I Stole Your Boyfriend

Taylor Swift brought something up in the September (2014) issue of Rolling Stone that really made me think. I will bring this to bear down below. Uh, the rest of the article was pretty mindless and useless; I guess Katy Perry and she are enemies... OK.

T. S. sheds some light on why some girls are so horrible, but first some thoughts.

Visually, women are portrayed pretty much consistently in magazines, television, film, wherever; let us say: in media. Definitely: it is any woman's prerogative to be portrayed however she likes. Some women (Lena Dunham) think that women in general are "creating a sexual persona for the male gaze" (what a cool sentence; she is so good with words; I was a fan of the first two seasons of GIRLS; emphasis mine). You can't blame people for thinking that that is what's going on; it seems obvious. That whole idea: men are bullying women into doing what we want, á la evil 60's Mad Men. Wasn't it women who fought to wear less clothes though, to be "free" to be more sexually expressive?

I know men. We can't tell the difference between a size two and a size zero. Most of us are quite OK with a size six. Size twelve? Bring it on. Men will like anything on a magazine cover. So why do we get blamed for the extremism? We don't look at models and think, If only she was two sizes smaller. It's easier to blame others. My inkling is that women want to be skinnier because other women are skinnier. They wear less and less because so-and-so is wearing less and less. They wanna be this way or that way because other girls are that way and they perceive that other women are stealing all the attention from men or can if they so choose. What do you think? Men are guilty of all sorts of things, but for now we speak on the feminine. And who are all those nasty, evil marketing executives? Could they be women?

THANK GOD NOT ALL WOMEN ARE THIS WAY.

What is this attitude that women seem to foster all about? Is it the female human nature of competition for the alpha male or status? Could, would, is it possible Taylor Swift has some insight into the matter?

(Granted: sex sells, but isn't it obvious that at any time in history if you put a naked body in front of people they will look?)

This brings me to the lovely, blonde-ly Taylor Swift and her easy going insight. I'll let her speak for herself, being the strong woman that she is:

"When your number-one goal is getting a boyfriend, you're more inclined to see a beautiful girl and think, 'Oh, she's gonna get that hot guy I wish I was dating' ... But when you're not boyfriend-shopping, you're able to step back and see other girls who are killing it and think, 'God, I want to be around her.'"

That's awesome and how women should treat each other. There would be less ferocity, animalism, and women would look out for each other more often, instead of ... instead of ... being so MEAN to each other.

To be certain, women don't have to be boyfriend-shopping; they can just want the attention. This sheds alotta light on this issue. It's this huge, unstoppable, nasty competition (perhaps nature) thing; and some girls are worse than others. (Note: just because some things are nature, it doesn't necessarily mean they are OK.)

We all want attention, to some extent, surely. Men and women want it in different ways. Women seem to be perpetuating the extremism that they absurdly strive for and the "freedom" of nudity and sexual expression. Personally, I think sexual expression (male and female) is out of control and has been since forever.

Yes: some girls are far worse than others, and bullocks that they aren't doing it on purpose. They prowl around, taking as their own endless fads and looks and dispositions trying to get whatever guy. And why? To steal a boyfriend? To steal a girlfriend and be gay for a day to cause a stir (wow, she's so crazy and scandalous—BORING)?To be able to say, I stole your boyfriend? To sate the insatiable in them: to prove they can do it to themselves and whoever is looking, to get attention, to falsely validate themselves. Maybe that is it.

And these girls they look at themselves prettily in the mirror, so pretty they look, so proud they are of themselves in their solitude (alone, alone, alone) where they fancy that no one in the world understands them (except for their next target) and they glory in their evil conquests: "I stole your boyfriend." And sometimes all they can do is try. They do this to their neighbors, other girls, usually nicer girls. They are mean. And it's just not cool. It's just not cool.

They are usurpers, lacking character (and who knows what else) and we should feel sorry for them. Are these the same girls that are always so proudly confessing that most of their friends are guys, as if it is something impressive? "I just don't get along with other girls. They're catty and mean and they suck." Or are those the good girls that have been marginalized? Not all girls are that way, so that is doubtful. They're just one of the guys, ha. I don't know. It's just not cool. Whoever they are, they should focus on the good, cool things in other girls and try to get along. Can't we all just get along? Ha. It's just not cool.

Why so hateful? I guess it's more important to get attention —how boring.

YOU are just not cool.

None of this is to mention the ugly side of the male species. And, hey, what do I know? Maybe I'm way off here. Anyway, I'm the most wretched of the most wretched and need more help than confused mean girls. God speed you, may God help you prosper.

Written, Typen by My Father

A Quick/Short Word on Abortion: VP Debate 2012

I just wanted to say some things about things that were said at the 2012 Vice Presidential debate.

I paraphrase.

Paul Ryan said that he believes life begins at conception.  He said he does not just believe this because of his Catholic beliefs; he also believes this because of what the sciences have shown and because of morality.  So, he said that if Mitt Romney was elected they would make abortion illegal, except in cases of rape, incest, and threat to the mother's life.

If one believes that life begins at conception (that, once a sperm gets into an egg, the union is a human, as much a human as a full, grown ass human), then Ryan's beliefs make sense.  You think something is wrong, so you act against it.  You believe something is a human, and you believe it is wrong to kill innocent humans, so you make it illegal to kill (abort) humans.  That makes sense.

Joe Biden said that he also believes life begins at conception.  He said he believes this, because he accepts the Catholic church's position/beliefs about this.  After saying this, he said that he does not believe in telling women what they can and cannot do with/to their bodies (it's between them and their doctors, he said).  He said he doesn't believe in forcing his religious beliefs on others.  He completely changed the subject.  He hid behind his religion; in essence, he made abortion a religious issue, so that he wouldn't have to defend it, and so Obama and he wouldn't have to hold people accountable for their actions.  If abortion is a religious issue, then Biden doesn't have to push it on anyone.  How can someone say that they believe that life (being human) starts at conception (for whatever reason: religious or scientific), and then say it's ok for people to kill (abort) those humans?  Is Biden ok with people killing each other?  Maybe he doesn't want to push his religious beliefs that say killing innocent people is wrong on others.  Maybe he thinks murder is a religious issue too.

Also, if life begins at conception (according to both candidates), then the issue is not one of what women can and cannot do to/with their bodies.  The issue is about what people can and cannot do about a human that is growing in a women or wherever; no one agrees that mothers should have the choice to kill a life.  People say 'pro choice,' as if it is solely about a woman doing something to her body--it is not the case that she is only affecting her body, though.  I don't think women should be forced to have babies, if they don't want to, but I don't think lives should be terminated.  Freeze them maybe?  Or maybe pick the lesser of two evils: force women and men to have the babies they 'accidentally' created; do this, at the cost of taking some freedoms away--life vs some freedom.

In my opinion the issue is a scientific and philosophical one.  If one cannot draw a non-arbitrary line where life begins, then life begins at conception.  This is the case, so life begins at conception.  That means that when sperm enters an egg it becomes fully human and should be entitled to all the rights that all humans should have.

Ryan made abortion a scientific and moral issue.  I commend him for that, and I agree with him.

Whether you are for or against abortion, at least be consistent and have good reasons for believing what you believe.

By the way, you don't have to be a woman to talk about abortion.  I didn't ask to be born, or to be a man (boy?), or to be so handsome.  All people should be free to think philosophically and critically about all issues: this promotes critical and new ways of thinking about things.  Obviously, it affects women in more and different ways, but abortion can affect everyone: woman and man.

Everything can be made into a religious issue, and many things can be considered non-religious issues.  If you believe such things as stealing, raping, physically hurting others, deceiving, killing, lying, cheating, being rich, being skinny and hot are moral issues that governments can address outside of religion--leaving religion out of it--then abortion isn't a religious issue at all.  It is a scientific and moral issue that should be dealt with by a just and moral government that is for and by the people and that protects ALL of its people.

If you're reading this, you weren't aborted... just sayin'.  You might wish you had been aborted, but ya... you weren't.  Weird, huh?  Not weird because I think you should have been aborted, existing is just so strange in general... sometimes--to me at least.

Look at these un-aborted humans--so handsome!