(no subject)

I don't think this needs explanation:



xkcd. Comic strip of genius. Obviously not quite as good as Steve Bell's 'If', at least in my reckoning, but still, up there with Sinfest and Dilbert on its good days.

(no subject)

More on the decline of Western Civilisation:

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/02/19/tv-gives-kids-attention-span

Perhaps TV should be limited for the under 18's: only allowable on prescription and under supervision.
Or perhaps it should be banned completely (for the under 18's, that is) just like Alcohol and Tobacco.

Now I don't actually believe that such is necessary, but I do think we should be aware of the course we are plotting, and the amount of 'drift' in the equation.

 

Thanks to 

shoarthing for the link.

 

G spot, I see no G spot....Because you're blind in one eye, you stupid ass.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080220/tsc-science-women-sex-718400e_1.html

One is almost tempted into the overuse of heavy irony here and say "quelle surprise". I wonder again about the differences between nature and nurture.
We are a diverse species and our diversity is a good thing: it enables us to fit into many evolutionary niches, which, as we are top predator and scavenger as well, give us good chances of survival. We are adaptable. We are also stupid, hidebound, and given to sloth and fouling our own nests (mainly because we regard it as cheaper to let someone else clear up after us).
But the folk who have, over the years, told women what they should and shouldn't be thinking and feeling; and what constituted 'normal' behaviour and sexuality (mainly men, it has to be said), have been talking through their arses, where there appears to be no G-spot as yet discovered (unless you ask an homosexual man - some of whom will tell you different). Perhaps all these folk telling women this stuff just had something to prove, or perhaps hide....

What is interesting is this may revive the old debate about vaginal orgasms and Freud. It may also irritate some feminists, but I hope not.

Evidently Spring is in the air.

A virtual chum, vox_diabolica, said in a comment to an earlier post (and I paraphrase) that he found it strange that his generation should be more 'traditional' than the one preceding it, which is the one to which I belong.
Admittedly, he's a Christian of a sophisticated kind, which would render him somewhat narrower of scope in some respects than a chap who left school to be a guitarist and sleep in a squat, but even so....
But I do find, the openness with which I grew up has been stifled in so many ways.
The polymorphous perversity of the seventies was an odd place and odd time, but it informed my live and let live attitude. When it came to drugs and sex I was an experimentalist, and to some extent, still am. Too old for white drugs I still smoke weed. Though I am at present chaste, it is not through choice: I never seem to meet appropriate women, and though I've tried the 'other thing' (it is necessary to know, you know) I found that it didn't suit, alas and alack: it will not do for me. Few (if indeed any) men are attractive, and almost all women are. It appears you can't change the way you're made, and I'm too bloody old to dissemble without feeling irritated.
So, I'm reluctantly heterosexual.
Reluctantly chaste.
And probably bored beyond human ken, but still, somewhere at the end of the bell-curve.....

Hope is one of those awful human emotional virii, like shingles it can strike when totally unawares: but maybe just down the Street, or around the corner....