Reflections, Reflections

To WordPress, that is: http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/.

Most of the posts transferred correctly; I will patch up the recent posts that I had to split up here in my spare time and do other blog house cleaning.

Even for its "basic," free blogging software/site, WordPress seems excellent. In this way, how good it was that Blogger presented problems, or I'd be blogging in this Google junk forever.

This article on Slate is so disgusting, that I don't really feel like expounding on the topic. Except to say that William Saletan reaches the absurd level of trying to equate bestiality to heterosexuality (which he constructs as all bad), and states that it is the opposite of homosexuality (which he constructs as all good). Yes, you read that right.

He does this by selectively picking anything in the characteristics of the bestiality people portrayed and how they related to the animals, and makes it into a resemblance of "heterosexuality," (which, as we know, is all bad and disgusting). Then he says that from a cultural and emotional perspective, bestiality must then oppose the wonderfulness of homosexuality, because the latter is all good and magnificent -- and the opposite of heterosexuality in every way!

At least, because he is equating bestiality to heterosexuality, Saletan spares us the line that the men portrayed in "Zoo" have a bestial gene and anyone who opposes bestiality is full of hate; he does describe the men as profoundly dysfunctional.

(cont. here)

Labels: bestiality, homosexuality, propaganda, slate

In what way? When critics argue that homosexuality is a dysfunction and therefore not genetic, pro-homos argue that it's not a choice and it's biologically wired, and that homosexuals are exactly the same as heterosexuals, except that they like people of the same sex. (Notice: exactly the same). At the same time, people like Saletan then say homosexuals have a completely different psychology, emotional structure, and culture, and are completely different than heterosexuals. (Notice: completely different). Saletan couldn't furnish a better example of human idiocy regarding sexuality ideas garnered for the moronic liberal masses.

But Saletan reaches the pinnacle of his twisted-around sexuality comparison with the following argument: in "Zoo," all the men who engage in sex with horses could not really be accused of abuse in the strict sense of physically hurting the animals,
because, in all cases, it is the horse that is active and the man that is bending down. This, he claims, is the utmost symbol of... heterosexuality.

(cont.here)

Labels: bestiality, homosexuality, propaganda, slate

In case you didn't immediately see the light to his argument, he "clarifies" it with a few examples to build his case.

But Zoo isn't about equality. It's about inequality. It gets inside the heads of the horse fetishists, exploring their peculiar mentality. At the core of that mentality is a craving for otherness. Zoophilia isn't homo. It's hetero. Very hetero.

So we are told that fetish of a thousand kinds is never a part of homosexuality, it's all hetero, all the time. And that homosexuality, because it is same-sex, is about equality! Like Foley being equal to his little pages, and John Browne equating himself to the male prostitute he exploited, and the 650,000 cases of homosexual batterers per year, they are just beating themselves into all that equality, of course.

(cont. here)

Labels: bestiality, homosexuality, propaganda, slate

"It's just like if you love your wife." Another, who calls himself the Happy Horseman, ventures, "You're connecting with another intelligent being." But the more the men talk, the more this pretense unravels. "I don't need a high level of emotional interaction," says a zoophile who goes by the name Coyote. The Happy Horseman agrees. A horse "has no idea what Tolstoy is, or Keats," he explains. "You can't discuss the difference between Monet and Picasso. That just doesn't exist for their world. It's a simpler, very plain world. And for those few moments, you kind of can get disconnected."

In other words, horses are bimbos.

And he has never heard of Gore Vidal who bragged about having reasonably anonymous sex with more than 1000 other homosexuals? And what happens at homo saunas? Oh, these aren't bimbos, these are faggots, is that why we can't equate it to the respective homosexuals who have a very disconnected psychology about sexual relations?

No, no - it's all heterosexual if it's bad, of course.

It's just like a gay orgy, except that it's the opposite.

Like when war is peace, or it's all equal, except it's all different. Get it?

(cont.here)

Labels: bestiality, homosexuality, propaganda, slate

The guys aren't there to have sex with one another. They're there to have conversation with one another, followed by sex with beasts whose cousins the men regard as barbecue meat. The classlessness of the society in the house conceals its abuse of the society in the barn. Later, the men return from the barn, bonded together in silent triumph. This isn't a gay party. It's a frat party.

Because, as you know, there is no such thing as more than two homosexuals ever engaging in sex. And homosexuals and homosexual pornography never portray anyone or anything in a way or context equivalent to "meat."

But he leaves his greatest show of intellectual strength for the finale: apparently holding an acid grudge against Rush Limbaugh, he then goes to state that very little separates Limbaugh from one of these bestial men!

(cont.here)

Labels: bestiality, homosexuality, propaganda, slate

To Limbaugh, women are just like animals. Don't take my word for it. Take his. Five months ago, he compared his cat to a girlfriend: "She gets loved. She gets adoration. She gets petted. She gets fed. And she doesn't have to do anything for it, which is why I say this cat's taught me more about women than anything my whole life."

That's the kind of frat-boy thinking that ends with a bunch of drunken idiots in a barn.

So, yes, we are surprised to hear Saletan hasn't called PETA et al to raid Limbaugh's house and rescue the poor cat from the bestial Limbaugh. I mean, talk about steeping low to vilify and mischaracterize a political opponent. And I can't wait to hear Saletan's protest on how horrible pornography is, because it does display all these attitudes he described. Maybe when hell, freezes over, that is.

If there is anything very bestial in all of this, it is surely Saletan's writing.

p.s. Captain's Quarters has a post worth reading as well.

Labels: bestiality, homosexuality, propaganda, slate

inkling_revival writes: Thursday, May, 03, 2007 6:09 PM

Proponents of "hate crimes" legislation justify the special status of these crimes by saying "It affects more than just the victim of the crime; the entire class is terrorized by the crime." For this reason, they claim, it must be differentiated from the mere violent crime itself.

In saying so, they prove themselves completely ignorant of American jurisprudence.

It is the case, in American law, that EVERY crime is considered a crime SPECIFICALLY because it affects more than just the affected party. Legal actions to address damage to a specific individual are called "Torts" in American law, and are judged in civil courts. Crimes are crimes because the commission of them attacks the very fabric of society. This is why crimes are prosecuted by the state, not by the victim.

Thus, for example, auto theft is not handled by a tort action, even though it's an individual who lost the car. The act of stealing a car terrorizes all who own property of any sort; and the safety of private property is the basis of individual liberty in a free society. Therefore, auto theft is handled as a crime, not as a tort.

Thus, there is no basis in legal theory for special penalties for "hate crimes." What they claim is special about the hate crime, is actually true for the entire society; the violent act terrorizes, not just the victim or the victim's class, but the entire culture.

Just did a test on Vox, and I don't get any of the terrible size limitation problems for posting that I'm having here!

And I also found this: Condemned To Google Hell - Forbes - which would also explain why a Google search never displays any of my blog pages, although, it is clear that in my case, it must be for the political content. So much for freedom of speech in the Big Google Brother Era.

One more reason to send anything related to Google to that place.

Will keep you posted (of my blogging whereabouts :-).

From Huff robert-naiman:

In his struggle to retain his position as President of the World Bank, Wolfowitz has retained the services of Robert Bennett, "a high-powered Washington lawyer known for adept legal skirmishing and negotiation," the Times notes today.

Guess what Mr. Bennett is threatening? To disclose the salaries and perks of others at the Bank:

"[He] also indicated that he was prepared to keep the temperature raised, possibly by demanding the public release of the salaries and perquisites of others at the bank.

A full public airing of the high salaries at the bank is not something that top bank officials want, many bank officials say. They may seek to avoid a confrontation if only to avoid calling Mr. Bennett's bluff."

Well then. Why don't Bank employees call Mr. Bennett's bluff? If Wolfowitz's critics in the Bank's staff association release the salary and benefit information - to which they surely have access - then Mr. Bennett won't be able to use the disclosure of this information as a threat.

And - it could be argued - as the World Bank is a taxpayer-financed institution, this information should be a matter of public record anyway.

It looks like Mr. Wolfowitz will stay at the World Bank and remain as president long after all the current staff has passed away into eternity. :-)

Hah! What interesting times these must be at the Bank right now. So many arms being twisted, so many threats, the bank dinausaurs screeching and jousting at each other with their razor-sharp claws...