?

Log in

No account? Create an account
mai 2018   01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

le 05 décembre 2017


cheers - applause

sex is bad

Posted on 2017.12.05 at 00:48
Eraserhead in drag, meets Sea of Trees...

I recently watched a movie I won't name right now, and the best thing about it was the way people just stopped and dead-pan stared - for a joke. It was a comedy. It was, harmlessly sardonic.

Well, then I watched, "Marie Antoinette (2006 film)," with Kirsten Dunst being, as always, Kirsten Dunst, pretending to be Marie Antoinette. This was not a comedy. But ut was amazing to watch, and had a soundtrack that could have been for Repo Man II. I mean really, grand ball dances of the aristocracy while some zany song by Oingo Boingo is playing? However, the point I want to make is that this movie spent a lot of time just stopping and staring, but not as a joke.

Tonight, I watched one of the best-made fucking-weird movies ever, starring Scarlett Johansson as a space alien. I don't really read much about a movie before I watch a DVD, and so I was trippin on this one. Under the Skin (2013 film). Scarlett Johansson, space alien, is a London girl who learns how to drive the Scottish way, picking up unintelligible Scottish guys, whom she lures into her sexness and somehow feeds to some kinda something somewhere, all in surreal weirdness.

It is clear that this movie owed much of its style to David Lynch's, "Eraserhead," a cult film which once made me run all the way home praying that I was not pregnant. Both movies just spent a lot of time wasting a lot of time just stopping and staring, for dramatic, if not horrific, effect. I highly advise watching Eraserhead before Under the Skin.

Then, chase that down with Sea of Trees. Because Scarlett's movie kept getting more and more "real"/existential, and she ended up in a different sea of trees, which is apparently a great place to die. Come to think of it, Kirsten Dunst also ended up in a sea of trees, and this leads me to the obvious conclusion that Marie Antoinette was a space alien. Seriously. They were both completely out of their element. They were both bombshells. Nobody understood them. They ate babies. They ate cake. They just stood there, staring. And they ultimately travelled away into outer space.

Not to mention they both had weird fucking soundtracks. I don't think Kirsten realised that her movie would seem a little more comic than, Amadeus, and would more closely compare to, "Don't Start the Revolution Without Me," in all its farce and banality. However, I wouldn't stretch this comparison to include the other two movies, except when the super-speedy motorbikes show up, which take us back to Repo Man.

In Marie Antoinette, sex is a bad thing. The young king simply never gets around to banging her, and everyone is all upset about this. Oh, but then they do have sex, so, that was like the major part of the plot, turning out to be a red herring. They were SUPPOSED to have a BOY, OR ELSE, but they had a GIRL!!!! Oh NO!... Oh, but then they had a boy, so forget all that.

Another red herring was the evil duchess who threatens all harm but then disappears from the movie so I guess we shouldn't have cared about that element. And the Swedish soldier shows up and has sex but then disappears, and we don't even get a plot twist that Marie's new son MIGHT BE HIS...

The whole movie was not about plot - I mean the revolution just appeared out of nowhere, near the end of the movie. Instead, it was all about stopping and staring at opulence. The thrill of being a 15 year old girl being lured away into seemingly infinite wealth. Marie was just misunderstood - torn between two kingdoms - and between the French commoners and the French aristocracy, both of whom were clearly asses.

But, if I allowed myself to get inside the head of a monkey who was strapped to a machine which constantly rewarded him cocaine, I would sit there and commiserate with that monkey, believing in my heart of hearts that overdosing was truly a very good and natural thing.

They say the rich have always been greedy. Well, that's what wealth IS. That's what value is: consuming! Destroying! Everybody wants that same ham on the table, and you're the one who has it - but its too big for your mouth and so what do you do? You use it as canon fodder, of course, because you wouldn't want to see its VALUE trashed in any way, right? That would demean YOU!

Anyway, sex was bad in the movie, Marie Antoinette, until it was good. But then everything came to a tragic end.

Similarly, sex was bad in the movie, Under the Skin. Strip away all the sci-fi and alien veneer, and this is just another movie about a female alienated by life and eventually learning to love it through sex, although THIS alien also meets a tragic end.

Both movies were amusing, pleasant and disturbing to watch.

We all live in a sea of trees. Because of the bad sex. We all steam away in an old cranky radiator. We grab our little crumbs of cake, for one brief moment, and then we are falling like flies on some space alien's shiny black kitchen floor.

Do you know that the real Marie Antoinette was not referring to REAL, tastie sweet cake, when she supposedly made her famous pronouncement? Rather, she was referring to something yuckier, such that the phrase would more appropriately be interpreted as, "Let them eat creosote!" or, "Let them eat coal tar!" (Apparently "tar" and "cake" are pronounced the same way, in France, or something...) However, whether she even said anything at all is debatable. She might have said, "Let them eat zombie flesh!" for all I know.

That would have made the commoners just stop and stare.

A few questions which every blogger should ask himself


Video=> Joy Behar and The View Audience Go Wild …

Joy Behar: Yeah, I Totally Jumped The Gun Spreading That Shoddy ABC Report About Russian Collusion

Joy Behar: Yeah, I Totally Jumped The Gun Spreading That Shoddy ABC Report...


I eat cake not because I am gay or straight, but because I am human.

What does selling cake have to do with any customer's sex or gender?

This is not an issue for sellers to fixate upon!

Any business which refuses to sell cake to one group and not another, based on some "moral" anxieties or apprehensions, (not even grounded in the Bible), is placing its own private privileges above those of all the customers, (by extension), it should be serving.

In fact, businesses were not created to either maximise private profit or to extend moral judgement into the private lives of citizens, including through the sharp knife of shaming: Businesses were created by charter by a government OF THE CITIZENS, to serve all of them alike, in their shared humanity.

It would be a crime to allow businesses to discriminated against particular groups, on matters completely unrelated to commerce, in matters completely having nothing to do with their business, in matters owned to the privacy of those groups and NOT even to the 'privac'y of those businesses' property or premises! Because money does not inform speech. Free people inform speech. People free of those who forever seek to CONTROL, through money, through speech, through moral shaming, through reference to religious abstractions - of which only THEY supposedly know the Truth, or intentions, or answers - or rules.

Simply, businesses may be chartered to serve the public. If they wish, they may choose not to sell sex toys. If they wish, they may write and speak and lobby against immorality but if they want to force that on any innocent segment of the population THEN CLOSE THEM DOWN.

My right to be about my life is greater than anyone else's right to be about their money.

My right to be about my life is greater than anyone else's right to be about their commerce.

Money and commerce - even interstate and global - ARE SECONDARY CONVENIENCES TO INDEPENDENCE, AS THEY ARE TO FREE SPEECH, AND AS THEY ARE TO FREE ASSEMBLY, SOUL - AND GENDER IDENTITY.

If an individual feels offended that any business should refuse to serve gays based on "religious concerns," it is THAT INDIVIDUAL, and not the business, who has the higher religious right to prevail in the question. Commerce does not control us, we control it - because it is ultimately an EXPRESSION of popular values.

Small businesses should not obsess over this small stuff, and focus on how both parties have conspired with globalised corporate elites to monopolise, to outsource jobs, to outsource trade, to outsource taxes, and to crowd out small business at every turn, both geographically and through the latest effort to de-neutralise the internet.  Forever, their aim is to siphon all the business and profits and capital up to a few groups at the top who, as the supply-side 'SUPPLIERS' of the game, call all the shots.  If you want to talk "morality," then look at how this country has been raped.

It is not hard to figure this out!  Especially if you understand the Bible!

LGBT Rights and Religious Freedom


“You are fettered," said Scrooge, trembling. "Tell me why?"

"I wear the chain I forged in life," replied the Ghost. "I made it link by link, and yard by yard; I girded it on of my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it.”


See also post: Bakers Sue State Because Selling Cake is Illegal and Will Get You Thrown in Jail

Journée précédente  Journée suivante