NEURALTRAFFIC

Something to be afraid of: "preferences" as defined by search engines and social networks

2011-03-01T22:21:00.000-08:00

For the first time in history, we find ourselves in an economy where corporate giants the likes of Google and Facebook amass their fortunes without ever the need for a production line. The new currency of the world is no longer measured in how much physical product a nation can produce but rather how much information it can gather and retain; this is the information age. The agendas of search engines and social networking sites are under constant scrutiny as privacy concerns continually surface. Conspiracy theories aside, I believe there are other more immediate evils that are the by-product of this information gathering. Although personal privacy is definitely something to fight for, our freedom to information is also at stake.

The internet as we experience it today is a vast landscape of content to which there is currently little order. In the physical world, territory is easy to see and claim. The digital world however, provides its inherent challenges and every broadcaster of this medium is looking for a way to cash in. How will the internet change in the future? If current debates about Metered Internet usage and Net Neutrality persist, then the answer is “bleak”.

Google and Facebook however, don’t make their dime controlling access to the internet. Their aim is to store and trend all your searches and interactions with the internet so as to create a more “personable” experience. Although these actions don’t hurt our pockets, I would argue they are far more damaging to the society as a whole. Having an application that knows what we know in order to fit our personal preferences is essentially providing everyone with internet access a digital “yes” man. And while there are definitely some benefits in knowing that we are not alone in this world, it could also be detrimental. Search engines and social networks are not just passive channels. With every click we contribute to the dataset and hand over more authority to these corporations to curate the content on the web. What results is an internet culture tailored to not only justify but amplify our own personal beliefs no matter how noble or abhorrent. Search engines that tell us what we want to hear, social networks with personalities that reaffirm our interests, are all breeding grounds for stereotypes and ignorance. When the information around us is shaped by our own preferences, to whom lies the responsibility to tell us the contrary?

Stay tuned: more to come

2011-03-01T14:35:00.000-08:00

Ideas for meaningful blogs come and go...I will be returning to my sporadic writing schedule ASAP.

Brainfart: A Twisted Case for Love

2009-11-04T05:46:00.000-08:00

It doesn't matter if you're hideously ugly, mentally unstable, morally deficient, or intellectually impaired, I believe there's somebody out there for you.

Proof, you ask? I submit to you, Exhibit A: Phillip Garrido of Dugard kidnapping fame.

Phillip Garrido is a pedophile, a kidnapper, a sexual predator but what's most interesting is that he is also a husband - not a widower or a divorcée - a husband. So to be optimistic, if the scum of the earth like Garrido can find a wife who doesn't mind his extracurricular activities, I'm absolutely certain that there's hope for the rest of us.

Phillip Garrido isn't a freak event either, Exhibit B: you all remember serial killer and rapist Paul Bernardo right? He had a wife too and she wasn't just complacent, she was racking 'em up while he was hitting 'em down. The funniest part is that I'm sure there's guys out there who are scared to be in relationships because they think they have an unhealthy or taboo fetish like feet or golden showers that would cause their girlfriend or wives to pack up and leave in disgust. Meanwhile, guys like Phillip and Bernardo are literally getting away with murder and their wives are in on the game. If that isn't love...I don't know what is.

Moral of the story? If you ain't worse than a rapist, you got a chance and be truthful, you never know what she'll say!

HAHAHA.

The Extinction of Human-to-Human Contact

2009-10-26T04:48:00.000-07:00

A friendly reminder that the Cellphone ban in Ontario starts today which is probably more accurately described as the hands-free law because the ban also includes the handling of any electronic device while driving. Although unsurprisingly I have operated a many of gadgets while driving (GPS', iPODs, cellphones), I would consider it a small personal sacrifice if it would get all the other idiots to stop. You know, the kind who can't talk and drive more than 20 km/h or the kind who text and drive in both lanes at once. The problem right now is that there is no way to distinguish the mentally sharp and physically coordinated people from the rest of the steering wheel hugging, windshield kissing dimwits who inexplicably have driving licenses. Perhaps there should be another class of license that would give this privilege to those who are capable instead of every John and Jane Doe who can barely work a ~~VCR~~ (is this an obsolete reference now?) toaster. As of right now it seems that we all have to suffer.

Humans are social animals and as such, we need the proper work-arounds for these laws of inconveniences. As much as I detest the now inevitable popularity of retards using bluetooth, I shudder at the thought of what other technology will benefit from this ban such as the ATX text-by-voice machine. Yes, you read that correctly. Welcome to 2009, you can now text in your car with your voice! And so continues this peculiar dialog between our engraved affection and growing affliction towards socializing. A modern-day paradox of an animal that both loves and hates to talk at the same time. To what lengths will we go to avoid human-to-human contact?

I believe that it doesn't take a huge leap of logic to see that machines will not just be passive mediators in our communication but active mediators. The future is heading in one direction and that is of convenience of talking without talking. It's obvious then that we will outsource our personal sentiments to the machines. It won't be long until we'll all be using GoogleVoice or some voice-to-text while Google trends our outgoing messages. Then it would be possible for Google to predict what you want to say before you say it! How convenient! So picture this, you call your buddy up and say "Yo.." and then Google fills in the rest, "meet me at the pub at 9". Or you call your girlfriend and say "Hi..." and Google adds, "I love you baby, you are my sunshine". That is the future we are going to have. The machines will know us better than we know ourselves. It's telepathy from the future like we haven't yet imagined because we won't be telling the machines what to think, they'll be telling us!

Brainfart: Half Asleep, Wholly Hilarious

2009-08-31T12:28:00.000-07:00

The state of your thoughts in the brief moments when you're torn from slumber and thrown back into reality can be rather amusing. Sometimes I think back to a personal experience I've had and chuckle to myself. I think it might be worth sharing.

Sunlight starts beating at my eyes and I reluctantly rouse from sleep. In a futile attempt to alleviate the brightness screaming through my eyelids, I snatch the corner of my covers and turn over in a groan -- at least that was the plan. Instead I feel a snag at my shoulder, a heavy weight holding me back. In a daze, I fumble around searching the bed for the source of my unease. Underneath the blankets I feel something foreign. As I unearth it from under the covers, it feels a bit unpleasant in my hand. It feels rubbery, heavy, anchored. Then I realize something, it was anchored to me. So picture me now sitting upright in bed with my right arm in my left. Except I'm having this trippy out-of-body experience because I'm recognizing one of these extremities as my own yet I feel nothing. I shake my pale limp arm a bit to help recirculate the blood. It was maybe a minute or so at the most before I eventually got that familiar 'pins and needles' sensation but it felt considerably longer with my mind racing.

It's especially funny/embrassing because in thsoe 60 seconds, I had created this crazy scenario in my head. I thought to myself: what if the feeling never returns? omigod, they're going to have to amputate! I wonder if anyone had to amputate their arm after sleeping on it? what the hell am I going to do if that happens? how could I possibly bear the embarassment of having to answer how I lost my arm? not in some horrific tradgedy that would incite sympathy, not in the glory of a heroic deed, but in (what must surely be) the most trivial incident ever.

I'm sure you have all gotten good laugh at my expense. Nevertheless, this is a genuine fear of mine and I'm not entirely convinced that it's irrational. After some very rudimentary research, I've found that it takes approximately 1.5 - 2 hours (depending on age, health, etc. of individual) for the cells and nerves deprived of blood flow to begin to deteriorate. Of course, it would take significantly longer for your whole arm to die. Although it's natural for people to unconciously toss and turn in their sleep to avoid such scenarios, I'm certain there are some very unfortunate souls that have lost their limbs to sleep. Probably not something you think about very often or at all but there you go.

Brainfart: Uncreative creativity

2009-08-24T14:23:00.000-07:00

--Some comments on District 9--

Watched District 9 over the weekend. Just wanted to share a few thoughts about the movie. Too lazy to organize them, so not sure how this will read. Haha.

1. Aliens: Why are aliens always conceptualized as humanoid? This is what I'm talking about when I talk about creativity. Aliens originate from different planets/solar systems/galaxies/universes or whatever with presumably different organic life and thus different selective pressures. I would imagine aliens would probably look more interesting than just two earth creatures mashed together. Giant bipedal shrimp? urg.

2a. Giant bipedal shrimp: On that note, this is an obvious design choice. Why? Because I'm fairly certain there would be no controversy over the maltreatment of aliens if they would happen to look like giant puppies, or perhaps little fuzzy bears with hearts and rainbows on their chests. Why don't aliens ever look like wide-eyed puppies?

2b. Giant bipedal shrimp (part 2): How can a shrimp ever become a creator? One of the greatest evolutionary achievements of humankind is the opposable thumb. It is the existence of the opposable thumb that gives us the dexterity and accuracy required to become a creator. How could a giant shrimp with flippers for hands possibly have the dexterity required to make even the most primitive of tools?

3a. Future tech - weapons: Obvious design choices as well. Sound wave, magnet, lightning guns? All visually interesting but unlikely. Modern warfare is being outsourced to robots and machines, why would such advanced aliens still carry around guns? And DNA activated guns? Are you telling me you can't just staple a flipper to the trigger and call it a day? How come there are mechs that need to be "manned"? None of this is efficient and makes any sense. Sure looks cool though. Sigh.

3b. Future tech - "people": It is evident that even here on earth, as technology progresses, the more we are being integrated with it. I don't see why these aliens would walk around in their flesh and exoskeletons. In the future, there will be no androids or humans, they will be one and the same. Flesh is fragile and has an expiry date, let's face it, as soon as we find a way out of these capsules we're out.

4. Smart and Stupid: Aliens do the darnedest things like trade mechs for cat food. What?! First of all, how is there a Nigerian gang living in an alien base camp? Secondly, why would anyone trade crazy superior guns for anything? You don't trade anything for a gun. Whatever it is, it belongs to the guy opposite the barrel.

5. *Spoiler alert* What's the problem?: What was the problem in the first place? The aliens needed some black fluid that could only be salvaged from alien parts to get them home? Sooo, why did they just park their spaceship in the sky? Nonsense.

Anyways, still more where that came from but taking too much time to write.
/rant.

Policing Your Fantasies

2009-08-17T21:50:00.000-07:00

In North America, video game violence has always had a bad rap for inciting real-life violence, that's nothing new. You could only imagine then, what public outrage would result when Rape games start showing up on store shelves as they inevitably will. Politicians and parents will protest and lobby to no avail, then watch in horror as a nation of adolescent trained serial killers add rapist training to their resumes. The world will surely descend into moral chaos and social anarchy, marking the beginning of Armageddon and the return of Christ.

The arguments opposing this simulated lewd behaviour are plain and simple: they threaten our core family values, prey on impressionable young minds and create monsters. So what kind of sick and deranged provocateur could endorse such a pastime?

Me.

Video games are fantasy and variety is the spice of life. If it so happens that it's someone's fantasy to molest school girls on the subway, then I believe it should be represented. Is it obscene? I bet many would deem it to be, but still I don't believe anybody has the right to rob people of their fantasies.

The only reason why video games succeed is because they are fantasy and not grounded by any real world influences or consequences. If you find that your trigger finger itches, you can rest assured knowing that there's an army of digital men without family and friends created strictly for your impulsive desire to kill them. In the same vein, if you ever feel a heat in your nethers there's a limitless pool of fabricated school girls awaiting your wandering eyes and hands. The reason why the fantasy world exists is because we all need a place to retreat where there are no consequences for our actions. Things like rules and laws make people insane. Inside, we all want to experience life without the strain gravity, monogamy, religion, or any other physical or social pressures, even if it's temporary.

Real world violence is not committed by video game fanatics because the real world and the fantasy world are not connected. Video games have become the casual scapegoat for society's blatant incompetence but real world violence is the result of real world actions, it's the culmination of real world abuse and neglect.

Should your fantasies be policed? Should they be censored by people claiming to be looking out for your best interest? And are we prepared to live in a world where our fantasies are presented and voted on by committee to determine if they're appropriate? If we're capable of creating a world without consequence, why not revel in it?

Hot? Single? Female? Broke? Shameless?

2009-08-08T21:19:00.000-07:00

I often hear women say that ~~good~~ wealthy men are hard to find. Well fret no more ladies because EstablishedMen.com is here to save the day. The tag line reads: Where Beautiful Girls and Successful Men Meet (and oh yes, it's real).

Apparently, this specific match-making site was created to subdue the demands of rich bachelors all over the world. It's a well known fact that there is an overwhelming abundance of young, attractive, morally decent, and abhorrently loaded unwed males who find themselves sitting all alone in their expansive properties wondering to themselves, if only I could find a beautiful woman who loves me for my money. It's not hard imagine why the website boasts a 4:1 female to male ratio.

Of course, this whole scheme is logically sound because it's the brainchild of a Toronto-based stripper who bagged herself an ~~"established man"~~ doofus. Essentially all she has accomplished is promote herself from a stripper to a pimp and a terrible one at that. Why would any rich guy looking for some hot ass decide to grow old with it? You don't marry hot ass. You don't adopt hot ass. You set it and forget it. Why? because there's no such thing as 50 year-old hot ass but you can sure bet that there's 18 year-old hot ass and if you find yourself with padded pockets you can tag that shit until you're half-lying in your own grave. Granted, these men may be looking for their own trophy wife but with websites like this there's a higher probability of these women ending up a mistress rather than a Mrs.

Strangely, I don't foresee a lot of success in relationships that are founded upon lust and greed. Although I do not contend that there are "established men" out there looking for beautiful girls, I have a feeling they do not need any help doing so. Money can't buy love but do you know what it can buy? Sexy, nubile whores whose legs open at the sound of a cash register and have no qualms about letting Daddy Warbucks make his deposit any which way he desires.

Is there anything wrong with this Lavalife for gold-diggers? Not really, to each their own. After all, there's always AshleyMadison.com, the "dating" website for cheaters. Let's face it, who wouldn't jump at the opportunity to get their fix or to get rich quick? We live in a world that is in no short supply of incompetence or immorality. Gold-diggers and cheaters will exist regardless of whether or not the websites do. While I don't have a problem with people choosing to be sluts or polygamists, I do take issue with people too cowardly to admit it. If you're going to be something, have more pride in it. Don't say you're holding out for an "established man" just say you're looking for a sugar daddy. Don't say you're "going out with the boys" for a night, just say you're gonna go plow her sister and you'd like it if she was okay with that.

Brainfart: Am I Replaceable?

2009-07-24T01:09:00.000-07:00

Here I lay, with the soft comforting weight of her head on my shoulder, immersed in the sweet scent of her skin. The gentle tickle of her breath teases my senses with each exhalation. I fixate on the way her small delicate fingers intertwine with mine, how the moonlight bathing the room in a pale blue glow, hug the curves of her body. Goosebumps, as my gaze rests on her tossed and tussled hair glimmering in perfect disarray. Beautiful as she may be, her only flaw remains…that she is not you.

Brainfart: Unattached

2009-06-23T09:24:00.000-07:00

A question people seem to be asking me lately is “Are you married?” to which my best reply is simply a cocked neck and a raised eyebrow. What?! This question amuses me and duly so. I wouldn’t even identify myself as an eligible bachelor, for that would imply my receptiveness to the idea of marriage. Although this shouldn't be confused with never, it definitely isn't in the foreseeable future. Today my reply may be an outward scoff but when does it become inward guilt? It's not unusual nowadays to be well into your 30's and single but no one wants to end up being the old guy at the club or the weird uncle that smells of cheap liquor and hookers. So what is the age that divides those victims of love's misfortunes from those culprits of social ineptitude? How long can you keep blaming cupid for his shoddy marksmanship before contemplating your own inflexible demands? Is it wrong to keep throwing back the cards you're dealt or can you make the most of what you have? Certainly, love is not something you settle for but can anyone be 100% what you want?

Brainfart: Because We All Watch This Show...

2009-05-29T13:11:00.000-07:00

This week was the season premiere of the new Jon and Kate plus 8, season 5.

To be honest, I don't watch this show religiously or anything (mainly because I don't watch TV programming on the TV unless it's live sports) but if I catch Jon and Kate, I'd watch it. Funny thing is, I hate children. Not all children, but enough to comfortably make a broad statement like that.

So anyways, the big draw this season is of course the chance to witness what will inevitably be the public implosion of this marriage as a result of the many rumors and scandals involving Jon and Kate's infidelity. It's one thing to all gather and swoon over a litter of cute little mixed babies, but dammit, nothing brings humanity together like watching our favorite TV idols slowly descend into the fiery abyss. We all knew it was going to end though, didn't we? I remember tuning into a few episodes, watching Jon and Kate give their couch testimonials and plainly seeing the distress and grief in their eyes. Granted, I didn't think it was going to end with college coeds and bodygaurds. It seemed more to be going the route of becoming homicidal/suicidal.

I haven't posted in a while and I don't really have a point to this post. I suppose there could be some moral questions to be extracted from a situation like this. Like could you endure a loveless marriage? Is divorce ever an option? Should parents stay together "for the kids"? Can infidelity be forgiven?

I'll answer those in a more organized thought process another time...haha. I guess for now you can leave me a comment!

Mac Is Me.

2009-05-04T22:12:00.000-07:00

Super slow on this post but I have to say it simply because it amuses me so.

Ever since the rise of iPods, the world has been divided. All of a sudden we are now either Mac or we are PC. As ridiculous as it might be to distill your personality into an OS, somehow people buy into it. What's more, it seems the people who claim to have personality buy Apple, which to me is odd because all Apples come one way out of the box. Pretty damn unoriginal. The most amazing thing of all, is the Apple business model.

iphone owners have enjoyed their free 3.0 firmware update since March but itouch owners got served with a $10 fee. But if paying for the firmware update when others are getting it for free isn't funny enough, listen to what it does. For an extra $10, you can unlock the ability to use bluetooth on your itouch! Yes, that's right. You'll need to pay to use hardware that was already prepackaged into the product you own. That is pretty much akin to me serving you steak in a restaurant but intentionally not informing you that it comes in a glass case and then proceeding to sell you a hammer afterwards so you can eat it. Except in this scenario, you don't even have a hammer or glass shards to show for it. You have nothing except the rich, engrossing, pulsating soreness of your newly torn anus. Although most, I'm sure, will chalk it up as the price of "cool". Apple's "cool" marketing is ingenius. Everybody knows "cool" costs money. So the more money you spend, the more "cool" you are, right? That is the Apple business model in a nut shell. Apple doesn't sell products, they sell "cool" memberships. All you need to do is keep sending them cash or else they'll make you so obsolete, you'll be last year's itouch/ipod/iphone when you should be this year's iwhatever. What's the difference between last year's model and this year's model? Functionally speaking, nothing - but it will be aesthethically different, that way it will be easier to point out the obsolete losers from the "cool" kids.

Nintendo has not been watching on the sidelines. They've been taking pages out of Apple's playbook since the Wii and DS lite came to market. Those little sleek white boxes all seem to scream "look at me! I'm cool and have personality!", Like Apple, Nintendo has no qualms about selling you shit they could get right the first time but don't just so they can sell it to you again but in multiple iterations. What do you want? A DS? DS lite? DSi? They're both the same and different at the same time!

My dear friends, we are amidst a new era of tech. This is tech for the tech-illiterate. The perfect amalgamation of electronic wizardry and fashion. There's no money in catering to the utilitarian, or for spec lists and product descriptions. Numbers aren't cool, they're for geeks. Technology has gone the way of pop music and pop culture, looking the part is ~~half~~ all the battle. Why pay scientists for R+D costs when you can just candy-coat another line-up of ipods?

*sidenote* It looks like my source of "Today's Tracks" has decided to only allow 30secs of embedded music. So no track today until I find an alternative source. Imeem, you can suck it.

Spot gets Chemo

2009-04-21T08:26:00.000-07:00

Saw this in the news today.

$7.5M to treat animals with cancer. $7.5M! And this isn't going to a lab where they do animal research, this is going to a Veterinary College. It's not going to cancer cures, it's going to cancer treatment - of animals. Don't get me wrong, who doesn't love animals? But saving animals from cancer has got to be pretty low on the priority list, right?

So some old rich lady croaks and decides to leave $7.5M to this cause. Everyone deserves the freedom to spend their money however they like but it won't stop me from believing that it's an inefficient way to be charitable. So Fifi has a malignant tumor and we now have the facilities to treat her, who's going to front the $10 grand or whatever it's going to cost to pay for the treatment? No one, that's who. We take poor ol' ailing Fifi down to the pound, shoot her in the face, get a new, spry replacement and no one would be the wiser.

What's a better use of $7.5M? Um, cancer research for humans? Okay, okay, let me rephrase. What's a better use of $7.5M from an animal lover's perspective? How about Habitat/Wildlife conservation? Animal Assisted Therapy? or indirectly, Go Green Initiatives. I think for that amount of cash you can think a bit more broader than just providing chemo to a 10 year-old dog.

Bonus tip: Here's some fun and interesting information to check out before donating. Go visit charitynavigator.org, they have information on charitable non-profit organizations and how they spend their money such as this article on CEO salaries.

Today's Track:
Snob Scrilla - There You Go Again

I Don't Have A Clue.

2009-03-27T17:43:00.000-07:00

I read a fascinating article about memory.

The story begins with a woman capable of extreme autobiographical memory, dubbed hyperthymestic syndrome; she can remember in detail every event on everyday of her life. What’s more interesting about this is that her extraordinary feat of human memory is later revealed to be nothing but the by-product of compulsive self-obsession. Other than this quirk, she is relatively unspectacular but her uncontrollable habit of nostalgic narcissism remains the secret to her uncanny memory with dates.

As it turns out, our memory for the most part is not very reliable but can be improved and reinforced with revision and reflection. It should be quite unsurprising then, that we remember more vividly and accurately, the things we replay over and over in our mind’s eye.

Now we go from one end of the spectrum to the other. See exhibit B: me. If superhuman memory is the result of extreme sensitivity to one’s past, then I would border on the clinically amnesic. I must deduce then that my notoriously short-term memory is due to my complete indifference about nearly everything. I have no idea what I did last week nor do I care. You can imagine why I have so few anecdotes. I believe being male in general puts me in a poor position to remember anything. I care nothing about dates, I take no pictures and I keep no diaries. Females though, have the unique ability to recount all the inane details of their everyday lives. They are by nature serial hoarders, like personal experience pack rats. This isn’t to say that nothing or everything is worth remembering. Perhaps the middle ground is not that we find a compromise but that we find peace in what already is.

i.e.
Your duty as a female is to remember.
My duty as a male is to forget.
Get over it.

Today’s Track:
Yeah Yeah Yeahs – Zero (Remix)

On 'on perspectives'

2009-03-18T20:39:00.000-07:00

Just because religion always gets my mind going, this entry will be a rebuttal of sorts to a friend’s latest post ‘on perspectives’.

I know most Christians would not identify themselves as "God-fearing" but I believe most are. It’s not that they fear God per se it’s that they fear not having a God. Why is having unquestionable faith a Christian virtue? Because the church is the shepherd, the congregation is the flock and so much as raising an eyebrow in question would throw the whole migration off course. I believe devoting yourself to a religion without some serious inquiries would be selling yourself short. How can you justify signing your life away to a set of metaphysical beliefs without at least shopping around first? Let’s face it, you wouldn’t even buy a computer until you’ve listed all your options. Any higher understanding of the world through religion is superficial, propped up onto the slender stilts of faith. Religion discourages questions because it simply can not bear the weight.

Christians will argue that humans are and will always be too inferior to understand the will of God. But if God is too busy tending to the greater good of the Universe to micromanage the follies of man, then why would he care about any of our individual crisis’s and accomplishments? In that respect, why pray to him at all? I believe that even if we're too feeble to understand God's ultimate intentions, as the only species on this planet capable of pondering why, we all owe it to ourselves to do so. We SHOULD question God and we SHOULD question faith.

As an exercise, let’s forget about God for a second and put yourself into his shoes. If you were an omnipotent being with a human mind, don’t you think that YOU could do better than this? What grade would you give God as the curator of earth? I’d say for an all-knowing being, he’s more incompetent than Bush. If you had the limitless power and resources, anything short of utopia is a complete and utter failure.

The fact of the matter is: Innocent people die, convicts get set free and none of it matters enough to be changed. If we are to acknowledge a God, let’s be more demanding of our ‘God’, after all he’s omnipotent. If pain and suffering exists, why isn’t our God more empathetic? If pleasure and happiness exists, why isn’t our God more philanthropic? God doesn’t even possess the qualities of a good friend let alone all-powerful being worthy of worship. I won’t believe in a God until there is one worth believing in.

Today's Track:
Junior Boys - Dull To Pause

Peace And Prosperity Through Inequality

2009-03-10T20:54:00.000-07:00

I believe we are not created equal. I also assure you that this is not pretext to my advocating sexism, racism and the like. However, I believe we can achieve true peace and prosperity through accepting our inherent inequalities.

Consider this: The familiar and perennial statement, “A woman can do anything a man can do” (or vice versa) it is quite simply misleading. While at its core, it’s true that there are no tasks strictly exclusive to either gender this isn’t to suggest males and females are equal. I feel that there is a significant distinction that has been neglected and that is between learned capability and inherent capability. Thus, while equality can be achieved, we are not all born equal.

A quick observation of bodybuilders is evidence of this theory in practice. As traditional hunters and bread-winners, males have always prided themselves on their physical prowess. There is no doubt that this is a historically male-dominated arena but women have shown that it is still possible to hoist heavy objects above their heads even without a set of male genitalia. Although you will discover that this is not entirely true. For females, acquiring physical strength quite obviously comes at the cost sexual identity. This should not be surprising considering having hormones such as testosterone is ideal for bodybuilding. Also, female bodybuilders will find that their masculine frame will render them infertile which essentially makes them men without the male plumbing. To put it more succinctly, embodying a male in order to complete a stereotypically male task is totally missing the point. Alas, males and females are equally capable but not born equal. There are of course, many other examples and we are continuously learning about the role that gender plays in terms of inheriting/treating maladies and diseases.

The days of being born equal have disappeared. As science marches forward, more and more evidence is uncovered that shows we are not all ‘blank slates’ at birth. While our genes can not fully dictate our fate, they still have an influence over it. Modern day genomics can identify markers that infer susceptibility to cancers and heart disease. These are the physical attributes that change predictably in accordance to gender and race. We will find our genes are not only limited to predicting our physical health, but also mental and emotional health. It is only inevitable that like with disease, the chances of inheriting these qualities will not be equally distributed among us. Maybe then we can ask the questions that are truly pertinent to true acceptance. Such as, “Am I insensitive because I’m a guy?” or “Am I horrible at basketball because I’m Asian?” etc. Of course to reiterate, this information will not cement our futures but merely enlighten ourselves to our own ‘preloaded’ strengths and weaknesses.

Today's Track:
Mr. Scruff - This Way

Love Is A Lie

2009-02-26T21:29:00.000-08:00

I don't believe in love. Well, not the everyday conception of love anyway.

Everybody is in pursuit of "love", but that's not what they really want. Why? Because real love is everywhere. Love is just an emotional attachment to something. There's nothing mysterious about that. Love is just a feeling and I believe it's a feeling you'll share with many people in your life.

I can say this because I've fallen in love before but I'm not certain I've ever fallen out. Do you think it's possible to un-love somebody? I'm not sure but I do know that love isn't what tore my relationships apart. It was just plain ol' compatibility. I think everybody just needs to come to the realization that sometimes, love just doesn't cut it. You can make romantic cliches about loving every molecule or every invisible gram of somebody's soul but love isn't what keeps people together. Love is just a feeling. I've learned that is possible to care deeply about somebody but still not get along with them and I'm certain that there's people who can relate.

Passion is overrated. Every woman melts at the idea of being taken into the arms of a passionate man but what is passion but forceful love? Being passionate is a feeling and feelings mean nothing. A feeling is not a pass-time. A feeling is not a moral value. A feeling is not an opinion. A feeling can't tell jokes. A feeling won't accompany you to the ballet. A feeling is just a feeling. In the end, the only thing that can keep two people together is how they get along, not how they they feel about each other. Feelings may grow sour when you find out you don't get along but not the other way around.

So what does all this mean? It means we need to learn to be truthful to ourselves. We're not searching for 'love', none of us are. Most of you have already found it and threw it back. Who cares about love? We're just searching for the right person for us. The realization then, is that the person you end up with might not be the one who loves you most but just the person you can stand to be with the most.

More Proof?
Love should be an independent feeling but it's not. We associate it with how we get along. We demean love that is unrequited, like it is of lesser quality, but who is to say it isn't real?
Take a look at the different situations below:
Love + Love = True love
Love + Growing Love = Romantic/Puppy Love
Love + No Love = Unrequited Love
Love + Never Love = Insane Love
Is love only validated if it is returned?

Conclusion:
Love is a lie. It's not a magical, selfless thing. Love is selfish because the love we're searching for is for ourselves. We not only want to be loved, we want to be loved the way we want to be loved.

Today's Track:
Smashing Pumpkins - 1979

Brainfart - Worthless Turn Ons

2009-02-16T18:23:00.000-08:00

Girls love themselves a Man's man. Girls love to feel sheltered and protected. "I need a man that's big and protective" they say.
Well I'm confused.
We're all grown-ups and this is 2009. Remind me again why anybody should need to protect you? Are we in the school yard? are you rich and famous? are we cavemen? are you a fugitive? what the hell aren't you telling me?! if you do in fact run into trouble...are we all of a sudden going to settle it with a duel?
That is a completely worthless trait.

I am a lover not a fighter.
hahaha.

Today's track:
Taihiti 80 - 1000 times

My Desk

2009-02-04T14:27:00.000-08:00

=/ My thumbnails are all fuzzy and whack. Too lazy to fix it. So here it is, my desk. As requested from Yuk. Yes, I admit my desk is not usually this neat. Although all I really did was put some loose papers away. I know my pictures are blurry, I can't take pictures. Do you see anything interesting? My video games, TV and computer are all in one place. I pretty much live at my desk. There's no real personal touches. Why? Because I sort of like the minimalism of it? And also because I know once I start with little things here and there, I'll start accumulating loads of knick-knacks that I won't know what to do with.

I suppose this is where I tag somebody...so, you're it! Yes, you. =p

Today's track:
K-OS - 4 3 2 1

Brainfart: Pet Peeves of Public Restrooms

2009-02-03T13:43:00.000-08:00

First things first, I'm not a germaphobe nor do I have OCD. I trust I won't be alone when I say that I can really appreciate a well thought out restroom. Now why is this worth blogging about? Quite frankly, it probably isn't =p but I've been uninspired lately so amuse me. Now on to some pet peeves...

The Inadvertent and Inevitable Sink Scrubber - I just don't understand how it happens but don't you hate it when you go to wash your hands and the end of the faucet hangs just over the edge of the sink? To the point where the only way you can get water on your hands is when your hands are literally rubbing up against the inside of the sink? How does that happen? Who designs these sinks? Are they purposely chosen so that the people who use them also end up cleaning them?

The Pointless Two Hand Wash - You know what really pisses me off? Those damned faucets where you have to have a hand on it for it to run. It doesn't make any sense. It means you can only wash one hand at a time and when you go to wash your other hand, you end up putting your clean hand back onto the dirty faucet. So what's the point?!

The Splashing Sink - You know when sometimes you go to some nice places with contemporary decor that is totally not functional? Y'know, the sink that is visually quite interesting but in reality just funnels water on to your crotch? Yeah, those suck.

The Glacier Melt - The water comes out at one temperature setting only. Liquid ice. Why? I suspect it saves money 2-fold. 1, saves on hot water. 2, people run the taps a lot shorter. Maybe there's a third - they won't be back.

The Warm Breath - I'm all for saving trees and using less paper towels but if you're not going to offer towels, please offer a better alternative than a machine that simulates people breathing on your hands.

The Wet Button - The only thing worse than bad hand-dryers are the kind that are button operated. They have that disgusting wet button, it's so dirty. I swear I'm not OCD.

The Neighborly Urinals - I'm certain that there's an established standard regarding how close urinals can be next to each other. There must be, because if I'm at the urinal and your leg is touching mine, that is too damn close! There's no point putting urinals that close together. There must be a one urinal buffer between each person, unless there is a divider between the urinals.

Okay, I could keep going but enough...haha

Today's track:
Birdy Nam Nam - Red Dawn Rising

Brainfart: On New Years

2009-01-26T15:00:00.000-08:00

It's funny how New Years coincide with reflection and resolutions. Your past follows you wherever you go yet it only matters when the January comes back around again. There's no better time for resolutions than the present yet we hold off until the New Year. I really don't know what I'm trying to say. I suppose my point is that we needn't rely on a calendar to tell us when our new year should start. You're capable of starting new everyday of the year.

Today's Track:
Mario - How Do I Breathe

Baptism

2009-01-18T13:19:00.000-08:00

Alone I stand.
Staring toward the heavens.
Repenting my sins.
Desperately in search of a sign.
Waiting for the rain to cleanse me.
Waiting for your love to bathe me.
And I will start anew.

Today's track:
Sarah McLachlan - Ice Cream

Brainfart - Contemporary Christmas Music

2008-12-17T12:55:00.000-08:00

It's that time of the year again, which means being subjected to a constant barrage of Christmas diddies 24/7 until boxing day arrives. I admit it becomes more tolerable and fitting as the decorations go up and Christmas day approaches but what really irks me are these contemporary Christmas songs. It seems as if every Britney and Jonas nobody has tried their hand at producing a 'classic' Christmas tune. Contemporary Christmas songs suck. I know there have been a few relatively new Christmas songs that have since made regular appearances in the 'classics' playlist but the only good thing about Christmas songs (in my opinion) is that they are familiar and written in a different era. Good Christmas music is about family, friends and doing shit you've never seen anybody do, like caroling, sleigh riding and roasting chestnuts on an open fire. Christmas music should soothe the soul, it should be jazzy, classical, transport you back in time or take you to a parallel universe where everything is somehow perfect. No matter what my taste in music is during the year, all I want during Christmas are those slow, orchestral ballads. Don't give me any of this new dance-club, teeny-bopper crap.

I don't know why artists even write new songs for Christmas. Why release a song that is only applicable a few weeks during the year? Just cut out the Christmas references and you might actually have a song that doesn't make me want to shoot the Christmas spirit in the face. I think it must be due to the low standards of Christmas music in general or just taking advantage of the occasion. As long as you mention 'Christmas' you're bound to get some air time. To me, it's the same as writing a Christian song about Jesus. Why waste your time? There's nothing worse than hearing to a love song on the radio only to find out it's about Jesus. "...you saved me when I met you / you make me a better person / I love you / O Lord you feel so good inside of me / Jesus, you make all the choir boys give you their "O" face..." That is so fucking gay. It just screams exploitation. Just make up some crap pseudo power ballad, throw in some Jesus shouts then sit back and watch as the brainless Bible freaks shell out their hard earned cash trying to reserve a seat for the big party upstairs. What a load of horse dung. Forget Christmas or Jesus, if you're going to write a love song, write a love song. Good music will transcend time, bad artists try to cheat the system by adding Christmas/Jesus references.

Today's track:
Bing Crosby - The Christmas Song

Making Babies

2008-12-09T21:44:00.000-08:00

You know what I find interesting? That we have so many deterrents, punishments and preventative measures to combat killing and death but none in regards to creating life. We revere and preserve life with such unrelenting opposition that we even debate and shun the use of euthanasia without exception. So now we find ourselves in a world where terminal patients in hospitals can do nothing but wait and suffer until their last day arrives yet people like Rajo Devi at the ripe old age of 70 are permitted to reproduce. Like with all the issues surrounding the morality and ethics of abortion, the problem I find is that people don't believe there are any negative connotations to life. I believe there should definitely be more emphasis on the detriments of introducing new life. There should be laws that prevent people like Devi from having children. Septuagenarians could not possibly possess the resources required for good parenting. It is astonishing to me the level of delusional selfishness it must take to bring a life into this world when it's pretty much your time to leave. I don't see a babies as cute little fleshy packages of life, hope and wonder. All I see is time, money and responsibility. How can anybody be pro-life if any one of those things are in question? Unless you are personally willing to take home a ownerless child then it is as good as dead to me. Forcing persistence of life regardless of circumstances is illogical. Unborn and otherwise aborted children become orphans and statistically unproductive or destructive members of society. Dying patients become emotional and financial burdens. Life is not what occurs between heartbeats but rather should be qualified by the day to day. If we really did revere life, we would only allow it to exist in the best of terms but we don't. Even heartless and mindless bacteria multiply only if the conditions are right. Why is it then that we allow teenagers, poverty-stricken couples and couples on the brink of death to reproduce? Although I realize it would be ambitious to suggest that all unqualified individuals should refrain from bumping uglies, there should be more focus on these issues. I believe this is a very conceivable future. In the future, people will cease to reproduce the conventional way and will instead choose ectogenesis, gestation outside the body. Not only will this process finally relieve females of their child-bearing responsibilities and offer them the freedom that accompanies it, it will greatly reduce birth defect rates and improve overall health. Potential parents vying for ectogenic babies will have to pass screening tests to ensure a good upbringing. Humans are way beyond just reproducing for the sake of propagating the species. I believe in an age of depleting resources and overpopulation our goal should focus more on improving the overall quality of life and not just defending it.

Today's track:
Sa DingDing - Lagu Lagu

True Happiness

2008-12-02T22:55:00.000-08:00

Do you buy into the cliché, "it's better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all"? I don’t. Do you believe that there are levels of happiness? For example, is a child enjoying a popsicle stick anymore happy than you are on your payday or vice versa? Does a more comprehensive grasp of the world around you and education improve the quality of your happiness? How could you be aware of what you’re missing if you never had it? Obviously, whoever coined that phrase about love had experienced it, you couldn’t make that comparison otherwise. However, I believe that a smile is a smile and a laugh is a laugh. Happiness does not improve with age or love, it just is. You cannot miss something you never had and you’re not worse off if you never get it. Happiness is Boolean, it’s either you are or you aren’t. I would even contend that happiness is more pure when you are younger. I want to be a child again. I want to be happy to see fresh snow or a new box of crayons. I want to be happy sneaking a sip of cola. I want to be happy jumping on the couch. If anything, time has done nothing but dilute my happiness. You don’t see children searching for happiness, it just follows them around. On the other hand, all the adults find themselves in this life quest for said elusive happiness. We’re looking at our jobs, through the pages of self-help books and in our wallets for the same happiness that resided in an empty cardboard box. Maybe the only thing that’s keeping us from true happiness is some brain trauma. Who needs this adult stuff anyways? I don’t want to grow up, I’m a Toys’r’Us kid.

Today's track:
Rooney - When Did Your Heart Go Missing?

Brainfart - Die! Die! Die!

2008-11-27T15:00:00.000-08:00

There's a particular Calvin and Hobbes strip that I really like. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the picture for it but this is how it goes:
A grumpy Calvin is waiting at the bus stop for school in the pouring rain and is thinking to himself, "I wish I was dead". In the second panel he has a change of heart, obviously he doesn't really want to be dead. The last panel shows Calvin with a new deviously brilliant thought, "I wish everyone else was dead".

It's funny how depressing things can get before you get suicidal. Everyone has those bad days when they might consider fellating the business end of a shotgun. Truth is, no matter how bad things are, you'd still have way more to lose before suicide would actually become a reasonable option. Besides, taking it out on yourself is the wrong way to go. You know what would really be therapeutic? Kicking a puppy in the face. Sadness leads to frustration leads to anger leads to breaking things (preferable living things or things of value).

Which leads me to my new business venture. Who wants to invest in a gun range? Not real guns, maybe like rubber bullet, bean bag, tennis ball guns. The only difference is at this range you pay a fee to shoot some guy running around like a headless chicken in a suit. Or instead of shooting, you could just pelt him with glassware. It's like those games at the CNE where you throw balls at plates except in this instance, you're throwing plates at the guy. God dammit that would be so much more satisfying. Who needs prizes when you can just throw plates at people?

Today's track:
John Mayer - Dreaming With A Broken Heart

What is life without religion?

2008-11-18T00:43:00.000-08:00

A question posed to me in the comments of the last post.

Is there a purpose to life without a God?
If we’re all running a race where only death awaits us, why not just stop now while we’re ahead?
These are all important and legitimate questions. I, as an Atheist and a regular Joe, dare not claim to be a prolific philosopher but do humbly offer my own answers (or in the worst case scenario offer questions for you to find your own).

It only takes one gaze towards the sky for us to realize just how small and insignificant we are in the grand scheme of things. We are to the universe like a grain of sand is to the beach. Human-kind’s existence on earth for ~200,000 years (or ~6,000 for Christians) is but a blip in the cosmic timeline. The earth has been inhabited by billions upon billions of species and life-forms that have come and gone before us. When the time comes for us leave this world, our existence like theirs will be next to negligible. The earth will continue spinning as it has done for billions of years and billions more. It may sound bleak but it is the truth that we live. What religion offers is a way out of this cycle of hopelessness. In death, we are reborn as immortals in a better world (of course to those who deserve it). Religion brings both a purpose to the life we’re living now and to one we will have after death.

It all sounds fine and dandy but the trouble I have with religion interestingly enough, is with the rewards it proposes of offer. Personally, I believe that religion and the belief in a heaven/hell and afterlife cheapens everything about the life we’re living right now. Religion is not necessary for a fulfilling life. Our motivation to live and prosper should not rest on a system of rewards and punishment; it should be genuine and intrinsic. What is more motivating and purposeful than living life expecting nothing in return when we die? I believe it would be arrogant for us to think we were entitled to enter a place like heaven if it did indeed exist. What’s more troubling is just the general idea of heaven. If such a place existed, would you even want to be there? Anything and everything that is worth living for is right here on earth and incidentally, also a sin. Given the Bible, I presume that in heaven there is no pride, envy, gluttony, lust, anger, greed or sloth. Perhaps heaven is God’s sweatshop, where we gladly work without complaining. Christians may believe there is a spiritual level of peace and happiness that transcends all the joys we find on earth but that seems like a cop out to me. That’s the thing about heaven; no one knows what it is or what people do there. Heaven is just some place dead people go and are somehow happy. How does it all work exactly? Do we just rise out of our bodies and turn into glowing orbs of thought? Or do we become thoughtless and forever euphoric, like in a permanent orgasm? People take it on blind faith that religion will handle all their problems in the end and that is the problem.

Religion is used to propagate the notion that having faith is a noble trait and quite frankly, it isn’t. In fact, religion is the only exception to this. In any other circumstance, having blind faith would be ridiculed and scoffed at. To plainly accept what is told to you without any evidence is truly ignorant. Critical thinking and skepticism is the foundation of modern technology and society. This computer that I’m using does not run on Jesus. The planes in the sky do not fly because we pray that they do not fall. How can you teach your children to not be gullible to idiotic claims yet at the same time be swindled of their common sense in the name of the Bible? There is no consistency to the Bible. There are people who believe in the literal truth of the Bible, word for word (the world and everything as we know it was created in 6 days, the story of Adam and Eve, Noah’s ark, Moses, the earth is ~6000 years old, dinosaurs were put on earth by the Devil to test our faith, crazy shit like that). I know there are more rational people who don’t believe in these things but nonetheless are still Christians. They may argue that not everything in the Bible should be taken literally but then that opens a whole new can of worms. The Bible is supposed to be the book of truths. If we start hand-picking what is real or not then who has the authority to do so and who is to say it isn’t just all lies? When you’re going so far as to claim the Bible as your guidebook to life, you simply can not acknowledge some of it and ignore the rest. While the idea of being a person of faith may seem romantic, it is not realistic.

Being Atheist is not about shunning religion but more about reserving judgment in respect for the truth. Humans do not have all the answers and probably never will but one thing is certain: religion poses more questions than it answers. Religion is a setback to humanity and civilization. Every major scientific discovery has been met and opposed by religion. There was a point in time when three letters, G-O-D was used to explain anything beyond our current knowledge. Why the sun came up in the morning, why the moon rose at night, why people are born and why people die. Over the years, science has proved that the sun does not orbit the earth and that the earth is much, much older than the Bible proposes. To say God is responsible for everything is not a simple answer. God can not be the ultimate answer because we are then left to reason why and how God exists. However, science strives to reach an ultimate answer, the theory of everything. Science is ever-changing and can be written and re-written. Conversely, religion promotes narrow-mindedness and is limited to the Bible; its view on the evolving world is forever static. In this day and age, G-O-D just doesn’t cut it.

The human mind is a beautiful thing. Atheists may demand evidence but they do not need to be physical. We as humans have only been given 5 senses in order to perceive the world around us but we continue to develop new tools to enhance our ‘sight’. We have the unique ability to project ourselves outside our bodies and view things in different perspectives. There are ways of proving things that we can not see. Billions of dollars were invested into the Large Hadron Collider in order to test high-energy physics and theories of dark matter and dark energy that can neither be seen nor felt. The force of gravity that affects us everyday is not visible yet there is evidence for it all around us. Science provides answers by reaching farther than our senses allow while religion provides answers by reaching back into its own empty pockets.

Hope, motivation and the will to live should not be something you rest on the shoulders of myths and fairy tales. I find that there is more than enough motivation in all of life’s challenges, accomplishments, kinships, friendships and companionships, amongst other distinctively earthly experiences. Instead of throwing ourselves into the invisible arms of cosmic beings maybe we should look to make a habit of relying on each other. My religion is made up of you and me. Although I do not possess the power to answer all your prayers, I guarantee I will have the same success rate as God and unlike God, they will not fall on deaf ears. If you still don’t believe in the powers of humanity, I offer you this: I believe that being non-Christian is more Christian than being Christian. Only I can say I have no expectations from my good deeds. I’m not good because I believe in a heaven; I’m good simply because I am.

Today's track:
Architecture in Helsinki - Heart it Races

Faith and Scientology

2008-11-13T14:16:00.000-08:00

Mocking Scientology is too easy, so I won't. Instead, I'm going to reason why you shouldn't either (well, most of you) and here's why.

Personally, I find it interesting how easy it is for everyday, self-professing "tolerant" people to bash other people's faith in Scientology without so much as a word of debate from their conscience. To me it proves that, like it or not, we are all guilty of being intolerant bigots. Not only are we intolerant, we are openly intolerant. I believe this is a reflection of both good and bad social behaviors.

Bad news first. No matter what the consensus is about the legitimacy or credibility of Scientology, it is a belief like any other and we've all been told before to respect them. For us to tolerate intolerance is to have herd mentality. We've all just accepted that hating on scientologists is the social norm. The irony is that most of you should know better. I think many of you (bible readers) should be aware of the phrase "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", which couldn't be more adequate. All you have to do is substitute 'sin' with 'faith'. It is absolute hypocrisy for a person of faith to slander someone else's. Honestly, what's the difference between believing in some big-headed alien God named Xenu and some eye-in-the-sky Christian God? The correct answer is about 2000 years, nothing more. This is an example of people having total disregard in critical thinking. Those whom are without mirrors should never mock other's appearances or people in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks. Supernatual is super-natural. If you're going to make stuff up it doesn't matter how fanciful you decide to get. If there's no evidence for any of it, who cares what "God" is?

The good news? Well, there is a glimmer of hope. If we can all recognize how absurd Scientology is, I'm optimistic that we can conclude the same about any other religion. If it wasn't so hypocritical, it would be great that people find Scientology an insult to their intelligence. It shows that we do value the truth and are capable of calling out nonsense for what it is. Now all you have to do is grab that mirror.

Today's track:
Claude Kelly - Disguised Devil

The Glow of Pregnancy

2008-11-10T14:14:00.000-08:00

It is often said that there is nothing more beautiful than life and the givers of life, expectant mothers. They glow with the wonder and pride of being the carriers of little happy packages. But is it just me, or do pregnant mothers serve as nothing but walking public reminders of their past sexual congress? Am I the only one who believes that pregnant women are abhorrently off-putting? In the face of a pregnant woman, I am forced to reconcile with the fact that there are presumably lifeforms on this planet actually willing to procreate with them. Not only that, women who are pregnant for some reason believe that getting knocked up is a free ticket to the town of indiscreets-ville. Nothing is sacred when you are pregnant. No one needs to know how hard and long you and your husband "tried" to have a baby, that is so goddamn inappropriate. The fact that you are pregnant makes it that much harder for me to imagine that you have the anatomy of a cabbage patch doll and I don't need to have any more contradictory evidence. No one needs to know how sensitive and/or gassy you feel. As far as I'm concerned, if there ever was an anti-glow, pregnant women are it. A blackhole, if you will. Besides, babies are nothing but glorified slugs, just disgusting amorphous blobs of flesh. A human child is the most pathetic example of life there is on the planet. Humans may be the most powerful species to walk the earth yet they are born into the world the most helpless. Every birth is a miracle because that's what it must take for a mother to love her child.

Today's track:
Jay-Z vs. Coldplay - Public Speeding

The Tech Gap

2008-11-06T16:27:00.000-08:00

If you aren't already aware of the ever-developing story of Brandon Crisp, it has been gaining national exposure. In brief, it begins with video games and then ends in death. Although some of you may find that account an offensively loose interpretation, my belief is that this is the way most see it anyways. The real story to me is that every time a tragedy occurs involving youth these days, media or video games are automatically marked as the culprit. Brandon Crisp was indeed a gamer and his fix, Call of Duty 4. When his parents observed that his academics and social life were suffering they confiscated his Xbox. Infuriated, Brandon threatened to leave and his father even helped pack his bags in an attempt to call his bluff. Three long weeks after the dispute, the teen was discovered dead in a bush not far from home.

I wonder though, how did it come to this? So far all fingers point towards the evils of addictive gaming and it producing unruly children. My problem with this sentiment is that it is misleading. There is no such thing as addictive gaming. Playing video games and computers online is not a drug. You don’t buy them in dodgey alleyways and you don’t do them in the restroom. Instead, I blame the parents and I blame the tech gap.

Whenever you hear about video games in the news they are always presented by old farts that are out-of-touch. In the last 50 years, technology has driven and changed the world. The problem is that while the younger generation embraces this change, the older generation is oblivious to it. There is a lack of understanding to say the least and parents nowadays are much too lenient. It is your responsibility as a parent to monitor and moderate your child. Call of Duty for example, is a rated M game for mature audiences aged 17 and up. How did it end up in the hands of a 15-year-old? Surely the parents had a hand in making that purchase and if not, were still aware of its existence in the household. Even if you make the executive decision to allow your kid to play the game, it’s still on you to discipline them. I’m not talking about attempting to confiscate an Xbox after the kid has logged 100+ hours in the game. I’m talking about discipline. I’m talking about hard rules. Not groundings or punishments, rules. Old folks don’t understand what they are even dealing with. What does it mean to play a game online? What is the appeal of MSN, Facebook, Second Life or WoW? Once you start seeing technology as “gadgets” and “doo-hickeys” you’ve already lost the battle. Today’s parents need to keep in touch with their children. Twenty years ago you may have shared interests by sitting around the TV as a family. Perhaps now you have to be open to gathering around the computer or Xbox.

The media has a way of spinning gamers as loners. They make it seem like video games are all made to be played in small, dark, closed-quarters, secretly hidden away from civilization. But I got news for you; kids don’t hide video games underneath their mattresses and sock drawers. Kids don’t sneak off to the park for a toke or to the can for a line. They are sitting right there at home in the family room or in their bedroom. Parents see this and blame the games. Well the way I see it, I blame the parents.

Today's track:
Dave Hollister - Take Care of Home

The Beautiful People

2008-11-04T10:17:00.000-08:00

Being human is about the constant struggle between barbarism and civility. We humans are semi-evolved, just a step on the ladder between apes and gods. Self-righteous brains trapped in a prison of flesh and bone. We are held hostage by our conflicting interests. The problem is that we all think one way but act another. We were raised to value personality traits such as intellect, assertiveness, and conscientiousness, those that cannot be qualified physically but at the same time we idolize the beautiful. We’re told not to judge a book by its cover but we are constantly preening ourselves in order to make a good first impression. Those of us who aren’t beautiful are reminded that it is only “skin-deep”, nevertheless finding ourselves on the outside wistfully looking in. Vanity is a cardinal sin yet we persist to live in a world that is not only ignorant to it but indulges it. I believe that unless we shed our skin, we will forever be shackled to our carnal urges. Until then, beauty and being beautiful does have some importance.

Firstly, beauty in itself is something uniquely human. Nothing on this earth is beautiful unless we impose it. In this sense, beauty really is “in the eye of the beholder”. However, this statement is generally used to combat discrimination and up heave the self-esteems of the visibly deprived. Although beauty is regarded as subjective, I believe most of the time there is a general consensus. There is a line dividing this world and that is between the eye candy and the eye sores. The truth is that beautiful people live better lives. We live by these double standards everyday.

Beautiful people can garner attention from across the room without ever the need to lose sleep contriving anecdotes. Beautiful people can stare straight at strangers in the subway and instead of having to dodge allegations of being perverse, instill confidence and vivaciousness in their subjects. Beautiful people are respected without having to provide any credence. This is the world we live in and we are to blame. Being beautiful attributes nothing but drawing lucky in the genetic lottery yet we still flock like the animals that we are. I say leave chaste to the gods - to sin is to be human.

Today's track:
Ghosthustler - Someone else's ride

The platonic friend

2008-10-30T23:59:00.000-07:00

Male/Female relationships are always a hard thing to define. Things always get sticky when you try to put opposing sexes together (that's what she said). If you’re a woman looking for a platonic relationship with a heterosexual male, good luck. I believe there is no such thing. Let me drop some knowledge on you. Males have two types of girl-friends: girls they want to copulate with and girls they don’t want to copulate with. If you’re a woman right now thinking I got it all wrong and you have a strictly platonic male friend, congratulations!, you belong in the former category. For girls who fall into the latter category, a male probably wouldn’t give you the time of day. Not that it’s anything personal but time is money and quite frankly, us guys are looking to get the most out of our investment. Girls view relationships as this spiritual entity that lives, breathes and is fed on feelings and companionship. Women have places in their heart to love men they do not wish to be ‘involved’ with. Conversely, a man’s heart does not have the capacity to care for women they are not involved with, some would say barely enough for the woman they are involved with. There is no man that is content with being a platonic friend. Just men that are frustrated and resentful that they aren’t being taken more seriously.

If you’re a woman who doesn’t identify with being in a relationship with a male but has a or a few good male ‘friend/s’, here are some signs that tell you that you are in a relationship.

- If you and your ‘friend’ meet up one-on-one without any explicit terms of engagement: you are in a relationship. – A ‘friend’ is someone you do stuff with. You go see a movie, shopping, eat some dinner, the point is that there is an event that focuses the engagement. If you take the event out of the equation, all you got is what married couples do which is nothing. Married couples are in relationships.

- If you and your ‘friend’ meet up one-on-one with explicit terms of engagement: you are in a relationship. – Do you know why people always ask “So who else is going?” whenever you ask anybody to go out? It’s because you truly are their friend and they would like to spend time with you as well as all their other friends. If you ask somebody to go out and it isn’t followed-up with that question, then it means you actually warrant to be allotted one-on-one time. This brings me back to my time is money statement. Males don’t give away time willy-nilly.

- If you are in possession of any mementos from your ‘friend’: you are in a relationship – I know I said time is money but do you know what else is money? Money. If a guy is spending money on you, you had better know he’s buying his share of your stocks. A memento is basically the most direct way a guy can express his intentions. A memento requires not only time and money but what all men find in dearth, effort and consideration. Look around, you see all that crap you got? Those are stocks for your crotch.

I’m sure there are plenty more situations I could address but I’m sure this already narrows it down enough. The simple matter of the fact is that only naïve women believe that all the men in their lives are asexual. They may be either homosexual men or bisexual men but never ever consider them asexual. There really isn’t much justification to do any favors for any woman unless there is something expected in return. You all know how the old adage goes: Do onto others as you would like done onto you. It-is-that-simple.

Today's track:
Samantha James - Rain

Brainfart - What Women Truly Are

2008-10-28T17:38:00.000-07:00

It doesn’t matter what kind of woman you are the rest of the year, conservative, liberal, feminist or activist, what’s certain is the only kind that wake up Halloween morning; tramps. Just goes to show you that as soon as it becomes socially acceptable for a woman to look like a sexual deviant without any repercussions, she would, and with jubilant enthusiasm at that. Halloween is the only night women confidently head out leaving their dignity (and the majority of their clothing) at the door. Halloween brings out every woman’s inner exhibitionist and is proof positive that they always understate and under-represent their true freak. Why is it fun for women to become something that they regularly gossip and condemn others for being behind their backs? Hypocrites.

Remember, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

Today's Track:
Lily Allen - Who'd Of Known

Yes means Yes and No means NOW

2008-10-22T02:28:00.000-07:00

There is a common misconception about women and that is that they are complicated. I’d like to point out that this is untrue, women are not complicated, they are just confusing as hell. Unlike men who are typically apathetic and indifferent, women are constantly sending out signals and trying to interpret them whether or not they exist. Women are like those old ‘magic eye’ pictures. The only way you can make any sense of them is if you stand back far enough and stare straight through the initial mess of information. Somewhere in that hodgepodge of seemingly randomly strung together words and gestures there is a point. Not everyone can see it and it might take some a whole afternoon but it’s there somewhere.

Anyways, my point is that with all this signal pollution, there are some that you (more importantly, I) need to get straight. These are the mating signals. You may be well aware of the basic displays of interest: leaning forward, mirroring actions, hair tossing, gentle touching etc. But these are severe oversimplifications of a very complex and involved process (which needn’t be). Being bombarded with all these signals, a guy is constantly calibrating his likability gauge. The real revelation is that even the most disinterested girl may be sending out this distress: ‘rape me now’ and waiting for you to cash in. Yes, I said it and girls, you know it. Through my experience, I am thoroughly convinced that all women just want to be raped. Okay, to be less blunt and crude, ravaged. Sure women complain about being objectified and degraded by men but they are all for it if it’s the right man. For the right man, she'll be anything you want her to be and that man just might be you. She might be shying away, brushing off your hands and swiftly avoiding your advances but what she’s really waiting for you to do is to wrangle her down like a wild horse and ride her like your jockeying for the Kentucky Derby - one hand clutching her mane, one hand whipping her insane. If that scene took place in front of a fireplace on a bearskin rug, I’m sure I’d be describing every woman’s fantasy and that it's in every sleazy romantic novel ever written.

The real dilemma has nothing to do with a man’s capability. Every red-blooded male would carry that out. The issue is with the logistics. Here’s why it won’t work: From a female perspective - The pro: getting raped is awesome. The con: actually getting raped. From the male perspective – The pro: consensual rape is awesome. The con: actually committing rape. If you ask me, the cons clearly outweigh the pros. If any of you girls actually got to live out this fantasy with a guy ballsy enough to act on it, maybe you should reevaluate what it actually means. The guy is either hypersensitive to your needs or just a rapist.

And that my friends, is why nice guys come in last.

Today's track:
Kleerup ft. Lykke Li - Until We Bleed

Let The Rats Roam Free!

2008-10-16T23:17:00.000-07:00

Recently, news outlets in Toronto have been circulating the latest developments of health infractions dealing with vermin infestations in Chinatown. While this news only serves to cement the truth in our collective speculation that we had all along, I’m going to take this opportunity to play devil’s advocate. To be clear, I’ll be in no way advocating that Chinese restaurants serve food à la Ratatouille, rather I’ll be trying to quell the fears of the public for their future Asian culinary endeavors. In the midst of all the recent activity involving tainted meat and milk, food safety is indeed the hot topic. Certainly, any bacteria that causes death has no place anywhere near consumables. However, I will provide you with this bit of insight. In this new culture full of antiseptics and antibiotics, are we all becoming ‘bubble boys’? I think there’s no harm in getting a stomach flu or food poisoning every once in a while. Rat feces, maggots or pig toenails, I’m sure we’ve all had our fair share in our lifetime regardless of how sanitary you think you’ve been. None of us live in a sterile world. Realistically, we never will. We are currently in an arms race with nature. We vaccinate and sterilize while bugs mutate to become immune. We use all this technology to do things that miraculously our body does on its own. If we expose ourselves we have the ability to become immune yet we choose to live in a bubble. The new generation lives in this bubble and it makes its inhabitants fragile. So I guess my point is maybe having a bit of rat for dinner could be a good thing. Bon appetite!

Today's track:
Tony! Toni! Tone! - Lay Your Head On My Pillow

going old school again. =p

Quarter-Life Crisis

2008-10-15T22:44:00.000-07:00

I think I'm going through a quarter-life crisis. I'm starting to adopt hobbies and interests that are neither here nor there but somehow I've convinced myself that I'm being productive. What constitutes a productive activity anyways? By measure of monetary gain? Educational value? Sure, I could do something universally regarded as intelligible like reading a book but where is the value in that? Hypothetically, if it takes me 8 hours to read a Harry Potter novel, is that any more productive than watching a half-hour episode of The Hills on MTV (for the record, I would do neither)? Personally, I would argue that reading Harry Potter is the bigger waste of time and aside from gaining exposure to pop-culture to which The Hills also provides, albeit decidedly more irrelevant, at least I save 7.5 hours. In any case, I think it really depends on the content and not on the medium. Maybe I can be productive sitting in front of the TV for hours if it's non-fiction or documentary. Of course I'm not referring to what is known as 'reality' TV but something along the lines of Discovery programming. Maybe I can be more productive reading the facebook status updates over the last month rather than the lastest installment of melodramatic pandering by Mitch Albom. This is how I spend my time not being productive, trying to justify the time I spent as being productive. There's only so many waking hours in a day and I'm starting to feel like my days are shrinking more and more. I find myself wondering how I can make the most of my 'free' time and invest in activities that have some kind of positive outcome other than just entertainment value.

Today's track:
Shanice - I Love Your Smile

Haha, old school.

Brainfart - Unicorn Media Bias

2008-10-11T01:34:00.000-07:00

What's so special about the Unicorn anyways? I think it's funny how the unicorn represents the epitome of beauty in the realms of mythical creatures. Unicorns are on TV and merchandise but what is a Unicorn really? A freaking white horse with a spike coming out of its head. I think it's sad that with all the possibilities and existing mash-ups of animals to choose from, the one we'd want most is a freaking horse with a horn. What about Pegasus? the Centaur? the Griffon? Y'know, the more interesting ones. C'mon, you put wings on anything and it would instantly be better than a Unicorn.

Today's track:
Xplicit ft. Pleasure P - I Want You

audio pr0n

The Uphill Battle

2008-10-07T21:33:00.000-07:00

I’m constantly in battle with my laziness. It’s annoying how it gets in the way of everything. I make short term goals, long term goals but somehow they are always thwarted by my nagging need to do nothing. There’s really nothing special about nothing. Anybody who’s anybody can do nothing, but nothing is just so good to do. I could do nothing in the morning and in the afternoon. I could do nothing in the evening, underneath the moon. I’m trying to learn how to be productive. It’s funny that no matter how stressful or unstressful my day at work is, the moment I get home I just want to unwind. I literally turn off. I don’t really play videogames because that’s too much effort reacting to stuff and mashing buttons. I don’t want to talk to anybody because I don’t want to think about shit to talk about. I just feel like plopping myself in front of the TV (internet TV on demand) and vegging out. Isn’t that just so freaking sad? It’s okay, you can say it. I’ve thought it to myself sometimes. Three or four hours into my TV marathon I’ll look at the clock and think Jesus, I could’ve been doing something more productive. And therein lies my problem. I’m perfectly aware of my laziness but I’m almost content with it. ALMOST.

Anyways, I’m gonna get started on a few projects. I’m too impatient of a person to work on “projects”. I tend to want things here and now. If waiting and effort are required, I have the ability to convince myself that I don’t need them. I suppose that could be a good thing or a bad thing. Hopefully sometime soon I’ll muster up the energy to produce something instead of just wasting away resources.

Bonus blog – Door etiquette

I’m not a saint or anything but I consider myself a gentleman. There are a few things however that I want to run through with the blogging public. So here’s the deal. When I approach a door, if there is a female directly behind me, I will generally (I say generally because I don’t always feel like being nice) open the door and let her through first. If there is a male behind me, I will generally hold the door but walk through first. These things I feel pretty comfortable with but there are a few grey areas that need to be addressed.

Scenario 1: The Tardy Gait Wait
I made the distinction of ‘directly’ behind me above because of this scenario. Sometimes when I approach a door, there’s somebody walking behind me but doesn’t walk fast enough to catch up or slow down out of my door holding radius. I put my door holding radius to about 4-5 steps from the door. When people are in this no man’s land it gets sorta awkward. It seems kinda jerky to not hold the door but I’m not about to stand there like a doorman for a stranger unless I’m getting tipped. People need to do one or the other. Speed up to catch the door or slow down so it doesn’t swing closed in your face.

Scenario 2: The Surprise Crowd
When approaching the door with a crowd of people behind me, I open the door, hold it for the next person and pass through confident that the favor will make its way to the end of the line. Sometimes though, there is the surprise crowd that comes out of no where. I open the door for someone to pass through then end up holding the door for a mass of people. In this situation what I usually do is wait for the next capable guy or guy with a girlfriend/wife or something to relieve myself of door holding duty. I figure there’s no harm in giving up my responsibility to someone else who should have it.

Scenario 3: The Vestibule Leapfrog
This is straightforward. If someone holds the door at a vestibule, you walk through and return the favor. But it really irks me on those few occasions when people just don’t get it.

Today’s track:
Janelle Monae – Metropolis

The Chinese Restaurant Conundrum

2008-10-05T14:30:00.000-07:00

If there's one thing that isn't lacking in Markham it's Chinese restaurants. In such a competitive marketplace, it's not surprising that countless of these places open and shut their doors within months. But what really baffles me is why? What the hell are these people thinking? All over town we have these dingy little shops serving mediocre food for admittedly thrifty prices but so is every other guy around. I honestly don't know what these owners are thinking. Why would you walk into a failed restaurant, put your name outside the door, serve the same old shit and expect anything less than failure? How does that saying go again? I think it was something like...CRAZY is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I mean, if you're going to do something, you MUST do it different. Something, ANYTHING. Serve hot pink tea, make Chinese happy meals that come with plastic toys you get from the dentist...whatever, something that makes you different from the next guy. If there isn't anything specifically special about what you provide, you're not going to produce a loyal consumer base. Thus, the people will come and then they will go.

I gave this a bit of thought and the only rational explanation I could come up with is that the majority of these places are just open for the purposes of money laundering. That would explain the apathy for sure. Otherwise there's way too many Chinese people with poor business sense out there.

Today's track:
Nomak - Sanctuary ft. Nas

Contemplating Infidelity

2008-09-29T19:59:00.000-07:00

Sometimes I dream up moral dilemmas because I think it's helps me to get to know myself as well as to be honest with myself. My latest quandary is with the issue of faithfulness. I know most of us would enter a committed relationship and fancy ourselves loyal, monogamous and faithful but I wonder how much of this is true faithfulness or just self-imposed nobility.

How many of us in committed relationships are really committed? How many of us have settled but have deluded ourselves into happiness? How many of us are opportunists, not actively looking to cheat but would fall victim to an unlikely scenario? Are we even obligated to stay faithful in such cases? Alternatively, is there a scenario where you would permit your partner to stray? And where does cheating begin anyways? Mind, body or soul?

Picture this:

Scenario 1 - You're a woman (wife or long-term relationship). You've been with your beau for years, no qualms or complications but not particularly happy either. He treats you well, gives you affection, tells you he loves you on a daily basis. Great house, great kids. The marriage is in good shape but otherwise lost some luster. You go to work one day and there's an attractive new employee that has (unknowing of your relationship status or against his better judgment) expressed his interest in you. Not that you ever doubted your husband when he told you but the compliments were nice to hear shed from a new set of lips. Now on to cheating. Would you not be at the very least enticed? If you forbade yourself from physically bedding the guy but indulged yourself to the fantasy, is that cheating? Is there a difference between fantasizing about fictional characters and real people?

Scenario 2 - You're a guy (husband or long-term relationship). Pretty much in the same romantic situation as above. Overall, everything is good but not great. An 'American Beauty' moment happens when your daughter's school friend (legal) comes over to tell/show you that you still got it. Same set of questions apply, what would you do?

(Okay, you can switch the genders around for either scenario. I was just catering to the gender stereotypes of compromising situations.)

So are you a cheat? So these situations are unlikely but that's not the point. The point is that somewhere out there, they happen and if they happened to you - what would you do? Is there a point where if your wife came home one night and said "I had sex with Brad Pitt" (I know he may not be everyone's first choice but nevertheless he's become the yard stick for these things.) you'd be okay with it?

Anyways, to answer my own question, I believe cheating begins at the heart/mind. Although I don't see anything wrong with a bit of fantasy from time to time, if you find yourself doing a little mental cut-and-paste with your bf/gf then I think it's time to reevaluate things. To say I would act valiantly and fend off my carnal urges in all conceivable scenarios maybe stretching it. However, I think it would be safe to say I would fair well in the eyes of most women. So maybe the commitment of most couples comes with an asterisk - I am committed unless in the event that...

Today's track:
Magnetic North - So Long

Asian raps. =p

Are Women Vampires?

2008-09-24T20:13:00.000-07:00

This topic will be sure to please.

Recently in conversation with friends, this question was brought up:

Do women fall for successful men or men with personality?

No brainer, all women want are wealthy men and I say wealthy because "successful" is just an implicit term women use to describe the wealthy men they wish to be with. No doubt personality is important but that's secondary. I see females getting their knickers in a knot over this statement but let me put it this way, society is based on this being fact. Women want successful men and there exists successful men simply for that reason. There's no shame in being shallow. To a woman, a man's worth is not some abstract subjective value that needs to be wrestled with, it is objective and it's in your bank account. The man is no better, because he runs the rat race with no other intent than for raising his chances for getting some. All the ephemeral moments and emotions in between are just by-products of the ultimate goal.

Let's do a case study:

"Jane Doe" says she's only interested in older men. Someone who, "is settled down, has his life together and mature".

Translation?

Again, these may seem like justified demands but women use these phrases as a ruse implying that they want a man who is not just settled down but settled down in his own place with his own shit. Settled down-edness is actually a function of material items - how convenient. When a woman says she wants a "mature" man, what she really means to say is "degenerate" and "castrated". How's that for personality? What kind of traits do women think makes a mature man? A woman will always say, "I want a man who understands me, treats me well, doesn't argue and isn't petty". Seeing that no man actually understands women, what that really means is that she wants a man who is apologetic and unconfrontational. A man whom in his youth had his self-respect so beaten and battered that it is no longer recognizable. In other words: a trainable doofus. Relationship "experience" teaches a man nothing but to shut up and behave.

So there you have it. Women are money-grubbing, blood-sucking, materialistic vampires that use sex as a weapon and turn men into zombies.

Q.E.D.

Yes, I'm feeling cynical today but I hope you enjoyed the ride.

Today's track:
Wouter Hamel ft. Giovanca - As Long As We're In Love

The Boogeyman Is Gonna Get'cha

2008-09-23T15:55:00.000-07:00

Reading through a somewhat recent article (10.26.2007) about superstitious/supernatural beliefs.

These things are just too interesting to me. The numbers from the poll are based on American response but I'd hope to hell the Canadian figures would be more positive (in this case, positive means negative). In brief, here is the run down:
- 34% believe in ghosts
- 34% believe in UFO's
- 19% believe in witchcraft/spells
- 48% believe in ESP (extra sensory perception)
- 17% believe in 4-leaf clover power

The only belief I have regarding this issue is that you can certainly learn some things about the kind of people who believe in such nonsense. For example, the article points out some general trends relating to the acquisition of such beliefs. In general, you are more susceptible to believe in these things if you are:
- of lower income
- without a partner
- uneducated (with exception of ESP which rises after college)
- a woman

Big surprise. Stupid poor people believe in crazy shit. There's no revelation there, with the exception of this ESP phenomenon which I find odd. I'm not sure how ESP somehow gains credibility but it is in other words "the sixth sense". I know the human body is wondrous and full of surprises but being able to see dead people, talk to dead people, or have "spidey-sense" or telepathy is not one of them. I believe it's not the education that would entice us to such beliefs but simply just aging. With age, people tend to look for spiritual guidance and think about "feeling" the presence of deceased friends or relatives to help guide them in their lives. I kinda get that rationale. I don't believe it for a second, but I understand. I also get that poor people may probably be more inclined to believe that random physical objects have supernatural powers that could entitle them to good luck. I could also get lost in a fantasy of lucky pennies and rabbit's foot bringing fortune into my life but I know that's crazy. I suppose people who are desperate for success are just that - desperate.

The second part about single people and women being more superstitious is not too surprising either. I know I've been in situations where my eyes played tricks on me. Explaining it is quite simple really, if you're the only one there, you're missing another pair of eyes to validate your account of the situation. Most of the time it's just fleeting visuals, perspective tricks, or plain delusion, which we know all women excell in (kidding - sort of).

Anyways, there are no such thing as ghosts. I don't have the answers to what awaits us in the afterlife but walking the earth as some semi-transluscent version of yourself is not one of them. Come on, just admit it's stupid.

There are no such thing as UFOs. Extraterrestrial life I won't argue but UFOs? no sir. If there exists any lifeform that is capable of not supersonic but superluminal flight visited earth, I am 100% certain they would have stealth down pat. I'm also positive that they need not be within our own viewing distance in order to observe us. Come on, just admit it's stupid.

There are no such thing as spells. Coincidence? sure. But reciting some gibberish as to influence yours or someone elses fate? hogwash I say. Unless you are personally addressing someone to whom holds your fate and your spells consist of persuasive language. Otherwise, nonsensical chanting in a dark room lit with candles to yourself will change nothing but the way other people perceive you when they find out. Come on, just admit it's stupid.

There is no such thing as ESP. There are currently 5 senses. Enhanced as they may, there are no other functions. Communicating with the dead is a pointless sense. Come on, just admit it's stupid.

There IS such a thing as a 4-leaf clover. Unfortunately that is the only difference between it and its 3-leafed cousin. There is more dividing you from winning millions in the lottery than just a single little green petal. Come on, just admit it's stupid.

Today's track:
Immature - Every Little Thing I Do

way back playback

The Cafeteria Shuffle

2008-09-19T10:27:00.000-07:00

Since starting my work in the big "office" / "facility", I've been observing the dynamics of the people during my lunch hours. Especially working in a lab where people are in uniform you can clearly see the division between the groups.

When people go to sit down for break, generally this is how they group.

Department > Hierarchy > Ethnicity > Gender > Age

First things first, people will split up according to department. Facilities with facilities, production with production, chemistry with chemistry, microbiology with microbiology, validation with validation, quality assurance with quality assurance...etc.

Then supervisors will sit with supervisors, group leaders with group leaders...etc.

These separations are pretty consistent. Then if the size of the group allows, there will be further separation into the last three groups.

Based on ethnicity, the mandarin people will group, cantonese, filipino, punjabi, hindi, english etc.

Then gender. Then age groups.

I mean, really nothing we all don't already know about the world. It's just interesting to be in a large enough building to accommodate all these divisions. Most of the places I've worked at have been small. 40 employees max? It's more amusing to see 40 people who otherwise wouldn't sit with each other have lunch together. Of course, only when it works. People are usually over compensating for their differences in age, genitals, cultural knowledge or whatever the case may be. Of course when it doesn't work and people are forced to be with people they know nothing about then it's just excruciating to witness. It's like the most superficial conversations you can have. The weather, traffic conditions and crap like that. But sometimes when you see other people get themselves into social situations that crash and burn, you find beauty in the fire. It's my own case of schadenfreude which I think we are all guilty of once in a while. I know I've been in awkward situations too many times so I'm going to enjoy myself when it's not me for a change.

Today's track:
Ne-yo - So You Can Cry

Catchy. Catchy.

Desperate times calls for desperate measures

2008-08-29T00:46:00.000-07:00

I was reading some articles on Howstuffworks.com when I came upon this nifty blurb.

______________________________________
Can Semen Make You Happier?

According to Psychology Today, Gordon G. Gallup, Ph.D., a psychologist at the State University of New York in Albany released a study in 2002 detailing results of a survey of nearly 300 college women who either used condoms during sexual intercourse, did not use condoms or just plain didn't have sex. Gallup's findings indicated that the respondents who did not come into direct contact with semen were more likely to become depressed, even suicidal. Gallup attributes this to the composition of semen, which he says contains mood-altering chemicals like prolactin, luteinizing hormone, testosterone, estrogen, and prostaglandins. Note: You may become depressed if you contract a sexually transmitted infection, so condoms are still a great idea.

______________________________________

Haha. So there you have it ladies, time to hop on the gravy train. I just hope that this exerpt was used out of context or was inaccurately interpreted. Ph.D? Really? and a phychologist to boot. He's no scientist and this study is not even scientifically critical.

While the prospect of this being true would definately aid in my future pick-up lines (Hey girl, want a sip of my happy juice? Not a euphemism by the way, my juice will seriously make you happy - scientifically proven.) it's just plain stupid.

Anyone with some form of respectable education would realize that these conclusions are severely flawed. Correlation does not imply causation. I love how it specifically calls for contact of semen aswell - brilliant. It's no mystery that sex improves people's moods, but maybe it's just because people who aren't getting any are single, perhaps lonely, socially challenged, emotionally detatched, things of that nature. I fail to believe that all sufferers of clinical depression with suicidal thoughts need is a good slathering of hot spunk. If that were the case, I think I would have the answer to my financial woes. I'm literally sitting on a gold mine - HA! And where does this leave lesbians? Oh man, they must be miserable.

Gordon G. Gallup you sly devil, what won't you do for your right to skeet on women? What a humanitarian this guy is.

Today's track:

Shugo Tokumaru

TTC Tomfoolery

2008-08-28T14:58:00.000-07:00

Even with all the hubbub about rising gas prices I have yet to notice a difference in the volume of cars on the road. Worse still, the news of the TTC demanding more hand outs isn't going to help.

I guess this shouldn't come as a surprise to Toronto residents. About every 6 months, like clockwork there's news about the TTC conspiring of some new excuse to take your money. You can sure depend on that more than you can their service schedule.

I for one am glad that I do not depend on the TTC for my daily commute and I doubt my field will ever take me downtown where I would need to. However, I can only imagine how metropass owners now forced to pay for parking would feel. Whoever is keeping the books at the TTC is in over their heads. There's only talks about costs, expenses and losses. If you see yourself in a hole, how about you look to cut your expenses (i.e. your paycheck) before you go looking to get money from the public? Granted, I'm not schooled on the whole anatomy of what makes the TTC run, but you don't need to do much research to know there's some number fudging somewhere.

You can't provide these huge sums of money ($6.3M/annum) required to 'operate' parking facilities and not have people ask questions. First of all, you don't 'operate' a parking lot - it's just pavement. Don't make it sound like more work than it actually is. I've been to a number of these lots and I can tell you I haven't seen a single soul from TTC at any of them. No one in a booth, no security, no nothing. If by 'operate' you mean, sending some guy out there to retrieve cash from the parking meter, then sure but you're paying $6.3M more than you need to. Of course the property value makes up the majority of the expense but you can't say that the metropass owners are mooching off the free parking.

TTC says that the $2-$6 you would have to pay per day would more than make up for itself if you decided to drive yourself and park downtown. I mean, I could get into this more and talk about pissing off people with cars, when you run a transit line is not a good idea but there's something else I want to address. When do you think this foolishness will stop?

It just looks like if there's any way to rationalize charging more, they'll take a stab at it. I can think of more right now if they need help. How about charging more to people who bring stuff on the TTC? A bike? $1 more. A duffel bag? $0.75. A backpack? $0.50. I mean, those things take up space and put more stress on the train/bus. Hell, what about fat people? shouldn't someone twice my size have to pay twice the fare? How about raising the price during evening hours? I guess it costs money to have the lights on at night. Maybe the price should change during seasons to make up for the costs of AC and heating. Yeah, temperature dependent fares. This all seems reasonable right?

Some things are just included in the cost. When I buy a ticket I'm paying for the full package. This isn't about whether or not it's fair to charge people to park or not because as it stands, metropass owners with or without cars pay the same amount. It's about getting the numbers right the first time around so you don't seem like a total douche asking for more every 6 months. Set a clear standard for what you're entitled to when you buy a metropass or whatever and then go with it. Riders shouldn't have to worry about what sudden 'luxury' they're going to have to end up paying for next month.

Today's track:
Boy 8-bit - The Suspense Is Killing Me

Michael Phelps is not my hero.

2008-08-14T14:19:00.000-07:00

Multiple swimming golds means shit to me and it should be the same for you.

I don't know why anyone else hasn't caught onto this masquerade. Almost all the various swimming competitions are redundant. Am I playing down the accomplishments of much hyped Olympic swimmers by the likes of Phelps? Hell yes because I'm a rational thinker. The whole thing is a crock. Someone explain to me why anyone cares about HOW these swimmers get from one end to the other? I only care who does it the fastest. I don't care if it's front crawl, backstroke, breaststroke, butterfly, side-stroke or the f-ing doggy paddle. Let's just take the freestyle competition as an example, of everybody who participates, the front crawl is universal. So who gives 2 shits about who swims the butterfly the fastest? It's irrelevant and f-ing stupid if you ask me. At this point, you might still be defending swimming but let me put it this way - just think about it in terms of track and field. All we got is running. Yes, there's relay, hurdles and other arbitrary distances of running, but nonetheless running. There is absolutely no demand to find out who is the fastest at backwards running, sideways running, crab walking, duck walking, crawling, hopping-around-on-one-foot or whatever. Just the regular as fuck running. Bottom line is: there should only be one style of swimming - that is front crawl, but if they want to include swimming hurdles, I will surely approve.

*Note* I realize there is an Olympic event called racewalking or speedwalking but I'm sure it can only serve to strengthen my argument because no one takes that 'sport' seriously. Anybody watching that event just thinks why the hell can't they just run this stupid thing? anyways. So case closed.

Today's track:
Stevie Wonder - All I Do

Human/Great ape rights

2008-08-06T14:51:00.000-07:00

Interesting news from around the world: The Spaniards have recently granted great apes human rights.

I know last week I was ranting on animal rights but life is queer like that. Sometimes you make yourself aware of something and then it starts popping up all over the place. Anyways, so I came across this article about the Spanish parliament who plans to provide great apes with “the right to life, the freedom from arbitrary deprivation of liberty, and protection from torture”. It all sounds pretty reasonable of course, because who can endorse capturing and torturing animals? Although this now outlaws apes from being taken in as pets or circus acts to which I am indifferent because I think apes are hideous (I have no desire to take one in or see them), it also protects great apes from being used in scientific experiments. This is important to note because it would greatly affect the scientific community, of course only in Spain but nonetheless restrictive.

Now, we can all sit here and gripe and moan about all the horrors that animals are subjected to in the hands of science but it is necessary. If a certain species of ape is endangered or something then I fully agree that they shouldn't be used for any experimental projects but that's the only exception I can think of. Animal testing is crucial to the development of medicines and to improve our understanding of life in general. Any testing on great apes would probably be minimal anyways because before they get to that point there would have been countless tests on lesser animals already. Lab rats, rabbits, pigs, the typical gauntlet of progressive human analogs. The bottom line is that these tests are important and necessary and like it or not, something other than a real person needs to be the test subject. Essentially all major discoveries, magic pills and surgical procedures that are available to you now exist because of the rigorous testing protocols involving animals. The fact is that you simply cannot grant animals these rights and still expect to live your normal life. There are real consequences to these rulings. If you set science back, you hold civilization back. As long as their is a purpose to the madness, then just let it go.

Today's track:
DJ Okawari - Bluebird Story (w/ Jumelles)

Animal rights

2008-08-01T14:31:00.000-07:00

Yes, I understand why there should be such a thing as animal rights. The neighborhood psycho can't just go around town skinning cats alive and hanging them outside your tree like wind chimes. But sometimes I don't really get why people get so upset about animal rights. Once in a while there will be rumblings from PETA about the living conditions of farm meat and how they are treated or slaughtered or whatever. Frankly, I could care less. I'm not saying I could slaughter a cow with my bare hands, because I couldn't. But I'm not stupid. I know where meat comes from. I know an animal needs to live, eat, breath and then die for me to then consume it. But truth be told, when eating meat, I don't really find myself pondering the animals sense of fulfillment before it got gutted. I'm not saying that you shouldn't care if millions of chickens are raised in little cages, stewing in their own crap and never see the light of day because in the end you should. I'm just saying there are more motivating arguments other than for animal rights. If free-range chicken tastes better and live better, then great. Win-win situation. But there are plain logistical problems that arise from this. I'm sure if there was a better way to raise a huge number of animals in an economical area then it would be done.

The problem is not how we treat the animals, it's how we treat the meat. How can we reduce our demand of meat? Just improve the efficiency of the process. Suppliers can cut meat to maximize product or find the best way to preserve the product longest. Consumers can buy only what they need, waste less or try to reduce their meat intake in general.

Another more motivating argument for reducing meat intake has nothing to do with animal rights but everything to do with cow farts. Apparently cows are the #2 preventable cause of global warming behind cars. Cows are notoriously known for their flatulence, the methane gas they emit is 23 times more effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. There are literally beef farms in the business of raising millions upon millions of cows.

So there you go, mass produced meat is bad for the animal, bad for environment, bad for your taste buds and lastly bad for your health. Nutritionists often suggest that people to ease up on red meat as it is linked to many late onset ailments. Of course this is all hypocritical for me to say because as everybody who knows me knows, I am pretty much a strict carnivore. I really don't go grocery shopping so nor am I concerned about where my food is coming from but nevertheless these are things to think about.

The 2007 Oxford dictionary word of the year was: Locavore. This is perhaps how some environmentally conscious people are dealing with the problems I've mentioned. The term locavore refers to people who only eat what is grown locally. This new fad is amongst the organic revolution with people searching for healthier alternatives while supporting their local farmers. The benifits? No mass produced product means higher quality fruits, vegetables, meats or whatever. Overall, it's probably healthier, tastes better, and better for the environment on two fronts. One being reducing the demand and greenhouse gasses from giant beef farms and second, reducing greenhouse gasses and resource consumption from the otherwise lengthy shipping process. There is a price to pay for all these benefits but it seems that people are starting to pay more attention to what they eat these days.
Anyways, beef = global warming. Imagine that.

Today's track:
Death Cab for Cutie - I Will Possess Your Heart

Do you believe in magic?

2008-08-01T13:18:00.000-07:00

We're all captivated by magic. As children, we watch with amazement and wonder while the rules of reality are manipulated before us. As adults, we're aware of the misdirection but still gladly blind ourselves to the truth in order to indulge ourselves in the world of magic.
In the world of magic, anything is possible. Gravity is nonexistent. Solids can penetrate solids. Matter can be created from nothing or disappear into nothingness. However, we all reach a phase in our lives where we lose our innocence and past mysteries become less puzzling. This is especially true for magic. Once the secret is out, we realize the lies and deception that lie beneath.

The question I pose to you is: Knowing all this is true, Do you believe in magic?

Some people enjoy the comfort of being ignorant. Sure, we all know that what we see can't actually happen the way it's presented but we'd like to live in a world where it could. But is it right to believe in something just because it makes you feel good? Or should we put more value in the truth? Of course, my point was to make magic an analogy for religion. We'd all like to believe in some prehistoric magic man who could turn water into wine and walk on water but why? All religions are all based on books that are just full of claims and illegitimate promises. Even with the huge leaps of faith and logic, some people like to state that God, Jesus and Heaven is "my truth". The trouble is that truth is not relative. There is no such thing is your truth and my truth. There is only what is real and what isn't.

I believe that we should not believe in things just because they make us feel warm and fuzzy inside. For something as benign as magic, I guess we could throw reality out the window for a couple of minutes but for something as life changing as religion, I'm not convinced is a good idea. If we cocoon ourselves in lies and deception then who will seek the truth? Besides, as the saying goes: Truth is better than fiction.

Today's track:
Ivana Santilli - Wish U Away

New album = highly recommended

Something, Anything

2008-07-22T16:15:00.000-07:00

To understand why religion is still around in this day and age is to understand its importance to the people who practice it. I think we can appreciate the fact that mass congregations to designated buildings strictly for the purpose of mindless chanting to some invisible eye in the sky goes against all of our better judgments. Still, we find many people from all walks of life, race and educational backgrounds, filling those pews on a weekly basis. Any rational thinking person would scoff at any of the fables being passed off as truths in the Bible, yet they deliberately subject themselves to the weekly insults to their intelligence.

There is a quote:
"you can't reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into"
(I can't remember who said this or if this is the exact wording but you get the gist)
It shows how desperate people are for spirituality in their lives. No matter how much it conflicts with common sense and logic, we crave for a bit of mysterious witchery in our lives. I think religion preys on the deepest innate insecurities of people. We are all in search for the same things: belonging, a more satisfying meaning to life, a more optimistic view of the afterlife, and the religion is the one-stop-shop for all your human needs. I see why people are attracted to attend church, there's something about gathering a bunch of people in a room for a purpose that creates an electric atmosphere. You get the same experience from concerts, sporting events, movie theaters - really anywhere there's stadium seating is a safe bet. Of course religion has the upper hand here because for one, it's free (that is if you don't donate) and they also covered their ass by naming themselves the only show in town because you shouldn't be worshiping false idols.

Another big draw is to hear the personal accounts of other church-goers who overcome their own dilemmas by consulting the bible (which is great because you got one handy at home) and if they are really lucky, perhaps get a talking-to from the big man upstairs himself. But do you know what is really great about the bible? It's that you can literally find a passage in there to support any cause you're willing to throw at it. The reason why religion is so successful is that no matter if you're a humanitarian or bigot, if you look hard enough, you can interpret the bible to support your own beliefs. People who are against/for homosexual marriages, abortion, stem cell research and other controversial issues of present all take cues from the same book yet still there is room for debate. It's amusing to watch religious yet otherwise rational people frantically consulting the bible on how to solve modern day conundrums. How could a book that was written thousands of years ago possibly predict the issues that are at hand today in our modern civilization? Quite frankly, it can't. The bible can't even solve the problems of the 20th century let alone the 21st. The bible was written in an era of racism, sexism, capital punishment, and other such barbarous rules of thought. For all its glory, it is clear that the bible is of human origin with no influence from a higher being. Especially now more than ever because it's basically the result of a 2000 year-old game of broken telephone where it has been transcribed, translated, re-transcribed, re-translated and so forth countless times. It is even possible today to find bibles that don't read the same. Can you believe that? It's the fucking word of God, get it right people!

There's no debating the importance of spirituality for the human condition but do we really need to throw away our heads to achieve this? I'm not proposing that we rid the world of religion and everything it represents, but we could replace it with something less presuming that does not declare itself to be anything more than a book of fairy tales. It's not insulting for a group of adults to get together and read fairy tales to each other. Fairy tales are fantastical and teach moral values but let's just call things for what they are. As much as I enjoy the stories, I'm not out there looking for a giant beanstalk, a sleeping beauty or a life-sized ginger bread house nor am I supposing that you be seeking them out. Can we just bask in the beauty that surrounds us without needing to know implicitly where it comes from or where it's all going to go? In the history of all existence on this planet, we have been both blessed and cursed with the intelligence to appreciate our origins. Let's just take things as they come for as little time as we have them and then worry about being dead when we're dead.

Today's track:
Organic Stereo - Brightness

Redefining "Family"

2008-07-17T14:07:00.000-07:00

Bigamy, Polygamy, Homosexuality, Incest. Which of these don't belong? Although most of modern society is coming to grips that the Homosexual family life is morally acceptable, it is fair to say the other 3 living situations I've listed aren't. In fact, I'm sure there would be some fire in the sky if any of those groups decided to hold a march in the city core to protest their rights. But why?

Many of the arguments for Homosexuality will work just as well for bigamy, polygamy and incest. It's a nightmare for any Bible-toting fundamentalist, but the fact of the matter is - what people decide to do in the privacy of their own homes is none of your concern. Let's work on bigamy and polygamy first since they are similar. Currently, the legal implications of bigamy/polygamy in Canada are fuzzy. Through some varied readings, there are some Criminal Codes prohibiting polygamy but also the Charter of Rights that lends some support. In any case, if it is indeed illegal in Canada, no one is enforcing it because there is a well-known polygamist community in Bountiful, BC. I really don't see much case against polygamy. There is nothing morally wrong about having multiple spouses. Granted, I believe the human species in general are wired to be monogamous because of our tendencies to become jealous but to each his/her own. If people find themselves in consenting relationships where all parties get what they want out of it then outsiders really have no authority to say it's wrong. Finding one woman who doesn't want to rip your soul out of your body and claim it for her own is hard enough, good on you if you can find two, or three, or more. Where the real problem lies is how some of these communities are formed. Of course a large majority of polygamist families are made up of one male and multiple females. You find that by doing the math that there quickly will just not have enough females to go around. Often times these communities are lead by some crazy religious whack job who shuns the birth of any males and marries prepubescent girls to middle-aged men to be sex slaves. There is no question that these acts are illegal.

On to incest. Of course, what I just said about bigamy/polygamy also apply here. There really isn't a moral way lay down law to separates two consenting adults from doing what they want to do. It really just isn't our business. However, incest is on shakier ground. Thinking about it just conjures up the most inherent repulsiveness that really no person in their right mind could ignore. But where is the root of this abhorrent feeling? It's not as inherent as you may think. We are not born sexually repulsed by our siblings. In fact, I'm sure a number of male teens in the heat of puberty might struggle with their desire for a sister of womanly physique. Picture a brother and sister separated at birth and then somehow brought back together serendipitously with an air of romantic influence. I doubt there would be any internal struggle of attraction without the knowledge of where they sit on the family tree. The repugnant feeling is the result of cohabitation rather than relation. If we as people are searching for happiness in life, why deny it to those who've found it? Another argument against incest is that it produces monster babies that belong under beds and in closets. This is no doubt scientifically true for brother and sisters although the risks do become less significant as the relations expand to 1st cousins, 2nd cousins and so forth. For example, relationships on the outer rungs of the family tree involving cousins have defect risks comparable to aging couples or couples with large age gaps. The argument here is why create a taboo with one but not the other if that is the case? And if the couple doesn't plan to procreate at all then why is there a problem to begin with?

Many conservatives argue that allowing these forms of families to exist will open the flood gates to the many who have secret desires for them. There really isn't much evidence to support the theory that people are looking to get into these types of relationships. Well, science is proving that homosexuality is more biological than a social choice but the others are indeed conscious decisions. The bottom line is, if you can make it work for you and no harm comes of it, then you can act as you wish. I personally don't see anything wrong with any of these family situations. Noted, incest is definitely the worst of the lot but I can't impose my will on others if that's what floats their boats...

Today's track:
Ott - The Queen of All Everything

Present day video games.

2008-07-09T15:11:00.000-07:00

Yeah, I'm going to blog about video games. I'm a geek okay?!

Video games have changed. You can sure observe the growing market of video games now. One of the fastest growing industries of present, everyone is trying to get their share of the action. You can especially notice businesses trying to capitalize on the emerging market by the amount of shovelware that is released (i.e. any Nintendo product).
But competition is good for any marketplace right? More options lead to better options in the long run right? I'm a bit skeptical about the game industry right now. There's no disputing that the production value of video games are certainly leaps and bounds above the games of yesteryear. Blockbuster games are now made with investments from dollar amounts in the 100's of millions and are several years in development. There are certainly more risk involved in these endeavors.
With the monetary numbers lurking around every corner, game developers look to cut costs and increase profit at every opportunity. We're in an era of in-game advertisements to which the consumer does not reap any benefit. Sports games that are brimming with ad's and with relatively low production costs retail for the same amount as any other game on the market. I thought it would be pretty obvious to cut the prices at the register so that the ads could potentially reach a larger audience, but what do I know?
The increase in the popularity of video games also put a strain on developers to meet the sudden increase in demand. This means they're always concerned about making the release date before their products fall out of the spotlight of the public eye. We've seen video games go through multiple delays but still somehow seem to be rushed out the door and poorly developed. Especially in a day in age where the end product can be altered with patches and DLC (downloadable content). This means, developers can ship out sub-par games without going through the appropriate post-production phases because they are still able to fix the problems as they occur. A curse and a blessing I suppose. We can always appreciate the improvements but I'm sure we would all want things done right the first time around. DLC is controversial. Don't you remember when a the game you bought was a the same game you brought home? You knew exactly what to expect when you got it. Games nowadays are unpredictable, you have no idea what you're getting. The whole point of DLC in theory is that you can get 'extra' content for your game, many-a-times for a charge if you decide to do so. But more often than not it seems like the DLC is just a system set up so you could buy material that you are already entitled to. You're essentially buying the game you already own. This is especially shown with music oriented games like Guitar Hero and Rock Band where they provide you with a shallow track list and then offer you the "option" to download as much great music you want online on a track by track basis. Highway robbery if you ask me.
The last beef (do people still say beef?!) I have is with the game industry's new-found obsession with the 'limited edition'. The only question I have is, why?. There isn't a huge population of people who collect video games and even if they do, video games for the most part depreciate in value so what's the point in that? What do you get when you buy a limited edition video game? Well, mostly just extra packaging and some worthless trinkets. Just another way to get people to shell out an extra $20 or so.
Okay, enough about that.

Music
So I'm a bit late getting on this album because it came out Dec. 2007 but it's amazing. Shad is a Canadian rapper from London, ON. Holds a business degree from Laurier and even pursuing a Master's. Pretty much sums up the state of the Canadian music industry if you ask me. Meanwhile kids like Soulja Boy in the States are living off millions from making songs about bizarre yet comical bedroom habits. Anyways, if you aren't on the Shad train, get on it.
Today's track:
Shad - Now a Daze

Future Mind/Body Hacks

2008-05-28T08:25:00.000-07:00

As we, the human collective, continue with emerging technologies and medical advances, the landscape of humanity begins to change. Science and technology has always been hindered by our ideas of ethics and morality. However, the promise of what these fields have to offer is too great to ignore.

We live in a world with an aging population that wants to defy death. Many of us could say we derive our code of ethics and morality by the idea of what is 'natural' but there's nothing natural with the human race as we know it. Our lifespan in the modern world is manufactured, we've stretched it beyond the limits to what nature allows. Wild animals know nothing of arthritis, diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, cancer. But it is our innate abilities as humans that has allowed us to cope with or in some cases combat the illnesses that plague us.

Who is to say what is natural or unnatural anymore? Today, it is possible to manufacture body parts, to create truly bionic men and women. We can produce living organs in a petri dish. There's a pill for every symptom you could fathom yet we still perceive ourselves to be as natural as any other organic life that shares this planet.

I think once we have come to grips with the fact that we have already reached this phase of 'playing God' then we could in our own right become gods. At least in the way of having more control of our physical place on earth.

Conquering physical illnesses is step one. In the future we could realistically live to be 150. The second step is to conquer our emotions. We already have anti-depressants and illegal drugs that make you euphoric. It will only be a matter of time until we have drugs that could mimic the precise emotions that comprise of love. We could have drugs that could deal with our other human yet detrimental emotions such as anger, jealousy and lust.

Although I believe that the human interaction will change drastically in the future. We already see the rise of computer dependency in our social interactions. It is inevitable that there will one day be companion robots made to suit every one of our tastes. A life-form that is built from the ground up, primarily mechanical but has an organic shell. Why? Well if you ask me, peace on earth depends on it. If we have any chance at living with each other, we have to ditch everything we hold sacred about being human. We'll eventually have to be some type of hybrid half-humans. If we could accurately replicate the human form and human emotions then we can give everybody the opportunity to be truly loved. A real companion. One that can truly produce emotions of acceptance, joy, delight and rapture. We could eliminate all the negative emotions that could only come with human-to-human disputes.

Yes, we're even too human for us. You better get ready for the future because some years from now you're going to be humping a glorified toaster. Maybe some of you already are...

Today's track:
Atomica - Larson

Sports And The Male Psyche

2008-05-10T13:33:00.000-07:00

I don't consider myself a big sports fan by any stretch of the imagination. I don't have a head full of team rosters and stats and would label myself as a casual sports enthusiast. I only primarily watch basketball and sporadically follow the local teams. However, the reason why I decided to write about sports is because I wanted to talk about the hardest of the hardcore.
The sporting arena is generally dominated by males. We follow sports like a pack of wolves, hunting down the games, desperately gnawing on every last morsel of sports trivia. There's an innate, inherent and dare I suggest illogical draw of sports that comes from the very depths of our loins. The hardcore sports lovers indulge themselves in trade rumors like they are losing family members, recite box scores like anthems, and stay so loyal to team colors they could pass for a power ranger. We see sports lovers running up and down streets and honking their horns but when you think about it, it's all very silly behaviour.
Why should you care about your local sports team anyways? For one thing, you shouldn't have to blindly accept a sports team just because you are coincidently geographically located within their region of representation. Secondly, celebrating your team's achievements is utterly pointless because of the following reasons:
-you have provided absolutely nothing to their success (aside from financial aid from purchasing the sports merch)
-their success will not improve your quality of life in any shape or form
-your local sports team isn't even a representation of your local sports talent, it's a strategic amalgamation of often international talent that incidentally wears uniforms with your respective city on it
Of course, I only direct these statements towards sports fanatics because sports do have their place in the world. It's the on-going The Young And The Restless soap opera for males. The sports universe has it's own legion of heroes and villains. It's full of drama, blood, sweat, tears, winners, losers and cheaters. It makes for great water cooler talk and we still follow it even if other people say it's just the same repackaged shit everyday. Everything is good in moderation I suppose.

Today's track:
Hey Willpower - Hundredaire

Pet Peeves Of The New Millennia

2008-05-07T20:02:00.000-07:00

I would say I have a lot of pet peeves. I get annoyed by a variety of things but recently I've developed a single severe and intense hatred for people with Bluetooth headsets.
Technology is a wonderful thing and the functionality behind Bluetooth is pretty rad but I feel like it's my duty to remind the world that it is indeed possible to have too much of a good thing. Going wireless and hands-free is awesome and everybody wants in on the action but really, all I see are rat-bastard douchebags abusing the technology. I mean, I'm not saying you can't use your Bluetooth. I'm just saying use it when the technology is applicable, otherwise you just come off as an attention whoring piece of shit fucktard whom everyone can identify by the blinking light on the side your head. Who the fuck are you to walk around with a hands-free and still NOT be doing anything that requires two hands? Maybe I should just punch you in the face if you want to exercise the practicality of having a headset.
Here are some general rules of thumb that everybody should follow: If you're not - in the act of driving, some big shot executive juggling phone calls and paperwork, playing video games, a double amputee - then fucking use your free limb to just pick the phone up to your ear and talk like a regular person! Fuck you Bluetooth toting tech-illiterate assfags that walk with some irrational sense of nobility and distinction because you're able to take calls on your ear. I don't need to be subjected to your now unhindered and completely unimportant conversations that are projected into every space you walk into.
If you acquired a headset because you are insecure about your image then let me make one thing clear to you: it doesn't make you cool. In fact, not only is it uncool, it commands that I actively hate you. The technology is there to facilitate the use of your hands, not so you can talk on the phone and gesture like the people on the other end can see you. You look like a ridiculous donkey assclown.
This is now chain mail. Please forward this to 5 other people or you will die a horrible death. Thank you.

Todays track:
Surkin - White Knight Two

Spring is here!

2008-05-01T09:04:00.000-07:00

Spring in Toronto is amusing. I've been here all my life and I still can't get used to the weather. But what's interesting about the weather is that there isn't much mild weather during spring and fall. I feel like winter passes and we go straight into the heat of summer.
Anyways, my post isn't just about the weather in general but the peculiarities it induces. If you were inside people-watching out the window during spring you would have no clue how the weather was outside. It's funny to see the odd mish-mash of people and the contrast of wardrobes. You got people who are weather appropriate, people who are still wearing their winter coats, and then these people who can't wait to bust out their summer tanks and flip-flops when it's 5 degrees outside.

Well, that's it for now.
This is how we chill from '93 till...

Today's track
Souls of Mischief - 93 to infinity

It's 10 O'clock, Do You Know Where Is Your Soul Mate Is?

2008-04-22T09:06:00.000-07:00

I don't get hung up on the idea of having or searching for a soul mate. One of the problems with this term regards the word 'soul' itself because its definition is not constant from person to person and I'm skeptical of its existence in the first place (but I'll save that for another day). The second problem I have is that the term soul mate is synonymous with finding the one and only. The romantic in me is affectionate towards the idea of finding the one person whom could receive and reciprocate my love. However, the realist in me finds this logic rather weak.

To literally believe that there is just one person on the planet to which you are truly compatible is deflating if you think about it. There are billions upon billions of people on this planet. If you're searching for 'the one' your chances are slim to none. Even if you're with somebody right now, the chances of them being 'the one' is just as terrible. Realistically, your chances of finding a soul mate are far, far worse than winning the lottery grand prize (which for 6/49 is about 1 in 14 million). If anything, you could win the lotto multiple times before you find your soul mate.

So now that I squashed your hopes and dreams of ever finding your soul mate, what is the point of all this? Like I said, I don't get hung up on the idea of being assigned a person to be with by the mysterious forces of fate and serendipity. Instead, I find deeper meaning in a relationship that isn't bound by singular pretense. Knowing this, there are many things to be optimistic about.

Firstly, chances are that there are plenty of people on this planet that are compatible with you. Applying game theory, you find that any two people could end up together given the right circumstances. So in fact, your chances at love isn't quite as dim as first imagined. Now that we are aware that there are a multitude of potential partners available to us, it makes what we got that much more significant. It's not about being stuck with 'the one' anymore. It's about commitment. It's about binding emotions rather than the obligatory binding of 'souls'.

My idea of what a 'soul mate' is, is about sharing a tried and true love. A love that is free to leave but instead stays to endure the hardships. The 'one' for you is the is the first and last 'one' who can stay with what you got.

Today's track
Sandrine - Sea Of Love

Who Is The Pope?

2008-04-21T12:16:00.000-07:00

The current Pope is Pope Benedict XVI. Apparently, he is a pretty big deal.

The Pope tours around the world spreading his 'holiness' and always draws in huge crowds as the faithful flock from far and wide to see him. But who is the Pope really? Well, as far as the Roman Catholic Church is concerned, he's the representative of Jesus Christ himself. And how do you earn such a commanding title? Basically after the old Pope croaks, some old people get together and put it to a vote. I'm sure somewhere in the election process they all stand side by side and somehow quantify each other's holiness with a special scientific tool known as a holimeter which detects human auras and accurately measures the size of their halos.

Why is their hierarchy in religion? The Pope is bullshit. If I decide to fully subscribe myself to religion, what makes you closer to Jesus than anyone else? Faith should be absolute. Either you're in or you're out. Besides, I thought Jesus loves us all the same. Why do any of us have to listen to some old dust bag with a big hat wheeze on about the Bible when it has no more meaning than when it comes from the lips of that crazy homeless guy you see downtown? In today's society, the Pope should be obsolete. But why does he exist?

Religion and politics go hand in hand. The history of Religion goes back to the day of less civilized times of King and Emperor ruling. The insatiable human need to feed our own egos by creating a meaningful place in this universe meant well for the creation and advancement of religion. Dictators soon realized the power religion could hold over the population. The Bible was devised and revised to keep the herd in check. Even today the Bible is quoted to push political agendas. Modern day controversial issues (such as abortion, stem cell research and gay marriage) involving ethics and human rights are being dealt with using the text from times when public executions were a family affair. As inspirational as the Bible may be, it has long past it's expiry date. It is a work of fiction and nothing else.

The Pope is nothing but a product of propaganda for the proliferation of propaganda.

Off topic but should be noted: There's a Darwin exhibit currently running at the ROM until August. I want to go to the ROM this year. I still haven't had a chance to see the Crystal part of it. I know people are divided between abhorring it adoring it but I still think it's cool -- at least for now until the novelty of it wears thin. Meh, maybe I'll have a stronger opinion about it when I see the inside of it.
Darwin for president!

Today's track
The Foals - Hummer

BUTT PLUGS!!!

2008-04-15T20:31:00.000-07:00

So you're a girl and sometimes likes the turkey baster in your rump, that makes you...unwholesome? adventurous? intriguing? irresistible?
So you're a boy and sometimes likes the sneaky butcher to pass you some meat through the back-door, that makes you...gay? and uh...nope, pretty much just gay.

I wonder, is there such thing as a gay man who doesn't like his excrement pushed back into his body by a beef bayonet? I always thought gay guys would swap positions but maybe there's such thing as full-time pitchers and full-time catchers. So then what if you're straight man who likes to rear your girl? that's half of what it takes to be gay...is that gay?

Do you know another funny thought I had? I thought to myself: is there such a thing as a gay man who neither wants to give or receive? What a stupid question. Every straight man is that man. I left the boundaries that define being gay in the first place. Homosexuals are sexual within the gender. Every man enjoys the company of other men.

This whole gay morality thing is interesting to me. I flip-flop on how I think of the issue. You can't argue with human rights, we should be evolved enough to understand and respect each other. On the other hand, we didn't evolve out of the sea by giving each other sausage suppositories. I'm also aware that homosexuality occurs naturally in the wild with other species. However, I'm quite certain that if any species were to become strictly homosexual then they would cease to exist rather swiftly.

So I've only come to this conclusion thus far. If we are truly evolved and for human rights and striving to be totally non-bias, then the only moral sexuality should be bisexuality. If love is so great then why shouldn't everyone have a crack at it? no matter what kind of heat they are packing. Well, if that is the case, then I'm already immoral on my own terms.

Back to square one...

Today's track
(definitely one of my favorite gay artists and Canadian to boot!)
Final Fantasy - The CN Tower Belongs To The Dead

Religious and Pretentious

2008-04-11T12:24:00.000-07:00

--scene from the subway--
enter male, walks uncomfortably close to protagonist (i.e. me)
male: excuse me...
me: yeah?...
male: have you've heard of the amazing story about Jesus?
me: uhh...yeah...I'm not interested, thanks.
male: oh, are you undecided about religion? maybe I can share his word with you.
me: um...no thanks
awkward silence
exit male stage left

I'm sure this has happened to all of us one time or another. I don't know how these people sleep at night. If there's anything that's worse than people begging for my money it's people who think they have the right to disrupt my day thinking they can get me to reevaluate my perspective of the metaphysical universe while waiting for the next train to arrive. I really, really hate these people. What the hell are you thinking?! What kind of religion are you part of?! If Jesus is as great as you believe he is, why does he need to be advertised? Why does he need yours or my endorsement?! Good products sell themselves. If you need to sell me on the idea of Jesus then you should be the one reevaluating your beliefs. Hey, I'm not saying you're not entitled to your religion. I'm just saying don't treat it like an airborne virus you can cough into my lungs. If you really want to promote Christianity and your new-found happiness then I say the best advertisement is to just wear a WWJD bracelet, smile all day and get the f*** out of my way. Don't go overstepping your boundaries.

Some people go so far as to travel to foreign lands. Some even to third world countries to spread the 'Good News'. They feel all noble and self-sacrificing doing such a good deed. What a load a crap. How can you travel to a place where the people are faced with disease, violence, famine, and death on a daily basis and tell them a story about how Jesus helped you through your roughest trials in suburbia? If you truly want to help these people, help them, and don't preach. Build some shelters or whatever and get out. I'm aware that any good is still good but it's really a bully's way of dealing with the situation. You can't give to the needy but attach a condition. If I'm going to chuck a pan-handler a nickel, I'm not going to say "okay, I represent Jesus and he just bought you for a nickel". That's not sacrifice, there's ulterior motive. Real sacrifice is unrewarded and is free of any addendum.

And as long as we're on this topic, let's talk about "The Man" himself. Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for mankind. God, who is an all powerful being, thought it was a good idea to send down his one and only son to be slaughtered and hung out to dry to wash us of our sins. Even if I disregard the insane logic of how exactly murdering the son of God puts everything right with the world, the 'sacrifice' wasn't really a sacrifice at all. Ahhhh, you see Jesus died on a condition as well! What do we get for being 'saved'? Well, we get to live without sin and worship and preach the word of God. Well shit, that's a lot of stuff to keep track of for being 'free' and all. Basically, the only thing we're free to do is that we're free to walk the straight and narrow path that is Christianity. Thanks, Jesus, Thanks a lot. I think I'll stick to the sinning and being damned to hell, thanks.

See below for a few things you might find in hell.

I have no idea how old this clip is but it's funny as hell.

Today's Track
Robots in Disguise - The Tears

(this isn't the music video, just the song someone uploaded to YouTube)

God owns you

2008-03-17T13:50:00.000-07:00

I have many problems with the idea of having a religion. More often though, I have problems with Protestants, Evangelists, Christians, Catholics, etc. The typical 'God' you think of in North America because that's what I'm exposed to the most.

Religion is a wonderfully weird thing. It has the ability to take totally sane and otherwise intellectual people and in the context of church, turn them unreasonably gullible. Perhaps they prefer to live by the phrase 'ignorance is bliss' but I have a feeling that people who attend church would not describe themselves as willfully ignorant.

I know people find great strength and comfort in believing that a giant invisible bearded man in the sky has the obscure hobby of watching everything they do. But the logic behind the intentions of this 'God' is plain mind-numbing. With the way people understand 'God', you know religion just can't lose.

You know people start to throw reason out the window then they try to justify the both the miracles and atrocities that occur in this world. If a boatload of people drown in the ocean and a single mother survives, you know, it was 'God' giving her a second chance at life. What a miracle!!! What about the boatload of people who died? The mother's children, husband, all the other people? you know, that was also 'God's intention, he was lonely and he needed more angels. Well shit, that seems mighty unfair to me, and this 'God' must have millions upon millions of angels by now, why the hell is he so greedy? But you gotta hand it to him, 'God' is truly non-discriminant when it comes to recruiting angels, he'll take them black or white, male or female, young or old, fat or thin, ugly or beautiful.

When all else fails, go with ol' faithful: 'God' works in mysterious ways. You can't question the all mighty. You can't attempt to understand what the great 'God' is trying plot out in his great plan. He's the freaking creator of the universe! What is the worth of a puny human soul in comparison to his great plan? the answer is nothing! He'll slaughter innocent men, women and children left, right and center if that's what it takes. But 'God' loves you and he needs you to worship him.

Why does a being who is supposedly all powerful require that he is to be worshiped? Why is this 'God' such an egoist and so needy? Why does he find the need to punish me if I don't acknowledge him? Why is someone who is looking out for the greater good so spiteful? If this is the 'God' they preach of in church then I certainly don't care for him.

What is our motivation to live? Where do we draw our morals? Am I 'good' because I'll be dammed if I'm not? or am I good of my own free will? I find greater faith in humanity with the knowledge that people are good with or without a 'God'. If humanity requires a 'God' to be moral then we are truly screwed. And if 'God' really has a hand in everything that I do then what does it matter if I'm good or not? Are you or I really able to act on 'free will'? or are we just puppets of this puppet master we call 'God'? Religion tries to give life some greater meaning by proposing the idea of an afterlife but at the same time demeaning every aspect of the life we're living now. Someone please explain to me (A) how this makes sense. (B) if even it makes sense, how it is comforting to know.

Pirates Ruining Movie Industry?

2008-03-14T11:07:00.000-07:00

Pirated media is a strange thing. Especially living in this community where it's so rampant and blatant. First Markham, Pacific Mall, Metro, various other places in Scarborough are all synonymous with pirated media. We are all aware of the News and claims made by the movie industry that they lose millions and billions of dollars to piracy but I remain skeptical.

I personally think that piracy, especially in the movie industry does not effect it's sales to a large degree. There was a point in time where theaters were saying they were losing profits due to piracy but I don't think having bootlegs readily available has affected the general movie-going community. Anticipated blockbusters still become blockbusters and rake in huge sums. I think that piracy is healthy and keeps the movie industry honest. Where the profits start to suffer is where mediocre to bad movies begin. That's when you start to value your dollar. We can all afford to shell out $10-13 on a Batman movie or whatever but we start to question ourselves when it's something like Bill and Ted's excellent adventure 2008.

When you look at DVD sales you can understand why people choose pirated vs. the real thing. I personally don't have a problem buying the real deal if it's a movie I love but that's the trouble there. Movies are all priced the same and they shouldn't be. It doesn't matter if it's There Will Be Blood or Norbit. It's going to be priced somewhere around $20 or more. Movies should be priced proportionally to their critic ratings or public ratings. I know movie watching is personal and subjective but let's all be honest, there are good movies and then there are horrible movies.

The point is, there's no way these people are going to get my money anyway. For example, I would like to watch a movie like No Country for Old Men but I'm sure as hell not buying the movie at $20 for a single viewing. I wasn't interested in watching the movie in the theater for $10 but maybe for $4 or less I'll watch the pirated version.

I'm not the type who can watch a movie multiple times but at the right price point I'm sure to give those responsible my money. In the meantime though, it looks like my money is going to stay in my wallet until those movie people smarten up.

Drawing again

2008-02-19T17:55:00.001-08:00

Just experimenting with different things. I really don't know what I'm doing or the most efficient ways of doing things. I wish I was more inspired to Photoshop, it's pretty fun once you get started.

Rap songs and world peace: looking ahead at what rap has to offer

2008-02-07T22:57:00.000-08:00

Yes, another musically relevant post (I'm sorry, indulge me - it may be worth your while - if not, sorry again, i do not return or exchange any time you will have inevitably wasted) a brain fart if you will. Perhaps rap and world peace don't belong in the same sentence as each other but my mind wanders.

We all love rap music. How can you not? Nowadays its lyrics have degenerated into nothing more than porn in prose. Not only that, it comes in lower on the food chain than the erotic romantic novels from your local variety store. But that's its appeal these days. Rap music is the train wreck we can't pry our eyes and ears from. It's too abhorrent to ignore. Although beautiful in its own way, always testing the limits of free speech, of censorship. I love to watch as they dodge censors with silly slangs and ridiculously simple analogies that throw off the robots in charge of bleeping and blanking obvious obscenities.
Objectifying women? hell yes. However, entertaining. Rap music is about women prostituting themselves for money and diamonds, glorifying infidelity and promiscuity all while graphically detailing the immoral behaviour of women. This is how we get lyrics like 'skeet, skeet' 'p-$$y popping' 'magic stick' 'wait 'till you see my d---' playing on radio at 8 in the morning while you're having your morning brew.

Conversely, on the other end of the spectrum we have world peace which is all about eliminating discrimination. To all who hate rap music now, don't worry you'll have your day. Today's society has made great strides towards ending discrimination. We live in a world of varying definitions of love and can appreciate companionship between race, religion, gender, age (to a degree of course). I for one, am eagerly awaiting the inevitable. If present day trends continue, yes it's true, there will certainly be an openly gay rap star in the future. Jesus! think of the potential! It's effing comedy gold! Picture this -- Despicably obscene and a needlessly thorough depictions of guy on guy action in poetic fashion. Lyrics spewed from between the gold and platinum teeth of buffed up gangsters preaching about their latest anal conquest. Men objectifying men. I'd love to see rap go there one day. Songs about men exchanging money and cars for sexual favours and we all know how promiscuous the gay community already is. Skeet skeet indeed.

If there wasn't enough motivation for world peace before you read this, then there sure as hell better be now. Let's all make this dream come true. Rap music is sick enough as it is. Let's hope for equality.

No more stupid songs

2008-01-21T18:34:00.000-08:00

This is like a general post about a pet peeve of mine that involves songs with a particular lyric. I don't understand how there are so many songs that have the phrase "...play that song again mr. DJ..." or something to that effect. Most female artists have a song like that. There's always seems to be some new song polluting the air waves with such a phrase.
Now that's a pretty harmless thing to say, what is wrong with a song like that? you might ask. Well, if you ask me, it's a dumb lyric to put in a song. If the song you're singing about is so damn good then why can't I listen to THAT one instead of listening to you sing about a BETTER song. That is just plain retarded.

Can't keep this up forever.

2008-01-13T17:56:00.000-08:00

More doodles! I need to get out more. At least this is sort of productive. Although there are more productive things I could be doing. Oh well.

Drawing at home

2008-01-12T18:49:00.001-08:00

I wanted to draw something more serious, but I kept drawing really ugly faces. I ended up drawing a bunch of shapes and it turned into this soccer playing dude. That's how I draw, with no direction. haha.
Anyways, the tablet I got for Christmas makes drawing on the drawing on the computer so much more convenient. I think this blog is just going to end up being a doodle blog more than me talking about stuff 'cause I haven't had much to talk about lately. Meh.

Nothing to report, I'm sorry.

2008-01-10T14:47:00.000-08:00

I think it was Chris Rock who had a stand up bit about guy's needing to hang out and stuff before coming home from work. He goes on to say how men need to mentally prepare themselves for all the talking and stuff they need to come home to. Of course I'm not retelling this joke to you. I'm just giving you the gist of it because I want to discuss the point.

I can relate what Chris Rock is saying. I for one need time to decompress after work before I'm mentally fit to socialize. I'm not sure women understand this process. I need time to myself to do anything. I can't be pushed into a conversation because I'm still stressed and irritable. This isn't really even a gender thing because I'm sure some girls can relate.

Here's the thing, women are always eager to talk about stuff right as soon as they can get to you but that's not always ideal. You're like, "how was your day?" "how are you?" "what? who? when? why? where?". Well, I just spent the last 10 hours of my day in complete and total misery. I woke up immediately cussing out my alarm clock wishing I was still asleep, I stew in anger sitting in bumper-to-bumper traffic on the way to work, I sit at my desk just thinking about the most horrific and torturous ways of killing my co-workers for 8 hours and then I'm back at the wheel just wishing everyone else could die all the way home.
So when I finally do get home, I need to veg out and forget/suppress my day. The last thing I want to do is to make some innocent person a victim of my average workday.

Honestly, it's horrible I know, but that's how it is. And another thing is, even though I had a whole day to accumulate potential interesting stories. I have none. A girlfriend can't believe it, but it's true. Take that previous description of what my day is like and then just replay it over and over and over and over throughout the week. That's how my day was. That's all even I care to remember about it. I am a rock in the daytime. When I finally feel up for conversation, you are my refuge.

I can never tell a story like a girl. I'm a terrible story teller. The entertainment value of my stories are totally dependent on the material. If nothing really interesting happens, I have nothing to report, I'm sorry. Girls are different, they can remember the most mundane details of everything they do and make it sound interesting or cute or something. I'm always entertained. Not only that, just being a girl allows for better material. Girls lead more eventful lives. They have a bunch of squaky, gossipy girl friends to tell them the latest morsels or information. They have guys constantly trying to impress them with shit. Random people popping in and out of their lives. Girls need to understand that average guys like me just don't have those social opportunities. When I go to the mall, people leave me alone. Old men don't try to make conversation with me, people don't give me friendly stares, nothing of the sort happens. I go out, do what I gotta do, come home, that's it. When a girl goes buys a pack of gum it turns into an adventure story.

Anyways, I'm ranting. I don't know what my point is anymore. I'm just bad at communicating with women. I honestly think I'm mildly autistic, I think I'm physically unable to interpret the emotions of a woman. I need girls to wear mood rings so I know how they are really feeling or just stop lying about being happy when they're mad or being mad when they aren't really.

Art?

2008-01-10T09:51:00.000-08:00

okay, i haven't drawn anything in a while. this is just something i did, it's supposed to be me. i got lazy drawing it out and stuff. drawing is pretty therapeutic. sometimes frustrating when you have limited talents and can't figure out how to draw something. anyways, maybe i'll post more doodles as they come along.

Juvies tried as adults?

2008-01-04T05:15:00.000-08:00

In the wake of the recent violent crimes committed by youths (teen homicides), there has been much talk about "upgrading" the current justice system to have juveniles who are accused of serious crimes be tried as adults. These knee-jerk reactions to harden the justice system always resurface after such events. But why is this all we're hearing? And who is really thinking hard about these situations?

When a teen dies because of needless youth-on-youth violence it's sad, I know. But the story from then on is the same. There's a "makeshift memorial", a "candlelight vigil", public outrage, some jazz about harder sentencing, and then we all forget. No one follows up on the issue and quite frankly, unless we are all personally affected, we probably don't care.

What I get miffed about is that ordinary people can think that locking a kid away for a few more years will show them the right way. How can people be so stupid? We're talking about kids, do you think they are at home patiently calculating their appropriate moral behaviour based on the number of years they will likely spend in prison? I fucking doubt it. If these kids were smart enough to chart out the pro's and con's to there decisions before they actually committed then they wouldn't be in trouble in the first place. Let's be honest, a teen girl tells a teen guy to go kill someone for her. He's not thinking about the difference between 3 and 15 years. He's thinking about the pink. Don't get me wrong, either way he's still a moron but the difference in the thought process is key. These so called deterrents do nothing but soothe the souls of the mindless public that don't care to even relive the adolescence for a minute. If they did, they would know where the real issue lies. At home, with broken families, neglectful parents, weeknights and weekends with kids just home alone to fend for themselves.

Yes, I blame the parents. Maybe even the school system. Education doesn't end with how-to's of math, geography, history and science. Someone should teach these kids the basics of dealing with anger, temptation or whatever it may be. Some people have kids and think it's enough to feed them and plop them in front of the TV to shut them up and go along their regular lives believing they are adequate parents. Man, people are stupid.

And that my friends, is a short story about why I hate kids.

Top 40 Rap music

2007-06-16T21:16:00.000-07:00

i find the state of today's top 40 rap music utterly amusing. particularly when the lyrics involve the rapper boasting about how fame and fortune has drastically increased his appeal to women. don't you just love that? it's laughable how in the whole process of writing you can be totally blind to the message you are putting out. which is simplistically: i can persuade girls to come in physical contact with me because i can provide them with monetary rewards. maybe it's just me but that doesn't seem like something you would want to flaunt. all you hear in music now is something like "shake it like you want this paper" or "moneymaker"...etc. doesn't it say something about your personality if your most significant encounters with women involve the exchange of money? i mean...even pimps collect money.