“House of the Rising Sun (art of Auguste Rodin)”

“Meditating” (so to speak) again on this one tonight…

All forms of prostitution do not automatically equate with sex trafficking.

I continue to have mixed emotions on prostitution.

Look, this shit is complex. People like to try to reduce it down to one dimension, but that’s not how it rolls. I acknowledge this from personal experience. Plus, I read history and comprehend how tribal rituals weren’t minimized to the extent as casual and pornographic sex is today.

Not that Sodom and Gomorrah hasn’t existed before…

Anyway, a point here that continues bothering me is human trafficking. Someone forced into prostitution is seriously a slave destined to be psychologically scarred. I’ll be the first to tell anybody that prostitution isn’t for everybody. Takes a certain type of person to choose to do that line of work independently and willingly, by her or his own volition, to whatever degree of involvement and for however long. Past conditioning factoring in however much it may.

But I continually, for years running, hear people disparaging prostitution while equating it with sexual slavery. While it can and does have its downsides, working as an independent sex worker is an individual choice. In a country as open and free as the U.S., we do have a choice. Many do come in as a result of economic hardship, myself included to an extent, but still. We can make a choice. The money is there, sure, but we who have the ability to choose opt to go that route because it appears like a better deal than whatever alternatives we’re taking into consideration. Let’s be real about this.

I, for one, don’t regret having worked as an escort. Still don’t, despite my epic burnout and mixed emotions ever since. It proved to be a worthwhile learning experience, IMO. BUT, I’d still caution others to be very careful about entering that line of work. Think long and hard on it. I personally studied two books from the library (Delores French’s On Working and Prostitution: On Whores, Hustlers, and Johns by James Elias, et al.) for a full 2 months before taking the plunge, and even there greater preparation probably would’ve been helpful. BUT, I carved out my own way according to my own boundaries instead of caving to whatever everybody else in the Industry happened to be offering or requesting. And that’s the beauty of independence in that line of work.

Anyway, I’m not going into it any further tonight. Just felt the need to state that bit.

“Why Happy Couples Cheat | Esther Perel | TED Talks”

Having previously listened to Esther Perel’s audiobook Mating in Captivity, I am glad to stumble across her talk here on TED.

“Healthy Sexuality – with JP Sears”

I particularly really enjoy this video out of those I’ve viewed from him thus far, having just found his channel a few hours ago.

Jordan Owen discussing Roosh, RoK, the Gor novels, and how embracing such crud makes things worse

It’s videos like this that keep me appreciating Jordan Owen.

Been hearing and reading the name Roosh the last couple of weeks and noticed the buzz around AVFM but hadn’t clicked on anything about him before today. Only recently recall hearing about the Return of Kings website and so took a look at it this evening after hearing the name Roosh mentioned yet again, this time coming up in Owen and Aurini’s falling out.

Looked a few things over, read a forum thread where opposing views voiced their opinions on the RoK site and overall message, clicked on a couple of Roosh’s videos pertaining to “rape culture,” and now I’m 1:08:54 into Jordan’s video above. So far it’s very interesting and provides a nice glimpse into this character who calls himself Roosh V, presented in a very fair-minded way, IMO.

He’s right that such talk like that coming from Roosh only serves to stir the panic that we all already know exists. Not helping. Definitely “defecates on” what a lot of men (and women) out here are trying to accomplish in hope of improving all of our lots in this life by aiming to be fair and to respect one another’s humanity.

Carrying on…

Pausing at 1:12:39 — couldn’t agree more, going on what’s been presented here so far. Jordan explains it all very well in terms I’m sure most could understand if they’d take time to listen and take it in. Not just letting his words play in the background while doing other shit either. When I’m not watching this, it’s paused, which is necessary when it comes to videos worth watching, as this one is.

Back to watching…

Just finished viewing the video. Very powerful. He did a really good job in explaining his position here, and I, for one, stand largely in agreement.

Stupid manospherian “statistic” strikes again (more on us dirty, unfair women)

Gotta take issue with something Eric Orwoll said in a video he posted on youtube 6 days ago. Was a little over 9 minutes into it tonight when he decided to mark it (and his latest one as well) private, the segment I’m concerned with occurring right before that premature stopping point.

Eric brought up this weird and unsubstantiated claim that keeps circulating throughout the online “manosphere,” that being the notion that women are all vying for the supposed “top 20%” of males and largely neglecting the rest. On what planet is that occurring? I’ve heard this claim  broken down by others where they’re suggesting that the “top” men in whatever hierarchy we’re talking about here (some say it’s about good looks, others say it’s more about money, and Eric claimed it’s about how healthy these men are perceived as being…) have sexual access to ALL women basically. And we womenfolk are competing with one another to get at them and just ignoring the other 80% of men along the way. Bullshit. That doesn’t remotely comport with reality.

People can’t even agree on whom the “top” men supposedly are. If it’s about money primarily, then health and good looks aren’t as important. And if it’s about personal health then high socioeconomic status isn’t terribly important. And how does one go about sensing someone is the healthiest specimen among male humans?  lol  Big muscles? Steroids can contribute to that, which isn’t considered terribly healthy. Smooth skin? Lots of over-the-counter products aid a person there, as does plain ol’ soap and water. Furthermore, there are all kinds of attractive people out there who can be harboring genetic disorders or STDs (especially if they’re fucking all the womenfolk) or turn out to have nasty personalities, etc. Someone can be beautiful today and a couch potato by next year. I realize that we humans place a lot of value in aesthetics, especially now since popular media has successfully tuned everybody in to being hyper-conscious of appearances, but that still doesn’t necessarily tell us a whole lot about a person’s actual health.

Is an attractive, physically fit man bound to be endowed with more sexual stamina? Often enough, but not always.

Is this about sex or about status? Because I can’t even get at this topic when it’s framed in contradictory ways depending on whom you ask. Are people getting upset because women are attracted toward highly attractive men? Or are they getting upset because they think women are just chasing money? Or is it simply because we’re inclined to be “promiscuous” in general, just not so much with the complainants? Are guys getting mad because they see (or just assume) other men are having more sex than them with a wider variety of women, to where this boils down to a concern over fairness?  LOL  I really want to know, because I hear the complaints coming in from all sorts of directions and all can’t be on the mark when they conflict.

I don’t know these women who are vying to sleep with the supposed “top 20%” of men. Maybe that’s due to me not living in California, but many of us date and marry within our own socioeconomic class. I did and damn-near everybody who springs to my mind did so as well. Do gold-diggers exist? Sure they do, but they’re not the vast majority of women obviously.

This stupid claim that keeps circulating is basically stating that 1 in 5 men get all the pussy and the other 4 out of 5 are left alone to masturbate for the most part. Bullshit. Come out here and ask people. I know tons of non-high-status males who’ve had hundreds of sexual partners, some of whom aren’t terribly attractive (IMO) nor necessarily all that healthy (unless smoking, drinking and drugging somehow is excluded from this assessment). And I know plenty of average-looking men who turned out pretty satisfied with their sex lives despite not racking up dozens and dozens of notches on their bedposts (and many of them have turned down sexual advances from women, so they know they could’ve gotten laid more had they wanted to do so).

This is just rubbish — the kind of junk statistics that cause me to not take statistics too seriously anymore, especially when bandied about online. We all know the joke: 68.7% of statistics are made up on the spot. Or pulled out of the ass of ideologues trying to sway others toward accepting some insane paradigm that defies experiential reality.

Does he really imagine 20% of men are just lazing around, getting their dicks wet around the clock by huge volumes of women? Because that sounds like a full-time job for a man to have to sexually service all of womankind.

I’d be more inclined to believe that there’s approximately 20% (1 in 5 or perhaps fewer) men who don’t receive much sexual action due to a number of factors which might include: poor personal hygiene, morbid obesity, severe physical disabilities, highly unattractive, shitty and/or antagonistic social skills, exhibiting general disdain for women, etc.

And in that portion of the video I saw, Eric disparaged women for behaving “promiscuously,” stating it is too easy for us. Oookay. Well, yeah, as a female it isn’t hard to get laid, though getting laid well is another story. But what’s the beef here?  What’s the real concern? That some men are getting laid more than others? That sex isn’t being distributed fairly across the male population? Fair by what standard? Are all men entitled to sex with women? Are men entitled to sex with women of their own choosing? Well, it takes two to tango and women aren’t property to be passed around or designated as belonging solely to this man or that man. Those days are ending. Kiss the Abrahamic traditions goodbye.

We all are out here trying to meet people we can connect with on whatever levels. Is this about jealousy because women have an easier time of getting laid than men generally do? Well, not all imbalances between the sexes can be made even and across-the-board equal. I don’t have the level of access Pamela Lee had (and still has), because I don’t look anything like her. Do I blame her for that fact of life? No, I work with those I’m attracted toward who are attracted to me and are more my speed. In a country with millions and millions of people, there’s all sorts of variety out here and countless connections that can be made. Some guys I’ve slept with were more physically attractive than me, but most were as attractive or less attractive. That’s just the way life goes. I don’t see the big deal.

Is it really suffering for a man to recognize he’s had fewer sexual exploits than the next guy, or worse, the next gal?

How fucking shallow have we become? Have we always been this trifling?

Besides, word to the wise: If men are wishing for more sexual access to a wider variety of women, that pretty much requires us females to be more sexually active, which then gets us labeled as “promiscuous” sluts for doing so. It’s a no-win situation for females. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I personally chose to go ahead and explore my sexuality as I saw fit and don’t regret doing so. The men I’ve been intimate with range across the scale in terms of socioeconomic class, looks, and personal health — excepting the extreme ends. Haven’t had sex with a homeless man found on the street, nor have I had sex with a millionaire, but have had plenty of sex with those in between. Can’t say I’m unhappy about that either. But not all sex is created equal, which a lot of guys just don’t seem to grasp. But whatever.

This is one area in Eric’s philosophy that’s troubled me for a while, having picked up on hints of it in his videos before now. He judges the “promiscuous” woman, and I wonder what it is he thinks can be done about that. He’s turned toward Christianity and speaks of people like himself being smarter and more competent to lead others. If I am to be honest here, he’s demonstrating himself to be very un-Christ-like. Jesus had no trouble hanging out with prostitutes, and he famously stood up for one about to be stoned. And yet today (and for at least the last 1500 years), practically everybody who calls themselves Christians immediately condemn the “whorish” woman. Why? Is that not supreme hypocrisy? Do people learn nothing? Does that not fly directly in the face of the very teachings one claims to be embracing? Guess that depends on what parts of the Bible one chooses to focus on…

This topic does kinda irritate me a bit. The first part above is just insane, fool-hardy, ignoring reality. The second part condemning the “promiscuous” woman is disheartening, because I still cannot understand why these double-standards must persist. A man takes 100 or 1,000 female lovers and we consider him great — a woman does the same and we call her abominable. But who do you think these men are sleeping with? Women, folks — they are sleeping with women. (Unless they’re gay.) Goes back to that “takes two to tango” business. Yet people want to hold us down, keep us in some designated place, telling us standards have to remain as so. Why? Because people fear female sexuality let off its leash? Well, welcome to modern life. Better get used to it. Genie’s out of the bottle by this point in time.

—————————————————————————

Update the next day: I recalled today where this baseless “statistic” sprang from originally. It is said to have came from the dating site OKCupid and supposedly indicated how women interacted with men on that particular site. Yet people have taken these results of one dating site and extrapolated that as if it’s indicative of gender relations across all of society and, indeed, even across all societies, as if this data is truly representative of the population as a whole. lol  Now, I used to be a member on OKCupid several years ago when it had all sorts of quizzes and was in its younger years, and just like a lot of other dating sites, many males preferred not to post up their photos. You think that has no bearing on the amount of responses one receives at such a site? Of course it does. Beyond that, the common demographic patronizing sites like that tend to be pretty young and savvy (naive?) enough to be using dating sites to seek out dating partners, so this is not a sampling of the general population by any means. There are plenty of young people who shun dating sites and quite a lot of older folks who do so as well. I personally can’t stand internet dating sites and grew weary with them by my mid-20s because they’re nutty places to try to meet people. Those I have met in person from dating sites all proved to be extremely incompatible, and I’ve read a study or two about how poorly people tend to select for compatible partners on dating sites, which was the final straw for me since those findings struck me as quite accurate in that respect.

It’s amazing what qualifies as a share-worthy “statistics” these days. People rarely look into the methodology used or the sampling size or the key demographics involved before they go running through the hills, spreading misinformation. OKCupid is about as far from a reputable research institute as one can get.  LOL  They posted up casual findings relevant to their own site and that’s it, and it’s intended to be taken as just that. I don’t believe they even promote such data as being anything more than that. So, I take it that a bunch of young, disgruntled guys with poor success on such a site, possessing no training in evaluating statistical information, stumbled across these casual findings relevant to this one site and then just misunderstood it as somehow being applicable across all demographics and all of society, then spread it with that misinformed understanding skewing their grasp of the data. Then someone like Eric Orwoll comes along and mistakenly repeats it as well, which is kinda sad considering how he strives at being more reasonable, logical, rational, and better-informed than the majority out here. That’s not to crack on him since I do generally appreciate his videos and output, but this was undeniably a big oversight on his behalf that deserves to be pointed out.

Just goes to show how all of us are prone to fallibility and can and do make errors in judgment and how we can accept false or insufficient information that conforms to what we want to believe without taking the time to delve into where the information came from and how it was collected and what sampling it actually pertained to. People love to embrace that which confirms the biases we already harbor, and that’s where we always get into trouble and wind up confusing matters worse over time. This is an excellent case-in-point that demonstrates that to a tee. Feminists have been shown as falling for this trap, and now we see others who aim to counter feminism succumbing to the same mistake in judgment.

“AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL 3 – Selling Sex To Children” (plus my thoughts)

Tonight I’m watching an interview with Darryl Roberts on his latest documentary “America the Beautiful 3”:

Having just watched up to the 18:47 mark, now pausing…  Let me say this. After having viewed Darryl Roberts’ first “America the Beautiful” film approximately 3 times (though haven’t watched the last two yet) and then numerous interviews of him since, I have to say that I respect the guy. Don’t agree with him or those he chose to interview on all points, as to be expected, but he does come across as honestly working to campaign on behalf of young girls by sharing their experiences and calling into question cultural influences and trends. He started off small-scale and worked his way up, advocating for youths he’s most concerned about.

Now, I can already see where “manospherians” are going to take issue. First, the documentary references the Mary Koss statistics on 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 women being raped in their lifetimes. In Darryl’s and the other people involved’s defense, those statistics were broadcast on the CDC website and literature. CDC= Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which is “one of the major operating components of the [U.S.] Department of Health and Human Services.” People tend to trust government-issued statistics. This is the CDC’s error, first and foremost, in accepting statistics without scrutinizing the methodology used. That’s why they’re trusted: we expect our government to operate with due diligence. Otherwise it’s just spreading propaganda and/or misinformation. So if people want to get mad over statistics, cooked by a feminist gender ideologue in order to bolster her own political leanings, being adopted and then broadcast online by the CDC, then great. I’m with you on that. But credible challenges to those statistics are just beginning to break into the mainstream, meaning that most who’ve heard the Koss stats repeated for years came to believe them. As did I once upon a time. Took time to “wake people up” the first go-round, so expect it to take time to awaken people once again. Darryl’s going on what he assumes to be reputable, government-endorsed data. As to be expected by most. And that’s a problem all unto itself.

Then Darryl mentioned Gail Dines, whom I know most “manospherians” just adorelove  I know. But it doesn’t appear the crux of his claims and speculations there rely much, if barely any, on her input. He’s, once again, taking issue with the commercialization of sex and aesthetic appeal. That’s his running theme in exploring how little girls are nowadays coming up being sold on a bunch of lies and bad information intended to make them self-conscious so that they’ll buy crap they don’t really need to transform themselves in radical ways. And I do see where he’s coming from in a lot of that, because I lived through it too, as a kid of the ’80s and a teen of the ’90s. And I probably got a bigger dose than some in terms of early sexualization and where that all led.

I too worry about the youth of this country and culture, both males and females, though I also started off mostly concerned with girls since I was one trying to figure out how to navigate in this modern maze. Now that life’s been chilling out a bunch in recent years and I’m in my 30s and taken myself out of that hook-up culture rat race, it’s provided time for greater reflection, one rumination being on witnessing how many males my age and younger behaved over the years. Fairly early on I came to prefer the company of older men over that of my peer group, and that’s never changed to this day. Because my age group is, generally speaking, a bunch of hooligans (myself included to whatever extent). Why? Well, look at how we came up and what all we’ve been exposed to. Think that’s had no discernible impact on our choices and behaviors and even modes of thinking? Well, think again.

My own story would fill a book. Taught me a lot. Cost me a good bit in the process though, as all risk-taking can. Came out realizing that practically everything I thought I knew was wrong, because we’re fed horseshit like it’s going out of style. And the younger a person is who’s saturated with all those messages, the more deeply ingrained they appear to become. Just my observation.

Back to watching the video now…

He could support young girls without taking on such a feminist position. Wish he’d be a bit more critical of feminist influences that have been confusing to girls and young women (not to mention males) as well.

And when they talk about the dehumanization of girls and women, what I really think is happening here is the dehumanization of sex itself. Both partners, whether male or female, are becoming props in a bizarre real-time experiment where youths come up feeling pressured to imitate “art.” (I use the term art very loosely there, mind you.) I saw it happening long before coming across what Darryl had to say on the matter. Been ramping up ever since I hit puberty, and was probably going on before then even. But then the internet brought issues revolving around sexuality and youth to a fever pitch, most definitely.

Haven’t read or watched “50 Shades of Grey” and hope not to. Not my style. Heard enough about it from others to suit me, and what’s been described I’d refer to as “gonzo porn” as well. That’s an apt term for the extremes porn has headed in (though porn has been crazy since at least the ’70s, the popularity of the internet having taken it too to unprecedented heights and weirder extremes). I don’t care for most porn anymore, and when I do look at it still occasionally my aim is to find amateur videos (though most marketed under that heading turn out to be anything but).

Before anyone FREAKS OUT, that doesn’t mean I’m advocating to ban pornography. Being critical of it and choosing to back away from it and preferring the company of others who do the same is an expression of individual choice. I realize others will lose themselves in that sort of thing, similar to how I did back when younger, and all I can do is communicate with people from my perspective on the matter. That’s all I’m ever aiming to do. New laws won’t change a thing if people persist in creating demand for raunchy crud.

AND not all porn is created equal. That deserves to be stated. Though most that I’ve come across hasn’t included much, if any, displays of intimacy and affection, which bugs me since I’ve viewed A LOT of porn over time. The novelty of viewing dehumanized sex began wearing off on me a few years back, and good riddance.

ALL INPUT winds up having an impact, whether we’re conscious of this impact or not. I’m grateful to finally come to realize how much that shit in particular was poisoning my soul. Others didn’t have to tell me — I felt it. At least when it comes to the craziest, most degrading stuff I’ve watched over time.

Darryl’s attitude expressed about porn comes across a bit more narrow and judgmental than my own, to be honest. Some female porn stars indeed got wrecked through acting in porn (Chris Hedges discusses that in a chapter of his book Empire of Illusion, by the way), but so did many males as well. Porn producing can be, and often enough is, damaging to all actors who remain involved in it. I’ve watched documentary segments where male porn actors talked about shooting up some sort of chemical directly into their penises in order to achieve a sustained erection, which then after doing that so many times over however many years it wound up creating nearly permanent erectile dysfunction. And think about gay porns and the males who participate in the bottom position. Slamming either males or females with huge dicks over countless hours is likely to do damage and to be painful, and then you add in scat and water sports and tolerating men ejaculating in your mouth and/or on your face — plus add in the cultural double-standards and stigma that these porn actors have to deal with. Think that doesn’t leave a mark on their psyches? How can it not? They are not robots, they’re human beings.

And this is a prime example of how chasing money can wind a person up with an impoverished spirit. Classic example, in fact.

I’m critical although I also realize adults have a right to navigate our own lives as we see fit. Just sucks that there’s so much demand that we degrade ourselves in whatever which ways. I’d actually argue that nearly everything is being devalued in modern life, so sex is just one aspect among many, sad as it all is.

Personally, I love sex and the exploration of my sexuality was a lot of fun on many (if not most) occasions. Not hostile toward sex so much as the nihilistic attitudes distorting sex along with so much else. Just breaks my heart since I respect sexual expression and intimate bonds and pleasurable exploration so much — hate to see it morph into something ugly where people harm and alienate one another. That’s not what this is supposed to be about. Why would we allow this? Why would we support this and pay for this and submit to being altered by such illusions?

Because I do appreciate the company of men old enough to have not come up with much porn beyond the occasional dirty magazine, I feel thankfully separated off from the youth culture of today and its wiliness. But I also feel bothered that they’re having to go through all of this and are picking up bad habits that destroy their chances for real intimacy. It’s a scary thought, to be honest. And I don’t know what to do about the situation. When I’ve tried talking to youths about this, they nearly always immediately shut me down. They defend porn vehemently, even some of the extreme material, arguing that it’s mere fantasy. I want to ask them if that would’ve truly been their fantasy had porn not helped put it in their minds? Because a lot of the fetish stuff wouldn’t likely dawn on most of us if left to our own devices, I’m willing to bet. Anal sex among heteros likely wouldn’t be all the rage if not for it being popularized in practically every hard-core porn produced over the last decade or two. Same goes for oral and most especially facial ejaculation. And so many young males wouldn’t be wandering around worried about how they measure up to male porn actors in terms of penis size, physique, and performance. And would the concept of bukkake even exist otherwise??

Very strange and twisted situation being created here. And now there are free porn sites where no proof of age is required. You think those haven’t become favorites among teens? Naive if you do. I’ve been to those sites and was shocked that kids, anyone, could just waltz in there with no sign-up required at all.

It’s like that shit is intentionally being funneled to us all nowadays, especially since the advent of iphones and whatnot. How Orwellian. Seriously. And Huxleyan too.

And, for the record, I have no love for beauty pageants, most especially those involving little kids. Disturbing trend, definitely.

Films that left an impression: “Fire Walk With Me” and “Hedwig and the Angry Inch”

A film my teenage mind could’ve probably done without, much as I loved it at the time, David Lynch’s “Fire Walk With Me”:

How Laura Palmer died, in case you never wanted to know, for those who cared much for the Twin Peaks tv series:

I wound up watching “Fire Walk With Me” first before purchasing the Twin Peaks series since it had came out back when I was too young to care about it. Not a big fan of the tv series, to be frank, but the film “Fire Walk With Me” made a big impression. Pretty sure I first viewed it after I met my (now ex-)husband, so probably when I was 18 or 19 then. Fucked me all up. Watched it many times. Particularly disturbing to learn David Lynch created that film with the help of his own daughter. That must be one hell of a relationship, if not entirely screwy.

Wouldn’t try viewing that one with my dad. Doubt he’d even care for it. Was uncomfortable enough, though, when he suggested we watch “Hedwing and the Angry Inch” back when I was 21 (said he also got my younger brother to view it with him too — not sure what all that was about, was afraid to ask). This being its trailer:

That trailer didn’t do the film justice. I remember it being pretty depressing actually. Gender discord, botched surgery, failed romances and despair.