Paul Ryan: The Cuntflap to End all Cuntflaps

I don't live in the United States, nor have I ever really spoken about U.S. politics, but this Paul Ryan guy, running mate for Mitt Romney on the Republican presidential campaign... holy shit.

Upon seeing this "Hey girl..." meme on Twitter which appeared to be parodying his conservative views, I decided to head to Wikipedia to check just how conservative he actually is (I had no clue what his views were at the time; all I knew was that he was a Republican). After reading his social policies, I wasn't surprised.

I was appalled.

For starters, Ryan is, and always has been, staunchly pro-life. This on its own, while something I strongly disagree with, is also something I saw coming a mile away. But, it gets worse: not only does he support making it a criminal offence for a woman to get an abortion (as in, making it a punishable crime on the woman’s part, even in cases of rape and incest), he also supported legislation which would entitle fertilised eggs to the same rights as persons. Fertilised eggs are not persons. I've studied the concept of personhood. While I am far from an expert, from what I understand, a person is a self-conscious, rational being, aware of its existence over time. Traits of a person also usually include:

• capacity for pain/pleasure/desire/memory 
• awareness of time
• ability to communicate/interact socially 
• ability to think intentionally 
• ability to solve problems

Fertilised eggs possess none of those qualities. Yes, they will eventually develop into persons during pregnancy, but fertilisation alone does not signify an instantaneous initiation into personhood. 'Human being' is not synonymous with 'person'. To quote George Carlin: 

See, the really hardcore people will tell you life begins at fertilization. Fertilization, when the sperm fertilizes the egg... But, even after the egg is fertilized, it's still six or seven days before it reaches the uterus and pregnancy begins, and not every egg makes it that far. Eighty percent of a woman's fertilized eggs are rinsed and flushed out of her body once a month during those delightful few days she has. They wind up on sanitary napkins, and yet they are fertilized eggs. So basically what these anti-abortion people are telling us is that any woman who's had more than more than one period is a serial killer!

Back in Town, 1996

Add to that the proposed restrictions on IVF and birth control, and bringing an end to all funding towards Planned Parenthood (including the family planning program of Title X, a preventative health care initiative), and you’ve got yourself someone who simply doesn’t seem to understand that we don’t need any more fucking people on this planet. 

Not only is he pro-life, he is also pro-gun—also not that big a shock. He openly opposes stronger background checks at gun shows, and he wants permits for state concealed carry (allowing someone to carry a concealed handgun in the state of permit-issue) to be recognised in any state—basically meaning that if you can legally carry a concealed weapon in one state, you can legally do the same anywhere in the country.

So, let's get this straight: he supports making it illegal to kill something we're still debating is a person, but he also supports making it easier for you to kill what we can confirm is a person. What the fucking fuck is going on here?

Of course, he also opposes LGBT rights, but does so beyond simply maintaining the homophobic status quo. He supports banning gay marriage constitutionally (making it illegal even in those states which have already legalised it), opposed the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell”, opposes same-sex adoption, and voted against legislation expanding hate-crime law to cover “crimes motivated by a victim’s actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation [or] gender identity.”—not much of a surprise given that he is practically a walking hate machine.

On the fiscal side of things, I can’t give a detailed analysis since I am rather uneducated on economic issues in the U.S., but I do know that Ryan wishes to abolish corporate income tax and reduce existing income tax rates, which plays right into the hands of corporate America. With this in mind, further down the page, it also says one of his favourite bands is Rage Against the Machine—you know, that leftist, socialist music group, known for performing songs that stated no matter which party you voted for, control was in the hands of big business. Yeah, Ryan likes that band. He must only have their instrumentals; they’d be good enough to convert his iPod into earmuffs to avoid reporters, as he likes to do.

I want to kill this man—not in a joking way, like “man, don’tcha just wanna kill that Paul Ryan?” I mean it: if he ever comes to this country holding the views he does, he will go home in a fucking body bag. Not that I’m a consequentialist, but shit, if I was, I’d be obliged to kill the motherfucker: his death would ultimately bring less suffering than his continued existence currently does. I’m not saying Obama and the Democrats are angels by comparison, but when you factor in Romney’s similar (but not quite so extreme) views on the same issues, the Democrats are evidently the lesser of two evils.

Never think it can’t get any worse, cos it will.

Labels: Leave my Metaphorical Forehead Alone!

Anything different, that’s what they’re gonna talk about: race, religion, ethnic and national background, jobs, income, education, social status, sexuality—anything they can do to keep us fighting with each other, so that they can keep going to the bank!

George Carlin

I was in a lecture today, being taught about Oedipus Rex and the context in which it was written. The lecturer, incidentally a former student of the uni, started to talk about how the text was relevant to different groups of people today, even though it was written 2500 years ago; one of those groups was, verbatim, "us [the class] as intellectuals".

I've been thinking about this for a while: this idea of labelling people with a certain defining attribute or personality trait. I think it's kind of ignorant. I am not just an 'intellectual'; I am a human being who does a lot more than think. Yes, I'd like to think of myself as intelligent, but does that mean my intelligence defines who I am? I don't think so. I guess if the label isn't seen as exclusive—i.e., I am an intellectual among other things, then it's a non-issue—but, so often in our world, we're quick to judge. I'm not trying to remove myself from the issue either; I do the very same. More often than not, when I watch videos criticising religion, something along the lines of "Stupid Christians..." or "Fucking Muslims..." goes through my head, even though the fault of whatever issue is at hand cannot possibly be attributed to every single member of the faith in existence—that's premature judgement, plain and simple.

And, for the linguistic manipulator, that's what labels are for: instigating instantaneous judgement unto a person based on a particular quality or aspect of that person's life or personality, and the stereotypes we have attributed to said qualities and aspects—when a mere adjective turns into a sole classification. Don't bother looking into the rest of their persona—we have the answer right here! We did the work for you! Ain't we a swell bunch? And in this world of access-on-demand impatience, people go along with it because it's the easier route. People take everything they get and question nothing, even when it's a sceptic feeding them the opinions.

Thing is, from what I see, people are just arrogant. We like that feeling of judgement, whether delivering the judgement (basically all a stand-up comic really does :P) or merely asserting it without having done the actual work. So commonly, I see people always asserting themselves and searching for avenues to superiority, even if it's only partial superiority. There's such a fine line between "I made this. I think it's pretty good :)" and "I made this. Isn't it awesome? It's so awesome. I'm awesome." It's such a small step now from acknowledgement to bragging.

I'm getting off topic :P

I don't want to see people through this label framework. I want to see people as individuals, not part of some autonomous collective. I don't want to see my friends who are Christians as my "Christian friends", but I so often do. Recognising their faith is a good thing, a sign of respect through acknowledgement of their beliefs; but does that religiosity alone separate them from my "non-Christian friends"? I don't think so. I mean, my friend group, while mostly irreligious, has at least one Christian I can confirm, and one or two who are part of families where some people are religious, even if it's to a very small degree. We're all friends, and more often than not, we put this shit aside and just hang out, so how does anyone's religiosity (or lack thereof) come into play here? It just doesn't. Sure, they might bring up a point of view in discussion that's based on their religious beliefs, but that doesn't change the fact that they remain part of a friend group with beliefs ranging from "raised as a Christian from birth" to "religion had no part in my upbringing whatsoever and plays no role in my life at the present time".

That's another thing that gets me with labels: their use on children and the effect that has. Let me get one thing straight: as far as religious institutionalisation goes, I think it to be child abuse, pure and simple. It's intellectual rape: you're depriving your child of a well-rounded point of view and systematically fucking their ability to make informed decisions. No parent in their right mind would do that. I have no problem with religious education, so long as it's balanced with education on other perspectives; but, of course, most religious parents simply indulge in the former, not even considering the latter. If your God is so fucking amazing, you can have faith in respecting your child's intelligence and their ability to find their own way to your God.

That said, children raised in a religious household oftentimes refer to themselves as Christian or Catholic or Hindu or whatever else, even when they're not really religious at all! I've seen people who 'identify' as being part of a particular faith when they don't really believe in the actual doctrines, read the scriptures, attend services, or anything else you kind of have to do to actually be religious. If you're not sure of what you believe yet, that's fine, but don't just photocopy your parent's label and stick it to your own forehead—that's just fucking lazy. You have to work this shit out, do some research, figure out what you actually believe in before you start calling yourself anything. You have to investigate the arguments for and against the existence of god (in the broad sense of the term), determine the accuracy of sets of scriptures, and come to a conclusion about your beliefs before you tout them. You can change those beliefs at any time—you could see things differently later down the track—but you have to find your own set of beliefs rather than just parroting what your parents believe in.

This inaccuracy is what makes stuff like the Census tell a different story to the one that's actually true. It doesn't matter if 66% of Australians identify with some version of Christianity—who cares? If you want to know who's actually Christian, it's far better to go off church-attendance figures, statistics regarding belief in the Bible and its verisimilitude, participation in religious rituals and public events, shit like that. Who you are is defined far stronger by what you do than what you say.

The same could be said for nationalities and ethnicities: just because you're from Country X doesn't mean you'll act in a certain way. It might mean you were raised in a different culture and have different values, but that's the keyword: might. Racism stems from not giving those of different nationalities the benefit of the doubt, shunning them before they have a chance to demonstrate what they as an individual believe is right and what they do in society. And if your parents were from a different country to the one you were raised in, but you were raised predominately in the country you still live in, what fucking difference does it make? In most cases, influence in identity surely extends far beyond one's parents and kin in general.

Politics is another area where labels come into play all too frequently. Everyone's a 'left-winger' or a 'right-winger', a 'liberal' or a 'conservative', a 'libertarian' or a 'socialist'. I don't classify myself under any of these labels, for two reasons. 1: I'm not educated in political issues enough to make a decisive judgement (I don't keep up with political news anywhere near as much as I should), and 2: my judgement on an issue depends not on which side of the proverbial scale it falls, but on the findings of my investigation into the specific issue itself. I would say I'm generally left-leaning, but I don't support any left-wing branch of politics (does Australia even really fucking have that? :P).

Like, get this: our Labor party is (as 'liberal' as it really gets over here) opposes, in our bipartisan political reality, the Liberal party... who, might I add, aren't liberal at all; they're definitely conservative. That's right: in Australia, you can even get away with lying even in the title of your political party :P  Anyway, a few years back, the communications minister for the Labor party introduced legislation that proposed mandatory censorship of the Internet at ISP level across the country. I don't agree with that at all; it violates what I see as a basic entitlement to freedom of speech and access to information, not to mention how much this would cripple our already substandard digital infrastructure—intercepting data and scanning it to verify its status as 'permissible content' at ISP level has been shown to slow transfer speeds to a halt. Yes, our government is also planning a to implement the National Broadband Network (replacement of existing copper wiring with fibre-optics), but throwing a mandatory filter over that is like constructing a 50 lane highway but only opening a toll booth in one lane. This isn't dumb as a proposition with conservative aims,  nor as a proposition coming from our left-wing of politics; it's just dumb as an idea. I can't use that legislation to trash either party in any other area; that makes no sense.

Might I also add that, metaphorically, you need both a left wing and a right wing to fly a plane; and, it doesn't matter what side of the plane you sit on because it's always the same two people in the cockpit. Elect who you wish; regardless, the plane goes where the pilot fucking wants it to go :P

Even on a personal level, this can get to me. Not only was I classified today as an 'intellectual', but I also like to think of myself as a 'comedian' and a 'writer'. In the same way that going around saying you're an 'intellectual' can be a little arrogant, I think the same of going around calling myself a 'comedian'. In the dictionary sense, a comedian is simply someone who engages in the formation and delivery of comedy, regardless of their level of skill or success. But so many people think that to be called a comedian, you have to be good at it—you have to be funny. I've gotten plenty of laughs, and my comedy videos are proof of that, but I still think it a little cocky to say to people "Yeah, I'm a comedian.", because then, for all I know, I'm now expected to be funny in conversation, or I have an implicit 'joke quota' these people want me to meet, or some silly shit like that. I always refer to myself as an 'amateur comedian' because while it's true that I tell jokes with some level of success, I also have a lot of fucking work to do before I'm anywhere near the likes of Robin Williams, Jimmy Carr, Frankie Boyle, Jim Jefferies, Steve Hughes—the people we know are comedians. Once I get there (if I get there at all), then I'll just be a comedian for I will have thoroughly proved myself to be beyond amateur in nature.

For now, though, I'm just a human being. Who needs to go to class :P

Ass: Kicking It and Chasing It

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Ronery: Just Her Onry

I recently went back to uni. I've had two lectures so far; in both sat the girl I like.

Alone.

She sat by herself in both the lectures. It's kind of sad. I mean, I thought she had friends—I know she has friends because I've seen her with them, but I guess none of them are in these two lectures... which contain pretty much every student studying the same degree she is.

I mean, even I have at least one friend in this class; he's actually one of the two reasons I haven't taken the opportunity and sat next to her. He's going through a rough time as far as his health goes, so I'm not exactly gonna say to him "Hey, there's this cute girl I wanna get to know so I'm gonna go sit over here. Have fun being in pain and everything, hope that works out for you :)" That's a dick move :P

But the main reason is that it just seems creepy. Some dude who's never spoken to you all of a sudden decides to sit next to you? After he had three months to do that in the previous semester? When he knows and speaks to none of the people you do? That's also a dick move :P

I still want to sit next to her though. I mean, sitting by yourself in one class where you don't know anyone? Hell, I did that in a few lectures and tutorials last semester as well. But this semester, having a chance to start fresh, I decided to sit with a friend—surely she has friends in class by now. 

There were plenty of spaces next to people where she could have sat too; she seems to want to sit alone. In the first lecture, it was a double horseshoe table configuration: a horseshoe-shaped arrangement of tables in the middle, surrounded by a bigger horseshoe of tables along all 3 sides. Both sides of the bigger horseshoe were against a wall; she sat near the back on one side, and by the time the room had filled, there was a space on either side of her. Not too many spaces in between people though, so it could just as easily be that she got there late and had to sit where she did; there's at least a potential alternative explanation.

The most recent lecture, however, was completely different. This time it was just rows and columns of tables, all separated, with two to a table, everyone facing the same way. She sat in the back right corner, alone again, when there were plenty of tables with only one other person at them (I sat in the back left corner, only realising when she answered a question). She even had her stuff spread out all over the table; she clearly wanted to sit alone, perhaps even knowing no one would sit near her.

I'm just noticing things here, and I could be proven totally wrong in the next few weeks, but it's just odd to see someone being even more antisocial than me. I mean, in the second lecture, she even put her feet up on the table. I fucking hate rules and authority, but I'd never even think of doing that! On one hand, that's fucking awesome disrespect right there :P  But it's also another sign of the apathy I don't like in her. If she doesn't give a fuck what the lecturer thinks about her feet being on the table, I get the impression that she's not gonna give a fuck about my feelings if I decide to communicate with her on any level :P  That's not to mention that I didn't get any funny feelings or butterflies in my stomach when I saw her on either occasion... maybe I don't feel for her anymore? I almost wanna see her happy just so I can feel that rush again, or so I can know if it's real.

I don't know if it's a good idea, even if I disregard the existing reasoning. Will it even make her happy? Or comfortable? I mean, she can't be that shy; if she wasn't shy, she wouldn't be putting her feet on the table and she wouldn't put her hand up to answer the lecturer's questions :P  I dunno.

I still wanna sit next to her.

Hypersensitivity: The Kind a New Type of Toothpaste Won't Fix

I love this motherfucker: so blunt, so brutal, so funny. Need moar. Moar.

Anyway, onto the point. I'm getting kind of sick of my mentality. This ridiculous "everything's so hard and I'll never amount to anything" bullshit, it's gotta stop somewhere. I overreact to so much stimuli (in terms of positivity and negativity), and what little it's now taking to get me into a hypo/hyper active state is absurd.

Like, about an hour ago, I saw some post on Facebook about my ex getting back from some trip she went on. I instantly feel anxious and tense, feeling the need to close every Facebook tab I have open, stop writing the comedy I was working on, and play Tetris to get my mind off it. Seriously, the fuck? My ex got back from a trip—why do I feel weird because of that? It's nothing that should make me feel uncomfortable. And it took little more than even seeing her name to set me off in the first place; again, why? Am I going to feel funny every time I see her name? I'm making way too many connections with what I'm seeing. I have an ex + I see her name = I remember that I had a failed relationship = I realise I was part of something that failed = I think I'm a failure. The 87 I got in my HSC Advanced Maths is fucking with me here—this isn't exactly the outcome my maths teacher had in mind when she was teaching :P

Another instance of overreaction came a few days back when I saw that some other girl I liked ages ago is travelling in Europe. Again, all it took was the sight of her name and the mention of the activity, and I was in over my head. This wasn't so much a depressive episode as it was a blind rush of energy, leading me to get out of my chair and pace around for a bit talking to myself, but it's still fucking retarded that it made me react that much. Some young woman I met is in a different continent—whoopde-fucking-do! This doesn't relate to me; it's not important to me; I'm not part of the picture. Why am I freaking out over stupid shit like this? Again, drawing conclusions. I liked her, got rejected, managed to move on by finding someone else, but lost all that; now, I know she's enjoying herself in another part of the world, taking on responsibility I never could and doing things I wouldn't have the courage to do in a million years. I picture her in bars, drinking, dancing, meeting people, having a good time—the very atmosphere I feel uncomfortable in—and I don't have the slightest fucking clue what she's doing! I'm just guessing, and the guesses are practically based on what I know will make me feel bad about myself. I'm effectively going nuts when I picture her doing something our age group just does, something normal, that I'm afraid of. You know you're in over your head when you're overreacting to things whose nature as nonexistent merit them no reaction whatsoever :P

The negative filter I see myself through is becoming the default, and I don't want that. I've always been one to believe that so long as I recognise that there's a problem with my perspective, it is not beyond self-repair. If I delve into self-depreciation any further, it's going to quicken the exponential downward spiral; and that's what this is: a self-accelerating image problem. I see something that provokes a negative thought, I feel bad because I infer far too much from the data, and that just happens over and over. I use to think of like a waveform with peaks and troughs, but the peaks are getting higher and the troughs lower. I'm getting more sensitive to things; I have to become less sensitive in order to live more comfortably as a young adult. I have to indulge in these "mature things" people my age do to become OK with doing them. My eating habits are kinda hardwired into me now, so they probably won't change; consumption of drugs and alcohol... maybe, if I feel comfortable with it; driving... I guess I'll have to eventually. But going to a bar or something with friends to hang out? For fuck's sake, that only requires me to show up; and, I mean, my friends will be there, so it couldn't be that bad, could it? I mean, if I wanna meet a girl, this is the way to do it! Pussy isn't gonna come to my front door and say "Here I am! :D"—doesn't happen that way :P

Most of the dreams and desires I have are of relatively plain things, at least as far as I can tell. I mean, last night, I dreamed of going out for dinner with some blonde woman in a red dress who I'd never seen before. She was drinking red wine and laughing at things I was saying (no clue what we were eating, lol); then we went back to her place and started making out. Upon her realisation of where this was headed, she nervously told me she'd never had sex before. I said that I hadn't either, she smiled, then we made love. ...seriously, does anyone else my age have dreams like that? To me, that's something a fucking 30 year old does, not me :P Don't get me wrong; I have crazy dreams too. I once envisioned going on stage at the Apollo (which has the word 'APOLLO' written in lightbulbs across the back wall), grabbing the mic stand, and smashing the lights of the two L's and the two O's, right before proceeding to talk about iPhone apps... that is, until I realised Apollo has only one P in it... it's a good thing I dreamed about that before I got a chance to do it, or I would have looked like a right cunt :P  But, just in terms of my personal and social life, what I want is rather ho-hum. If I went out every few weeks and let go, I'd be happy with that. Eventually, I'd probably grow accustomed and want to party all the fucking time, but at least I'd be going places and doing stuff.

I've thought about doing comedy more and more too. I'm writing amendments to an hour-long show I did last year for about 50 students from my high school (which sucked, hence the amendments :P), and I'm really looking forward to recording the material and putting my uncensored, full-length show on YouTube. It just goes to show that all I need is something to look forward to and I'm fucking set. I mean, I obviously need to work towards it too, but the push to work comes from the desire to see the outcome, so that's taken care of already. I might even ask my UniBar if I can perform there. I've got a few 'safe' bits that I know will work, that have been tested on audiences before; if that goes well, I could experiment more and develop my own unique voice and tone. It makes me really happy to dream about being on stage at the Melbourne International Comedy Festival, or the Montreal Festival, or the Edinburgh Festival, or on any TV broadcast, and push every boundary they put in front of me. I don't know if I ever will (it's a bit silly thinking any exposure this comedy video will get will somehow get me shortlisted for a comedy festival :P) but I like to think about it, so I will. Too often, I tell myself that these dreams are unattainable; but they're only certain to be unattainable if I don't work towards them at all. A little work can turn into a lot more :)

I have a friend who also blogs, and she's blogged quite a lot about the efforts she's made to lose weight and lead a healthier life. Every entry has her achieving more and more, pushing herself to the next level, progressing to new heights, and getting closer to her ultimate goals. The cynic in me sees this and says "exercise is only pausing the clock; all the life you earn through a good diet and exercise you effectively waste through counting calories and running in circles :P"... then he also says "but you can't say shit because you're a lazy cunt, and while people call her 'beautiful', no one will ever think you to be the hottest guy in the room because you look like you belong in a science classroom teaching children about their skeletal structure—I mean, a woman could mistake your right arm for your dick and still call you impotent :P". First off, who's the real cunt: me or him :P  But, more importantly, she's making a conceited effort to improve herself and she's succeeding. She's got to put in the hard yards but they fucking pay off; and it also gives her more energy and motivation to keep at it! Just like I have a negative exponential spiral that's pushing me downwards, she has a positive exponential spiral that pushes her upwards; sure, she still fucks up and makes mistakes, but it's still a general trend of improvement.

I hate all that "turn that frown upside-down", "don't stop believing in yourself" semantics bullshit—anyone trying to fuck me around with empty language like that is a deluded faggot who needs their fucking head pulled out of their arse—but I want to appreciate the concept of self-betterment and see it as an alternative to persistent self-depreciation. In one of the bits I'm doing for this comedy video of mine, I talk about my high school reference (or 'letter of recommendation') and how everything it says is a complete load of shit. My approach to study was not "conscientious and thoughtful", I did not display "school and house spirit", and I am not a "genuine, quiet" person ('quiet', in an employment context, is just a synonym for 'submissive' :P). It's a self-depreciative bit, but it's because the school is lying; they are the target of the humour. When I beat myself up because I'm too lazy or unmotivated to do anything beneficial, that's a whole different story—it's still self-depreciative, but I'm lying to myself. It's not humourous at all; and I'm bullshitting myself out of hard work and trying new things simply because I can't be bothered. That's just plain derpy :P

I guess I just want to better myself and see improvement in my life, see dreams actually come true and stuff. I want to hold my girlfriend by the waist and slow-dance with her while staring into her eyes and indulging in her natural smile, but I can't fucking do that without meeting the bitch first, can I :P  I wanna get on TV and explore new comic ground, but I can't do that unless I walk onto a stage somewhere and get myself seen, can I :P  I wanna actually be able to enjoy nights out rather than sitting to the side being uncomfortable (or simply not going at all), but I'm not gonna do that without letting myself fall victim to potentially shitty music and a pool cue to the back of the head, am I :P

Even as I write this, I feel happy, like I have potential. I know I can't let it go to my head and become arrogant or too complacent (fallen for that one too many times :P) but there's a big difference between a realistic outlook on one's future and simply assuming you'll get the worst possible outcome in any given scenario :P

Now... how to maintain this mindset forever... >.>

Ignorance: Avoided by Reading More than one Book.

Yesterday, I opened my mailbox to find a pamphlet that says 'Jesus Christ: HE IS YOUR ANSWER' in my mailbox. I read it cover to cover. It sounded like propaganda, it had no real substance to its message, and it made Christians look incredibly ignorant—pretty much what you'd expect from the mentally inept people who usually spout this crap. It's not the fact that it promoted a religion that made it stupid; it's the fact that the people who wrote it were clearly retarded and had no clue as to the reality of the world around them. More on that piece of shit later.

I've been thinking about religion quite a bit lately. To put it simply, I think the aim of all religions is to fool, control and abuse the intellectually inept and those who can't properly critically think. Its goal is to regulate and manipulate, not to save like they so often claim. If you need to stick a label to my forehead, I am an agnostic (in terms of god in general), and an atheist (in terms of the Abrahamic God).

This said, however, I do not automatically hate or even dislike someone if and when I find out they have faith in a religion of some form—this alone does not make someone worth hating or disliking. The moment they say something of pure religious conviction that contradicts scientific knowledge or basic common sense, I usually lose respect for said person very, very quickly. Two of my closest friends are both Christians, and I don't know what I would have done without them. They've helped me countless times when I was in need, without banging on about their shit; they're both intelligent, caring people, regardless of their faith. So I don't develop disdain for a person simply because of their religious background—only on one's actions and intentions do I judge someone.

Even my first (and, at this stage, only :P) girlfriend is Christian. I knew of her faith before we started dating, but I couldn't care less at the time. Did it honestly matter? I couldn't have given less of a shit about her beliefs back then, even though I didn't share them; it blew me away that she'd put aside our differences just so we could be together. It never came between us, not for a long time. I knew it probably meant she would be unwilling to explore sexual avenues, but this was our first relationship, and it lasted little more than six months. I wasn't going to ask anyway, because religious or irreligious, we weren't ready for that kind of intimacy, and discussing it would just have made her uncomfortable. I was lucky to be with her at all; far be it from me to push things :P

Well, as much as I understood that, I was still going to play "Bash the Bible Basher".

Skip ahead about four months. By this time, I'd become wrapped up in more controversial stand-up comedians, starting with George Carlin, and moving on to Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, etc. Anyone familiar with even the gist of their work will cite its dark, cynical, anti-authoritarian nature; and that's what I became: darkly cynical and anti-authoritarian :P  I quickly grew to internally criticise religion, writing more and more on the subject in short monologues. At the same time, our year was doing some kind of life skills program (I would have thought you got those by... living... life... o.O). Among the workshops was one on homosexuality, and its tolerance in society—a few gay people came in to discuss their experiences, and would answer any questions the group had. My then-girlfriend was in the same group as me, so we did the workshop at the same time. After it ended, we left the building. Upon reaching the area where we hung out, I was about to reek of bigotry:

"Well, that was a bit pointless for you, wasn't it?"

"What do you mean?"

"Well, you're Christian, so you think gay people are all going to Hell anyway."

...see what I mean :P  I've more or less jumped to the conclusion she's homophobic based purely on her supposed religious beliefs. Now, I can't remember this conversation word for word, but it went something like this:

"Well, it's not like I hate gay people or anything——"

"Yeah, but you think they go to Hell just because they're gay."

"Well, I do think homosexuality is a sin, but that doesn't mean——"

"According to you, people go to Hell if they sin even once. Isn't that putting them on the same level as murderers?"

She now has tears in her eyes. She starts to cry, albeit holding back the tears to speak:

"I don't think gay people are on the same level as murderers; that's not what I think at all. It's not like I think gay people be punished in the same way murderers are; it's God who views all sins as equal, not me. I don't think gay people should be treated like murderers or anything like that. It's God's job to judge them, not mine."

At this point, it has come to my immediate attention that I am being a dick—an arrogant, bigoted, convoluted dick :P  I basically attacked her for what she might have believed, and for some pretty extreme potential beliefs at that. She wasn't a Bible basher at all, yet I treated her like one all the same. Realising what I'd done:

"...I'm sorry. I shouldn't have lashed out at you like that; it wasn't right——"

She then held her arms out, beckoning me towards her. I went to her, and she hugged me, tighter than she ever had before. I wrapped my arms around; I started to unwrap them about 10 seconds later, but she was still clinging on, so I stayed with her, still not aware of the full impact my actions were to have. It's a cruel irony that one of the closest moments we had came as a result of me being a dimwitted, overly-judgemental fucknugget. It frightens me to think that this event may have destroyed her feelings for me—it's not like I didn't deserve it, but it's still unnerving for me to think the only argument we had was this intense, and that from that point onwards, things weren't really the same. We never fought before this, about anything.

I mention this story because I know a lot of atheists and agnostics like to take the moral highroad and say 'we never try to force our beliefs on other people, unlike you religious bastards!' As my story demonstrates, this isn't true—it's all on the individual. I was the one being a bigoted cunt here, unlike the religious person, who had never tried to lay her beliefs on me a day in her life. Her parents had invited me to her Youth Group thing when we started dating, but that's as far as the word spread, so to speak.

Not too long after that, school finished, and she went on a trip to the United States to see relatives for about a month. She came over to my house once before she left, and we exchanged Christmas presents. She got me a Super Mario Chess Set—she evidently knows what I like, because that was awesome. I got her a necklace—I wanted to get her a copy of an anime film I'd heard about that was based off a series she liked, but couldn't find the damn thing anywhere :P  This, when I look back on it, makes it apparent to me that the relationship hadn't been too damaged by what I'd said. We kept in touch while she was over there over MSN, and nothing seemed awry. When she got back, however, she wasn't open to me at all. I knew it was over by the weekend, and the following Monday, I had to get someone else to give me the bad news because she wouldn't tell me. The best six months of my life ends here.

Months later, I was still trying to get over it. I'd left my friend group, going to the library at recess and lunch rather than outside to see them. Meanwhile, she started going out with a friend of mine; this I only found out about the day before our Year 12 Formal, so you can imagine how shitty I felt about that :P  Thing is, they split only two months after they'd started going out. I remember the day I saw 'Relationship Status: Single' printed on his Wall: I was fucking ecstatic. It was that simplistic, competitive animal inside of me looking at the numbers and gloating in his defeat. "I went out with her for longer than you, I did more stuff with her than you, I was closer to her than you; I win, you lose >:D". A dickish thing to think, most certainly; but when you're down, you'll look for anything to pick you up. From what I understood, she simply didn't like him as much anymore, and they'd been talked into it somewhat by friends, so it was nothing out of the ordinary.

Now skip ahead another six months to a random meetup with friends (little more than two weeks before the publishing of this entry). I'm well and truly past this shit now, and he and I are still friends—I'm pretty sure he doesn't even know I thought that way about him :P  The subject of their relationship was brought up (while he wasn't around, if I recall correctly) and it was mentioned that my ex's parents pressured her into leaving him because he wasn't Christian.

That fucked with my head, big time. My mindset instantly changed. Granted, I was no longer thinking "Haha, I'm better than you"—that mindset was limited to the night I'd seen the Facebook announcement—but my mind was now at the complete opposite end of the spectrum. Now, I felt enraged at the situation: he got royally fucked over. Shit, she got royally fucked over! He got judged prematurely by her fundamentalist, intolerant parents (who seemed to be fine with me, from my experience with them), and she got fucked out of making her own goddamned decisions. She was 18 by the time they'd started dating. She's an adult. She can think for herself. She decides who she does and doesn't go out with. This friend of mine isn't a drug dealer, nor a violent criminal, nor a rapist, nor a scumbag; he wouldn't do anything to hurt her; he's not a bad person. He did nothing to deserve the judgement he received.

And no, this isn't the chauvinist in me trying to step in and valiantly defend my fair lady; I'm not trying to win her back in any sense by appealing to some code of morality. The fact of the matter is that her fucking parents have no place deciding who their adult daughter does and doesn't go out with. There are only two prerequisites for a relationship here: Person A wants to go out with Person B, and Person B wants to go out with Person A. That's the end of the process. If she decides on her own that she doesn't want to go out with a man who isn't Christian, so be it. The point still stands: she goes out with whoever the fuck she wants to go out with. Shit, if I'm not right for her, can she at least be free to choose my fucking replacement?

It disgusts me that her parents have that much influence, that anyone has that much influence in deciding the outcome of a relationship other than the people involved. It's clear abuse of the "Honour thy Mother and Father" commandment; just because it's there doesn't mean parents have the right to be uptight, ignorant, judgemental cunts.

Because that's what this shit does to some people: it fucks their minds right up. It destroys their ability to think properly and actually deal with situations rationally; it permanently tarnishes their perspective on everything. Her parents may have disagreed with her choice to date an irreligious guy, and even expressed their opinions to her—that's their right as people—but I'll be damned if I'm going to think it appropriate for them to fucking interfere with her dating life. And I mean, this doesn't even affect me, yet I took it so personally when I heard about it because I probably fell victim to the same bullshit. I bet you anything that while she was in the U.S., her extended family advised her to leave me. I'd put my life on it. Whilst I had most certainly changed as a person, and become a lot less like the person she liked, the reasoning of 'I just don't find him fun to be around anymore' could have simply been a cover-up for the true reasoning. For now, however, I believe what I've been told—my ex has never been one to lie.

I'm evidently angry about this, which itself irritates me a little: this is all so minor in the grand scheme of things, yet I feel so strongly about it. I don't think ill of my ex for any of this at all; as I've said, she was just as much a victim of her parent's ignorance as my friend was, and as I may have been. It's all in the past, and it's just one small part of my life; but it's still someone's feelings they were toying with, and, at least in my friend's case, what was done was revolting. Being dumped is hard enough as it is, but if it was her decision, I'd have no reason to feel angry. Being dumped with reasoning this poor, on the other hand, is just fucking cruel.

This is when I begin to hate religious people: when the exercise control over their subjects for the sake of their own hate. It's ignorant meddling, and those who meddle ignorantly should be treated like the unenlightened knobs that they are. I learned from my mistake when I called my ex a homophobe, and I apologised for my intolerance because I knew what I did was very wrong and hurtful. She deserved absolutely none of the hate that came out of my mouth, not a fucking word of it. The more fundamentalist religious folk, however, preach till they die, and never realise how ignorant they or their words are, even when they're presented with the evidence.

This brings me to the pamphlet. I scanned it with a magic scanning machine to show it to you:

This is the front cover. Not much to say about it—standard fundie-Christian fare. Now, what is Jesus Christ my answer to? Did I ask these people a fucking question? If I'd asked "What's the name of the man who Christians believe died for their sins 2,000 years ago?", then yeah, Jesus Christ would be my answer. But I didn't ask that question. I didn't ask these people any goddamned questions. Is this Jeopardy by mail-order? Do they send me the answer so I can send them the question?

You see, I was under the impression that Christians thought accepting Jesus into your life was the solution to the problem of sin, not the answer to a fucking question. Devalues the guy a tad, don'tcha think? They evidently respect Him about as much as they do the language.

Also, gotta love the choice of red as the highlighting colour—you know, the same colour as the Devil, hellfire, blood, anger, lust, rage, and evil. Well, at least it's honest!

The first page—where the madness really begins. Now, firstly, why bother quoting the Bible to try and convince me that God is real and that Jesus died for my supposed sins? I believe the Bible was thought up by men thousands of years ago with the intent of tricking people into following their bigoted command from beyond the grave—the point's fucking moot because the book has no credibility to me.

Next up, the classic "Here's how it is, folks!"—making statements and assertions without a shred of fucking evidence to back your point up. God made us, did he? Prove it. You can't? Then stop talking.

Also sick of this "We are sinners by default" nonsense. Really? So, even foetuses are sinners? The fuck did a foetus do to you? To anyone? Yeah, it might have given its mother morning sickness and a bit of swelling, but was that its fault? Why are we sinners right off the bat? And, if we're below God's standards by His design, why the hell are we expected to meet His standards in the first place? Is He incapable of lowering His standards, or producing us to a better standard? To quote Lenny Bruce:

"If God created the body, and the body is dirty, the fault lies with the manufacturer."

Just replace 'dirty' with 'sinful', and there goes your point.

Then we get to the diagram. God likes His metaphors, and He likes them blunt. And stupid.

First off, since when did God live in a forest next to a cliff? Is that Heaven? That's a shithouse Heaven, man. God can do better than that. Where are the fluffy clouds? And the golden harps? And the pearly gates? There aren't any fucking gates, not even a fence or a roof! Shit, you could fly a plane over the top, jump out, and land in this Heaven! What kind of Heaven can be broken into via parachute!? Total fail.

Also love the bridges we've apparently been trying to build. Let's get one thing straight across the board: this diagram assumes we do all these things to reach the Abrahamic God. This assumes He is there to be reached; this alone could be false. In reality, these things may be practised without the intent of reaching God (with the exception of non-Abrahamic religions). In reality, these things are usually practised to either advanced society or because it's seen as the right thing to do. Must have been hard for them to type this with their heads stuck so far up their arses.

Morality: wait, what? Morality isn't a good way to reach God? Doing things you believe to be right and acting in a morally righteous manner to people doesn't mean anything to Him? Well, I suppose you could look at the way some fundamentalist Christians act and talk sometimes, and agree with that one :P  But... isn't there a Christian morality? What about that morality? That one sucks too? Damn, I guess all moralities must be awful. Well, at least I'll have no need to think of other people when I act now that I'm saved!

Religion: Wow. Just wow. I can't even begin to process the amount of irony they managed to cram into the presence of that one word. Let's get this straight, shall we? Oxford Dictionary defines religion as: 

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods

Does Christianity involve belief in and the worship of a personal God? Why, yes, it does! Therefore, Christianity is a religion; and, according to this diagram, religion doesn't let us get to God. We're not even two thirds down the first page, and they've already gone and completely fucked their argument. But, for the sake of humour, let us continue.

I'm sick of these faggots who try to separate their own religion from all the others by not classifying it as religion. The dictionary and the nature of context makes you incorrect. Even if your religion is correct, it is still a religion. Please get over yourselves. I'm pretty sure arrogance of that calibre is frowned upon by your God.

Good Deeds: see Morality (note to author: they're practically synonyms, for fuck's sake >.< ).

Philosophy: hahahahaha—oh, you're serious. Let me, a Philosophy student, school you. A key area of Philosophy is the concept of logic (the study of correct reasoning). Part of logic is mathematical logic (logic involving mathematical symbols). Without this, they wouldn't have the computer they typed this on, nor the printer they printed it with, nor the resilient architecture of the churches they worship in. Then there's the linguistic element of philosophy, without which they wouldn't have the ability to communicate with their computer nor their fellow Christians. That's not to mention the impossibility of such texts as the Bible, which I gathered was their lovechild from all the quoting they've been doing. This is, of course, ignoring the fact that there have been, and are, devout Christian philosophers—Immanuel Kant is a fantastic example. Way to insult one's own kind.

And all this has been done without success? Well, what does one do when they try something, wishing to succeed, but fails in the process? They try again. People will continue to attempt advancing society via these means forever, Bible or no Bible, God or no God. One day, we might find the key answer people have been searching for, whatever it is, if there is one—it may or may not lie in the hands of God.

Oh, but look! Apparently, we can build a bridge—with a novelty-sized cross. The symbolism hits deep, doesn't it. Also love that it's not Sinful People, it's just Sinful Man. Chicks must get a free pass—can't say Christianity beats down on women's rights now, can you, ladies?

OK, first off, the bridge itself is impassable. I can get about 40% of the way over the bridge, then I run into the tip of the cross. Meanwhile, those amoral, Jesus-reject plane-flying motherfuckers can still get in without a problem. Is there a ladder? A lift? Suction cups or something? Same goes for getting down the other side—do we abseil down? Is there a water slide? A slippery dip? I ain't never seen no cross with a goddamned slippery dip. That's because there is no slippery dip. That's because you don't build bridges out of crosses. And anyway, how wide was the cross that Christ was crucified on? Stretch your arms out as wide as you can—there's your answer. That's hardly a large gap. People can't jump that? Or find a plank of wood that long somewhere? Just take a plank off the actual cross! Damn, the security in this place is worse than at APEC '07. 

I also see more Bible quotes; these I shall explore for you. Gotta love the claim that sinners are all wicked, greedy, depraved, envious, murdering, disobedient, lying, malicious, gossiping, slandering, God hating, insolent, arrogant, boastful inventors of evil operandi. Wow! That's not not a wicked, depraved, malicious, slanderous, arrogant, boastful thing to say at all! Then, the next quote says "no one can boast about [having faith]." Yeah, ragging on those you want to save, not boastful in any way. Implicit braggin' is still braggin'. Any author of scripture, God or otherwise, knows that if you're gonna contradict yourself, you have to do it on different pages.

God demonstrates his love for us by having Christ die for us? No—God demonstrated his love for us by having Christ die for us. Get your tense straight, yeesh (waits for someone to find a temporal error in this entry :P).

And Jesus answered what, exactly? More fucking questions I didn't ask! Is there a question in the previous quote? That's not a question; that's a statement, an assertion, a proposition. This stuff really isn't hard to grasp—there are kindergarteners more linguistically enlightened than these pricks.

Back cover. I can choose to cross—I see what you did there! Credit where credit's due; that was a good one.

...wait... I can choose to cross? I cannot build the bridge? What must I do? Like, the author's referring to themselves in the first person? What? Well, if it's what they must do, why the hell are they sending it to me! They should send it to themselves!

"...repent then, and turn to God"... no, you turn to God first, then you repent! Who are you repenting to if not to God? The atmosphere? Don't you know it's polite to look at someone when you talk to them?

And why does this pamphlet feel the need to tell me what Heaven and Hell is? I live in a country where 66% of the population aligns themselves with some form of Christianity, and we get most of our media from a country where 80% does the same. I know this shit, man! I don't live under a rock—and if I did, I'd make damn sure I didn't have a mailbox so I didn't find crap like this in there when I got home.

I also need to mention, just in case anyone is unaware, that the whole CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL thing is actually sarcasm. These people must have thought it was serious. We learned types have a pretty dry sense of humour at times, don't we ;)

And what's this about helping me grow? What man doesn't know how to grow? Every man knows what turns him on; we can take care of this ourselves, thank you very much. Or did they mean grow taller? God's not gonna help kids grow taller. Kids grow taller until they hit their 20s, then they stagnate, then they start shrinking at 50. God's not gonna interfere with that process. Don't give kids false hope like that—every kid wants to be tall. Hey, at least they know what the kids want, right? They're all kinds of hip, and they're most certainly down with it, if I may say so myself.

I laughed when I saw it was from a Korean church. Living in Australia and seeing that was just funny for me; I don't really know why. If Australian Koreans wanna practise Christianity, that's cool, go right ahead; just do a better job of proselytising next time. Throw some evidence in the mix! It helps :)  Koreans practising a Middle Eastern religion in black man's country that was taken over by white Europeans—multiculturalism at work, 'eh?

Getting to the point: my main problem with this garbage is that it doesn't tell me a damn thing. I know Christians believe I'm a sinner and that I need to accept God and Jesus to be saved; what new information does this pamphlet present to me? None. No presented evidence, no compelling argument, nothing of any value; just drivel that I've heard a million times over. It's sad to think these people are under the impression that they're saved—if God is real, and He lets people this stupid in to Heaven... fuck it, leave me out. The Devil might be a cunt, but if he shares a flat with Christopher Hitchens, Charles Darwin, Mahatma Ghandi, Frank Zappa, and the aforementioned comedians, I think I'll crash with them, rather than these silly bastards who think they're headed to a magical forest upon death.

Image: I Have Lots of Problems Too. I'm Just Like You... Except I'm Not.

Not too long ago, I realised I'd answered a question of mine, a question I'd asked myself ages ago. How ever long ago it was, I looked at all the things that I don't like about myself, the things that are 'wrong' with me—the way I eat, my difficulty in dealing with social situations and change in life, my discomfort around trying new things, the list goes on—and I wondered if there was a central issue surrounding it all. I thought "well, if there's a central problem inherent in all these smaller issues, then I only have one problem to solve, and it'll be my first step to making my life a whole lot better". Oblivious to my discovery, I summed it up in an earlier entry with these words:

The fact of the matter is: I'm not willing to take risks anymore. I don't want to talk to this girl for fear of embarrassment and rejection; I don't want to ask anyone to let me perform comedy for fear of social contact and disturbing the status quo (in terms of scheduling: you have no idea how much I hate interrupting people—I don't even make phone calls on that basis :P); I don't want to drive a car for fear of a collision; I don't want to drink or consume any party drug for fear of loss of self awareness and control, possible arrest and almost certain bodily harm. I'm simply no longer in favour of putting myself in any position where there's anything substantial to lose anymore.

So, the central issue appears to be fear of a negative outcome. Problem is, I've conquered the problem before, and several occasions on which I did so follow that quotation. I used to be able to deal with that problem; the issue now is that I don't have the self-respect or self-worth to justify doing such things.

Speaking of recent discoveries, I found out a day or two ago that a friend of mine made her blog public again. Turns out she's been reading mine, and she wrote a few entries on topics I spoke about. Some might be pissed off were their friends to read their blogs, but I'm actually quite happy she's reading it. Obviously, I'm pleased someone's reading it at all, that's nice on its own; but it's also good to know that there's someone out there, incidentally someone I know, who I can kinda talk to about things without actually talking to them. One might think "why not just fucking talk to her about the stuff directly?"... I dunno. I feel uncomfortable talking to anyone about these issues because I always feel like I'm being a nuisance. At the same time, if someone needed to talk to me about something, I'd try to help them, and in reality, my friends would do the same for me, so thinking I'd irritate others if I did so is a little ridiculous :P  Even with that said, however, I still don't like to do it, so I keep to myself.

Anyway, this friend is currently trying to lose some weight. That's all well and good, and she seems to be managing it quite well (from what little I've read, anyway), but she keeps calling herself 'fat' and describing her body as if it's some kind of blob with a head on top. I don't see that. I will admit, there's meat on her bones, but I thought that was fucking normal :P  I just cannot see a problem with her size or her figure. Granted, this is coming from the same person who was attracted to her seven months ago, but even though all that sexual tension is gone, that doesn't change my opinion. Thankfully, she realises that the negativity is simply a state of mind, and she tries to counter this mindset.

Thing is, there are heaps of things I could say about myself that would paint an equally negative picture. Friend of mine thinks she's ugly? Bullshit; I'm ugly. Face is alright, but my teeth are all out of whack (sucked my thumb as a kid, hated wearing the corrective gear to fix the problem :P). My hands and wrists remind me of Mr. Burns; I have no muscle whatsoever; and my legs are like those you'd find on starving African children. That's all due to my diet, which is abhorrent and will probably lead to my death at 30-something. I don't have the determination to change that, nor even the will to try any new food. That begs the question: why bother asking a woman on a date? I'm going to eventually have to make it clear that I don't eat like everyone else, which will probably be a huge turn off. There goes any hope of dinner at a restaurant, lunch with friends for introductions, dinner with the parents: that's all instantaneously fucked as soon as the declaration is made. That, coupled with the shallow exterior and opinionated interior, makes for a shitty boyfriend :P

This is all assuming, of course, that I'd ever have the guts to talk to a woman, but why do that when rejection is more-or-less guaranteed not far down the road, if not on the spot? Where am I even going to meet one? I have no social life whatsoever. All the friends I have are from my old school, and I'm hardly ever in contact with them. I really only ever start chatting to two of my friends; a few others occasionally say 'Hi', but it's mainly the same two people, and it's not all that often. I have nothing interesting to talk about, so why bother? I never go anywhere either—no parties, no outings, nothing other than the occasional movie. Where else is there to go, anyway? I don't drink, so why go out to clubs and bars? I'd be wasting my fucking time, not to mention putting me in that atmosphere is the quickest way to make me bored and uncomfortable. Most times I've been with people who are drinking, it ends up sucking major balls. Unfortunately, that's where you meet people these days, so no progress can be made on any front.

It all comes down to perspective: my friend sometimes thinks she's fat, and this can lead her to believe she is viewed as unattractive. I've never believed she's fat, but her self-image is a lot closer to her than my image of her, as would be the case for most people. Likewise, my other friend tried to imply that I wasn't the arsehole I was making myself out to be. I disagreed because I felt more strongly about what I'd done then he did. It's like we don't want to get our hopes up for something that won't happen, at least when we're in this state. This has been getting worse for me, though. I've spent a few mornings lately lying in bed practically bashing myself up in my own head, thinking about this stuff and basically not seeing the point in even getting up. Once I make all the inferences from the data, there ceases to be a point in doing anything, so why get out of bed?

I wish I could just ditch all social desires, friendwise, romance wise, all of it. It's only when I think of those things that I look at myself this way. When I'm preoccupied doing something else, this shit almost never happens. When I'm writing a monologue, a script, a poem, or a story, or when I'm working on a bigger video project, or playing a game, or watching YouTube, I'm focused on everything else. I don't think about other people, only myself. It's indulgent and selfish but it fucking works. All I get then are challenges and ideas: things to beat and ways to beat them. Good ol' problem solving FTW :P

There are heaps of things I seriously want to do, but don't, and even when merely thinking about doing them, it's better than thinking of my social life. I wanna get on stage every week at uni and rant about whatever comes to my mind. I wanna join an improv troupe somewhere and learn how to think on my feet a little better. I wanna write satirical articles for some newspaper and get under people's skin. I wanna take my Nintendo 64 to the mall and play Mario Kart and Super Smash Bros. with complete strangers. I wanna wear a Klu Klux Klan outfit in public and hold up a sign that says "FREE HUGS (COLOUR DOESN'T MATTER)" on one side, and "NEW KKK: MORE ROBES, LESS RACISM!" on the other; then, when I get arrested, I can ask why I'm being judged on what I'm wearing rather than what I'm doing. I wanna go into a high school pretending to be a Department of Education representative to tell the kids on their assembly that school uniform is a psychological control mechanism. I wanna learn martial arts from Jackie Chan, then crash through the roof of Parliament House and beat the shit out of everyone in that motherfucker. I wanna go to an anti-LGBT rally and hold up a sign saying "HOMOPHOBES ARE THE REAL FAGGOTS". I wanna intercept the O'Reilly Factor broadcast on Fox and play 'Wake Up' by Rage Against the Machine instead. I wanna break into a bank and modify the code in the system such that all the bank fees and loan interest go straight to charity (and a little to my own account, for my services :D).

All those things I can do without worrying about friends or food (except the Jackie Chan one... that one's a little outta reach :P).

Most of all, though, I want to be with someone, and love someone. I don't know why, but the urge is always there, and it grows every day. I feel like I've devolved, like I'm back to being a 16 year old boy, simply wondering what it's like to be with someone, how it feels; I just don't know anymore. That's half the fucking problem: I've been there. I've actually been there. I don't just want it; I want it back. I want to explore another relationship. I want to feel for someone so strongly that I can't hold my feelings back anymore. I wanna hold her hands and get lost in her eyes as she looks down in shyness and giggles. I wanna know what it's like to wait for a text I'm expecting from her. I wanna have that one in-joke that only we understand. I wanna watch TV with her and berate whatever shit they've put on. I want her to run up to me from behind and cuddle me, the warmth from her body filling my own. I wanna walk home with her in the rain. I wanna make her feel better when she cries. I wanna have arguments with her just so we can come out stronger and hug tightly when we make up. I wanna see her close her eyes in ecstasy as I feel her up under her shirt. I wanna kiss her all over her naked body before she pushes me onto the bed and steals my idea. I wanna make love with her at her old high school... during school hours, for that extra thrill :P  I wanna be told what turns her on so she can lure me into her fantasy.

I wanna feel so much for her that I can't help but tell her I love her.

That desire always comes back; it never goes away. Problem is, shit that perfect is, like, unattainable, especially with all my flaws :P  It's awesome to write about and fantasise about, sure, but is it gonna actually happen? The image isn't quite that strong :P

I still feel like that little 16 year old boy, but now I'm in the adult's world. I still have that teen angst, I still have that teen curiosity; I even look the fucking part :P  That's even why I don't perform comedy at uni: are a bunch of young adults gonna take some fresh-outta-high-school fucknugget like me seriously? Are they gonna think I can actually humour them? That sounds intimidating. I mean, I've performed in front of adult audiences, and I've performed once in a really adult environment (which was the most fucking fun ever :P), but there's an eerie 'you don't belong there' vibe I get, being the presumptuous cunt I am.

I don't know if a woman will really ever see anything in me, nor do I really think I can do much to make one happy. I don't even really know what love is or what it feels like, not in the romantic sense—I haven't experienced it enough to get any strong grasp. I assume I'll know when I feel it, but I don't know. All I really know is that, with all that's been said and all the conflicting emotion, I still want to find someone I can be with.

Even if it's only for a little while.