformation, disinformation, covering their tracks. Do you really think a bunch of nerds from North Korea are going to fly to New York and start blowing up movie theaters? No. It’s not realistic. It’s not about ‘The interview.’ It’s about money. It’s a professional job.”

In the wake of 9/11 and the horrific destruction of our civil liberties for the ostensible sake of national security and safety that ensued, I’ve grown to be very weary of “9/11″ moments that implant the dread of vulnerability and danger in our minds, for this is when we are most likely to surrender freedom for security. People are chickenshits and will gladly build a fence around their liberty in order to keep danger at bay. The media conglomerates have been slowly chiseling away at internet freedom and neutrality because it represents a revolutionary capsizing of their antiquated business models. A publicly touted and perpetuated “North Korean hack” over a stupid, meaningless, movie is implanted in our minds as an infraction of utterly serious nature, of national security, when in fact, it’s just a horrible movie that is actually, from what I hear, not terribly critical of North Korea, or if anything, slightly unflattering of this country.

What troubles me is this: can Sony, and its media brethren, manipulate this matter, and extrapolate an American-endorsed course of legislative and regulatory action that will allow them to enjoy favored benefits which will ultimately result in the perpetuation of their antiquated business model by the concomitant repression of a vibrant internet simply because of an allegedly state-sponsored hack? I have a suspicion that it will be easier for Sony, et al, to put internet freedoms on hold if a foreign state can be brought to blame for this ungodly act of hacking, at least in the eyes of a compliant and ignorant American public.

The North Korea narrative stinks.

North Korea has nothing to gain by muzzling a comedy, Sony, everything, thanks to overbearing, myopic American reactions.

**Edited 12/19.
Additional links.

Why the Sony hack is unlikely to be the work of North Korea

The Evidence That North Korea Hacked Sony Is Flimsy

Posted in L3

Sony and the MSM have slowly fed the narrative that North Korea is guilty for the Sony hack.

In the matter of the Sony hack, North Korea is only a suspect. Nothing more.

Let’s recount the “evidence” which the mainstream media and the victim (in America, both parties, in this case, are synonymous and have many of the same interests and motives and work hand in hand to help each other’s cause):

* Evidence allegedly points to the fact that the methods involved in this hack are similar to the cyber attack North Korea carried out against South Korea in March, 2013. Other security experts, however, have argued the contrary…this is unlike North Korea’s historic hack methods.

* It has been alleged that many of the hacked files were leaked from a bank of IP addresses belonging to the St. Regis Hotel in Bangkok.

* The hackers have claimed their actions were retaliation for Sony’s release of The Interview, a movie detailing a farcical assassination of North Korean president, Kim Jong Un.

* The hackers made available five new Sony movies on the internet, but The Interview was not among them.

This is it.

North Korea has denied involvement, of course. Semantics…North Korean government involvement.

If this was a normal criminal case involving an individual, and the aforementioned evidence was used to try the suspect, that shit would get thrown out immediately and the prosecutors laughed out of court.

Hackers are a slippery bunch and planting red herrings represents the most rudimentary of their skills. Claiming unsubstantiated motives and mimicking bad English are elementary tasks.

Of course North Korea is a suspect, but it seems this basic investigative fact has been lost in the collective Sony-fed frenzy, bolstered by the MSM, which, through its lazy reporting language, assumes North Korea’s guilt without compunction, and lacking a cautious dose of skepticism. Considering the weak set of circumstantial evidence floated against North Korea thus far, you would hope the MSM would spend more time dissecting Sony’s narrative than kowtowing to the entertainment corporation’s theories.

Posted in L6

Mean Day.

My mom told me, recently actually, that I was a mean person.

This, after I relayed to her and my dad about how I got in a shouting matching with a bicyclist on the Metro Red Line a few months back.

My mom may be right.

I think my asshole cred has slowly cemented itself in place.

I’m well on my way, at age 50, to earning a distinguished doctorate in the fine art of assholery.

It didn’t always seem like this. I was a sweet, disarming little fella when I was young. Yech. I’ve mutated into this really sour, unlikable, disagreeable and petulant old guy who increasingly finds it difficult to hold his tongue.

Some days, my assholery brims like a bucket of puke in the chemo ward. Just oozes filthy bile hate.

Which defeats and shames my hypocritical blabber about striving for equanimity and that Zen-centered affect that is trained to resist indulging in life’s extreme emotional roller coaster and drama addiction.

But then, it’s all over in an instant, and I’m mean. Again. Sometimes for the whole day, it gathers steam and creates a stampede of ill-mannered behavior that will one day get my ass kicked or killed.

#1: This morning, on the Red Line commute to work, a seat emptied next to me and this middle-aged Black dude sat down, and my peace and space was utterly ruined, decimated, by his unruly presence and absolutely horrid, otherworldly Lovecraftian stench. It was an odor as I’ve never smelled before. The fearsome thing about his stench that attacked me when he sat in the seat next to me, causing me to turn away and hold my nose, was that it was unrecognizable! If someone smells like shit or sweat or vomit or butt-cheese, cool. I can deal with the known, as distasteful as it may be. There is still the comfort of the “familiar” evil. Not this Black dude! His stench was of extraterrestrial origin. I’ve never smelled such putrid, vile muskiness. It is indescribable. If I were to try, I would say it was a dull, reverberating odor that pounded the walls of my sinus cavity. After a few stops, I could take it no longer. I got up and tried to brush by his stubborn legs while waving my hand across my face in the most conspicuous manner possible. “What the fuck. You stink, dude!” I bellowed but he just shuffled in that mentally ill distracted way and placed his lunch pail on the seat that I vacated.

#2: There’s a homo exec at work who is one of the most arrogant, argumentative pricks I’ve ever had the pleasure of working with. He is renowned in the company for his connections and influence and he rubs many people the wrong way but there is still a plethora of fan boys and fan girls (usually of the fag hag variety) who kiss his ass all the way to the bank. He is a “psychic bully,” a concept I’ve noted lately. This is a breed of bully that flourishes in the modern workplace where physical violence, or aggression, is actively discouraged. Psychic bullies thrive on putting others down, making others feel like shit, demeaning them, eliciting reactions, manipulating others subtly by wearing on their patience and mental fabric. Psychic bullies are geniuses in the art of social intelligence for they are masters of psychological warfare. They never do anything overt; that would be too risky for an HR-sensitive corporate culture. Nope, the psychic bullies are subtle and usually quite passive-aggressive as they wreak havoc from the perch of innocuous offense. This guy can be utterly malevolent and no one dares go toe to toe with him. Those who have tried have failed miserably. Today, as is customary within the shell of his smug myopia, he was convinced of a narrative having unfolded itself of which I was the main culprit. He began a crescendo of accusatory thinly-veiled language that was obvious to me, but which others might not have noted. He was working his panties up in a bunch and he was convinced of his plot line, which involved me, but he failed to consider there were other possibilities and this caused him to focus on the irrelevant points. It was not my fault, but I wasn’t pointing fingers. Not my style. Finally, on the speaker phone, as he was working himself up into an accusatory blather, I had enough. I told him sternly, “Just calm down, “X.” He tried to say he was calm, which he was, on the surface, but he was not to those who pay attention to such matters of oblique meta language. He was working on a string of self-justification, and I added, because we hadn’t had enough, “You’re asking the wrong question!” This was just before I clocked out for the day. Tomorrow should be “interesting.”

#3: My least proud moment, with my girlfriend, tonight. Tired, stressed, angry, I accused her of only calling me when she’s driving, a bitter accusation made worse by the tone I snarled it in. The implication being that she didn’t want to take time to talk to me for the sake of talking to me. Upon her retorting, “I just can’t win with you,” I upped the ante by castigating her with a, “oh, don’t play that victim card.” This was answered with a “fuck you” and a call ended notification on my phone.

All in all, a day fractured by too much interaction and dependence on my environment.

Certainly not what I strive for.

Posted in L2

Guardians of Peace and their Christmas surprise gift. I haven’t peeked, but I have a suspicion…

What, what, what could it be? Hmm?

The mystery looms.

Guardians of Peace has promised us this much.

They have enticed us with more corporate smut and we eat it up! That sordid show biz and all their untouchable, unfathomable, Fancy First World problems. Millions of dollars swirling amid the elitist chaos of an industry that, at best, surmounts 8th grade maturity level like…never.

The Guardians of Peace, a strange and curious handle if ever there was one, sent us another imminent plot twist, but it looks like we’ll have to wait a few script pages before it reveals itself on Christmas.

“We are preparing for you a Christmas gift. The gift will be larger quantities of data. And it will be more interesting. The gift will surely give you much more pleasure, and put Sony Pictures into the worst state.” Rudimentary and awkward English aside (was that a contrived, artificially constructed grammatical wreck, meant to act as a red herring…?), when one considers all the sewage that we have been treated to during the first seven waves of cyber leaks detailing the above-the-line shenanigans at the mammoth corporation, the apocalyptic promises of the hacking group leave one wondering what kernels of disaster we’ll discover under that GoP Christmas tree.

Whatever it turns out to be, I suspect Sony is tipping off concern as they have begun unleashing all their 3-piece sharks upon certain high-profile conduits of GoP’s offerings with legal letters warning that all illicitly procured data, all of it, must be destroyed immediately. As in, delete; as in, empty that recycle bin as well. All of it. Delete every byte, every digital trace.

The cat is out of the bag, now we will get our lawyers after you, and they will come with brooms and feather dusters. Time to clean, baby!

sony threat p1

sony threat p2

sony threat p3

This debacle is nothing but a fool’s game. Have any of these so-called revelations really revealed anything those of us with perceptive and cynical minds don’t already know? And especially those of us unfortunate enough to make a living in this sullied industry populated by adolescent minds with too much money and too much prestige? I hate to break it to you, GoP, but this stuff is old news to a lot of us. The entertainment industry is top heavy with self-centered, elitist, smug, egotistical, stupid, soulless people. Now it wouldn’t be so bad if this is all there is…after all, this is simply being human. These are the same types of humanity you can find in Peoria. People are not radically different in their distasteful commonalities.

No, the worst thing is not that Hollywood folks are all of the aforementioned laundry list of crap. It’s that they work so hard at portraying an image of social responsibility and shallow “Liberalities” of concern for all things deemed to be of concern for this class of creature. Hollywood people act as if they care about equality and open-mindedness and that ethereal level of saintly existence that places the well-being of mankind above their own trite money-grubbing dramas. It’s like a guilt cleanse. But the bombshell is that voila…the industry folks, those masters of the socially conscious, yoga-practicing affectations, are rotten to the core. They are superficial, lying pieces of trash. Vermin who hate you for just being you and who are just as susceptible to petty prejudices as the next guy. They are greedy shysters who shift numbers and balance sheets so they can take home a bigger slice of the pie even though they have no need for all of it, an egregiousness further muddied by the fact that they essentially take the money from much of the the lowly industry workforce.

From Sony's official website, a scroll down menu wherein they yodel about social responsibility.

From Sony’s official website, a scroll down menu wherein they yodel about social responsibility.

Bonuses in the entertainment industry have rapidly risen and concentrated among the Vice Presidential and Director class. The same people who make an ostentatious display of concern for the less fortunate while secretly mocking these very same people.

I’ve witnessed first-hand the condescending and snobbish trashing of “lower castes” by homo executives. It happens all the time. Don’t ever believe the Hollywood lie, namely that they are good people. They market themselves as such, but honestly, they are just as vile as you and me.

Sony is beginning to mount an offensive and it won’t be long before they finagle the Feds into somehow criminalizing mere possession of the data which has been liberated by the GoP, and other future hackers.

I have a theory about the GoP’s Christmas surprise. Once again, it will not tell us anything we don’t suspect, but it will affirm our nagging worries about corporate and government collusion. I believe the GoP has information in the cue which will directly tie Sony Pictures Entertainment with the United States government, and spell out a mutually parasitic, oligarchic relationship that leaves a detritus of discarded human rights in its trail. I think the GoP will finally tell us it’s real…we have entered an era of the new American Fascist State. And it won’t only be SPE…other large media conglomerates will be implicated.

This is all theory, of course. Pure conjecture. The twelve days of Christmas have begun…

Posted in L5

Man’s most idiotic risk.

The Washington Post, in a satirical roast of an annual already-satiric tradition put out by the British Medical Journal, does it one step further. It takes the goofy levity which the BMJ presents in this year’s tongue-in-cheek study, which essentially tells us what we could have phoned in: men are more likely to be represented than women in the annual Darwin Awards (yes, it’s a real thing), and paraphrases a conveniently misandrist barb as their headline. They are reporting on a dryly humorous matter, and thus act as if they are not restrained from offensiveness because, after all, the subject of scorn is men.

As if handed the keys to such an egregious insult of males (behind the facade of satire), the Post’s Rachel Feltman chooses to glibly title her news report, “Study: Men are just more likely to be idiots.” Disguised behind a facade of acerbic irony, Feltman haha’s her way through her account of the BMJ’s tongue-in-cheek study in a boldly flagrant, anti-male manner that seems to proclaim “I don’t need to worry…no one will call me out for my offensive humor, except obscure male bloggers. Just no one who matters.” The same “people who matter” and who would create a fuss if this “humor” report used such inflammatory language to ironically poke fun at females.

For instance, let’s say the BMJ chose instead to concoct an over-the-top study of absent-minded, clueless driving techniques by women. Would the Post write an article making light of this with the headline “Study: Women drivers are just more likely to do something stupid.” Who would be foolish enough to wager that there would not be a chorus of whiny griping about such an obviously satirical headline? Social Justice Warriors are notoriously undernourished in the matter of humor when it comes to observations that betray the gravest defense of any woman’s respectability. Even in humor, you shall not denounce women.

As for men, the rules are entirely different.

In such instances, women are prone to conveniently defend, “I was just joking, don’t be such a baby,” while capriciously taking self-righteous offense at all perceived instances of impingement upon their honor, and by extension, that of all women, however much the “slight” was made in jest. Joking only can work one way, and that would be the woman’s way.

Perhaps the fear on their part is that behind every affront of humor there also resides a kernel of truth.

In addition, SJW’s are also notoriously unable to palate harsh truths.

And of course it’s true that men are more represented than women in the realm fatal stupidity.

It’s what men do.

Call it male idiocy (the BMJ contrasted “idiotic” with more “acceptable” forms of risk-taking, like parachuting), but ultimately, many risks, in their infancy, would be considered “idiotic” by a good portion of the population at any one time. It’s this idiotic risk-taking that enabled humans to escape caves and toy with fire.

This idiotic risk-taking built larger-than-life monuments that have withstood the trials of time and which has brought us to this point in time where women can mock man’s nature behind the comfortable screen of entitled complacency. Human progress is solely the result of innate male courageousness which some mock in our epoch of luxury with the caustic accusation of “idiocy.” If males were historically sensible and safe, we would continue to live in caves to this day. Idiotic risks are modern society’s pampered castigation of the primitive aggression which has driven human development for millions of years.

I would say that man’s most idiotic risk was allowing women to attain such shameless empowerment that they have no qualms deriding that which has served them so well, long before their “liberation.”

Posted in L6