I had a caller today who comes into the Principal’s office for an occasional haircut. He’s a cheeky lad, convinced that his hair is beautiful and suits him. He just wants it left alone so he can grow it long, perhaps like mine.
Of course, it’s not like he comes into the Principal’s office planning to have it cut, or even with an inkling that this will happen. But it does, just infrequently enough to catch him off guard and starting to get cocky again.
Ain’t gonna happen, no way will I let it grow long and feminine. Your hair may be beautiful in the absolute sense, but hair is highly symbolic. It symbolizes strength and power for both women and men. A woman’s long hair symbolizes her sexual power over men, while a man’s long hair, at least for those with the Samson complex, symbolizes his animal strength.
It’s that same cockiness we need to break our males of, and it is very convenient that a male will grow his hair long and give us the opportunity to use this as a tool against his inflated ego. There is no nakedness like sudden and unwilling baldness.
So I tie him to the chair, and the school nurse slowly starts shearing his silky hair, laying each lock across his lap, where he can see it but not touch it, while I laugh and watch him squirm. Then the clippers come on, buzzing, crackling their way up his neckline, higher, until his hair is utterly gone and he feels shorn, naked in our presence, as a man should feel.
Soon enough we will have him broken, and he will follow the orders of the Mistress into whose custody we will release him.
Publus recently sent me a comment on one of my blog entries, and I was saving it until I had a chance to respond to it. Alas, I went to it, and it was gone. Apparently I had deleted it when cleaning out my spambot comments.
No matter, I remember the bit I was going to respond to.
Based on the sorts of punishment that he read is meted out in my school, Publus was speculating on what the proper punishment would be for someone in the position of dubya, who started a war based on deliberately falsified data. I’d add, the punishment should probably be more severe because of subsequent lies and coverups – you don’t think I’d let any of you get away with something like that, do you?
Well, I could only imagine, but it did bring to mind a forum discussion that happened a year or more back. The question was, “Who would you want to make submit to you, or who would you want to submit to?” I am truly surprised that I was the only one who came up with dubya as the one who I would want to submit. Must be that he commands too much respect.
Well, here’s to bringing down the average. Cheers!
I’ve just come across your site and I am intrigued and impressed. Having listened to a recording of yours on Keen, I know this is a mix of fantasy and reality but I’m going to pose a few serious questions/comments in the hope that you respond in earnest.
I became interested in the plight of boys’ education while reading a several page spread in a weekend newspaper back in 2000. It dealt with the educational symposium held in Seattle that year. The focus was on boys’ inability to compete with the girls intellectually. One solution proffered was to have boys enter school a year later than girls, which would help to offset their disadvantage of being less mature than their female classmates.
While I am sure it would be advantageous not to start students who are not yet physically or emotionally ready for school, a study has shown that holding back students, even at the start of schooling, will make them more likely to drop out before completing high school. The effect was attributed to the students being older than their peers. One could only guess whether holding back most or all boys would have that same effect.
Just to bring this up to date, now that my blog seems to have acquired a PR (page rank) of 3/10…
According to Pingoat:
Your Blog’s Value is $173.89!
Inbound links: 117 Technorati rank: 59495
…which is up from $15 or so last April, a 1053% increase. Not a bad rate of increase. If the current trend keeps up, by September my blog should be worth $1999.74. Cool. I should be able to sell some good advertising.
…which is up from $18,629.82 this past October 5, a quarterly increase of 72%. I like this trend. In two years, my blog will be worth two and a half million dollars. Can I retire on the value of my blog?
In this post I am responding to a comment of Publus’s that was responding… Well, no need to reprint it. You can go read it here. I’ll respond to its basic points, which transcend individual blog entries and commentary.
For the most part, I agree with Publus when he says that the positions pundits and pols have taken on issues are positions of moral absolutism, and that for them the ultimate proof of whether we are right or wrong is whether we are with them or against them, not how well we construct our arguments or what they are based on. They permit themselves the freedom of mix-and-match factoids, assembled and reassembled as a matter of convenience when someone sees through their smokescreens. The only issue I would take is that Publus has, perhaps, not taken it all the way to its roots.
Search Cafepress for your favorite fetish here!
The problem is not so much (or only) that they have taken a position of moral absolutism – “with us” or “agin us,” but they have reached their position independent of observation or real facts. Remember what I said of these modern thinkers in an earlier post discussing the abominable state of modern analytical thought – for people like this facts don’t matter. Facts are of less value than ideas, and all ideas are equally valid and deserving of respect. In fact (sic), for people who think this way, facts can only obscure an issue. According to this logic (and it does sometimes appear to be the prevailing logic), knowing anything about a subject or an issue will cloud your thoughts. It will slant your opinions. Only people who are truly ignorant have any wisdom, because only their thoughts are free. So ideas not based on fact – or as I think of them, non-reality-based ideas – are most worthy of support, and since facts don’t matter, you can make them up to support your premise as you find it expedient.
So think of this if you’re watching Fox News or listening to O’Reilly or any of those other think-a-trons. They based their opinions on nothing whatever, they know it, and this makes them feel more wise than you, me, or anybody except our president, who (as we all know) knows nothing whatever, is not learning anything, and has made it his goal to stay that course.
It looks like we’ve got a new category here. One too many political rant filed under “miscellaneous” made me make a category just for political rants.
Just in case the story goes “poof”, I’ll summarize it here briefly.
During one week in September of 2005, five giant squid washed up on beaches near Vigo, Spain. The largest was more than twelve meters long.
Apparently giant squid strandings are not as unusual in Vigo as they would be on my local beach. Nevertheless, since the creatures are rare and hard to observe when they’re alive, scientists take the opportunity to study those that strand on beaches.
One interesting thing they found, something seen before in other strandings, was a male who had inseminated himself accidentally – or so they surmised. This had been observed previously with other males found washed up on beaches.
What happens is that the normal mating activity involves a male grabbing a female and holding her long enough to inject her with a packet of sperm. Since she probably doesn’t want to be injected, and she’s bigger than he is, the male has developed the longest penis in the world to safely reach her. According to the article,
The male’s sexual organ is actually a bit like a high-pressure fire hose and is normally nearly as long as his body – excluding legs and head.
So it seems that a penis that big is a little hard to aim properly.
Or maybe the problem is that the researchers just don’t think like giant squid. Maybe the pain of being injected with this was less than the pleasure of letting it go. Perhaps, given the fact that he was in the process of stranding on a beach, he decided to do it once more for old time’s sake, and masturbated, injecting himself with the packet, giving new meaning to the phrase, “Go fuck yourself.”
I happened to read a little piece in this morning’s paper. It was one of those color commentaries that are written by highly opinionated people, apparently for the sole purpose of being controversial. Just so I don’t need to quote it extensively, I looked and found it for you on the net. So certainty is bad – but are you sure about that?
It’s written by Jonah Goldberg, a young conservative editor for the National Review. Yup, he’s young, or at least youngish on the geezer scale (b.1969). I’ll be waiting for him to get some wisdom, but I won’t be holding my breath.
He has written an angry diatribe against people (exclusively liberals, of course) who don’t think blind faith is a good thing, and feel fairly sure about this. Um…ok. Well at least we know where you stand, Jonah. Blind faith good. Reason bad. Knowledge bad. Wisdom…well who needs that when you already know everything you need to know based on blind faith?
According to his logic, true certainty is only obtainable through blind faith. Real facts are illusory, a distraction, a vale of tears. I guess. He pokes fun at people who express certainty in this way, and asks them, “Are you sure?” as though he’s come up with some sort of humorous self-evident truth.
News for you, boy. You forgot to ask yourself the same question. I’m sure you have no clue if you’ve firmly placed your faith exclusively in things that are either demonstrably false or based on absolutely nothing but your wishful thinking. After all, Archie Bunker said, “Faith is when you believe in something that nobody in his right mind would believe in.”
He says, “…for the new “liberal” (sic) champions of skepticism and philosophical humility, hell is other people’s certainty.” Ok, liberal is liberal, but “liberal” is not liberal, those quotes make it mean ‘conservative’. This sentence is just so messed up and meaningless. Perhaps the only reason why liberals might find it hellish to be in your presence is because you’re such a dumbass. And there’s nothing worse than a dumbass who is a crusader for his own bizarre brand of moral certainty. Just look at what an embarassment our Prez is.
So Jonah, are you really sure about that?