A bank's dress code policy...

comment:
"It is odd to me that one would assume wearing make-up is akin to "whoring-up" - how old-fashioned is that? Nobody is talking about rouging their nipples, lady"

you mean wearing make-up isn't like whoring-up? And it isn't old fashioned. woman have worn make-up for a long time. make-up is usually meant to make you look aroused. Sounds like whoring up to me.

Original article: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/12/15/132078288/bank-dress-code-makeup-will-enhance-your-personality?sc=fb&cc=fp

Romantic Rape

A while ago I was in a class. The professor was talking about rape and about how we (only girls were in the class) were in the age group most likely to get raped. She talked about how a lot of anti-rape things actually romanticize rape. She told of a commercial with just a girl crying in her bed to sad music.
Some time, before or after that— I don't know. I remember seeing a DeviantArt piece on rape. It was in the "Daily Deviations." I know they aren't a reliable source for anything. I couldn't find the image again. It was just the torso and pelvis of a woman, her hands gingerly covering herself with a little bit of blood. She wasn't in the fetal position, she wasn't covering her breasts at all or even had much of a closed body posture. and her skin was perfect. there was not a bruise. don't struggle?
Even when I was searching for the image. The rape images that were trying to tell a serious message about rape being wrong. (not the jokes or the pornographic ones) Seemed to be very romanticized. pornographic. this is sexy. a few of them were kind of violent and not very romanticized. a lot of them were just the typical tape over mouth and "real men don't rape." tape. I know symbolizing that people who are raped don't usually tell anyone. but what else does it say? don't scream? you shouldn't tell anyone?

I could always go back to Twilight and other smut novels. I wonder sometimes people intentionally try to get us excited about these things. We should like a big strong guy who can "take" us whenever he'd like. In fact we should like it when he does. actually, I'm not sure I wonder about it at all.

Ramble: Anime-Loving Feminist

I've gone over why I don't like most anime. It is— in my experience, mostly demeaning to woman. I have had an acquaintance, who seems to enjoy anime, but also claimed to be a feminist. Saying how that people (white, male atheists) mostly as she would like to believe are blaming rape-victims, because they dress provocatively and walk alone at midnight.
...
that's all. Even if she is going to follow the generic feminist notion that nothing women do can will have any sort of change to the likelihood of their being raped, that still doesn't explain any of her like of anime. Yeah, there are some, maybe even a lot of anime, but most of the ones that I've seen are demeaning to women. How can you accept that while defending feminism? It's just never anything I really understood about women anime people. I mean not all anime is bad or demeaning. You'd just have to be very discriminating in your tastes. Oh, wait that's why she was upset— discrimination.
No, I don't suppose it makes any sense. I just had a bad day and people complaining about an article of hers and reminded us of our disagreements about rape. That and her liking anime bothered me and I had to ramble about something about it. Though, the article she wrote had nothing to do with anime.

It all seems so hypocritical to me. Maybe there is just something I'm missing.

it must be this.

A Rape of Uganda

I keep going back to wondering what is the motivation for rape. Of, course though there is the statement that sex is about power, so rape is both. That's not really what I wanted to talk about, though. Well, Rape was on the list, but not so much the power vs. lust. More on the what-the-fuck-are-people-thinking-?

Uganda. That's some pretty F-ed up stuff there. (have I sworn on this before?) Back to Uganda. I just read Harper's article on it. I think it scared the shit out of me.
The author talked about one uhm, man. At least I think the person is a man, maybe they are or maybe she is just pretending to be one. I wasn't clear on that. But I was clear that at this person at least used to be female and a lesbian. She didn't feel comfortable in a dress so the Church decided that she was possessed by a male spirit. They thought it best that performing an exorcism would be best. The men held her, talked in tongues, took off her clothes (exorcising evil spirits in those too?) fondled her– while it was all being called "holy" and eventually locked her in a room and raped her––– for a week. Then they called her "cured".
okay for one how does anyone ever start to think that raping someone is going to turn them straight? because they will realize they enjoy hetro sex? last time I read anything about rape it still said that it wasn't enjoyable. In fact I don't think I ever ran into the phrase "I was raped and it was fucking awesome." I don't think that will change.
If homosexuality was a choice, which it isn't, by the way, I'd imagine lesbians would be like "fuck this shit, guys are douche bags."

But back to the context. This was at a church. Now, the article didn't say if there were any white guys at this church, however there were white guys at other churches Blessed had been to. Blessed is the gay man the author talked with. Okay context, they are in a church they believe homosexuality is a sin because it is in the Bible. What else is in the bible? rape is 'punishable' ie wrong. Now, let's say she didn't say no, let's say she didn't "cry out". In fact even if we go as far to say she wanted it. (which clearly she hadn't.)
The author, Jeff Sharlet, went to several abstinence parties. There where signs in one of the churches among "Say no to homosexuality." there was "Avoid sex before marriage" and "always say no to sex."
sooo, Sex is okay if it's to get a male spirit/demon out of the body? a mob mentality and because it was curing her it was okay for them to give in to their sick thoughts and rape this poor girl.

Disclosed

Boyfriend and I were hanging out with a friend at his grandma's house. The guys were playing Magic, I was drawing and the grandma was watching TV. The TV ended up on a movie called Disclosure. (there is a novel that I need to read.) First thing I want to mention in the beginning the main character's(Tom) daughter didn't want to put on her coat, so he said something like "you should always listen to your father." her reply was "Rachel doesn't have a father she has two mommies." Uh, I approve.
The second point is that Tom is sexually harassed. They of course went into that "sex is about power." but even if we are 100% certain of this it's- more of a wanting of power, the need to control something. Not necessarily actually having that power and doing what you will with it. (which would make it more sexual.) Tom had said "sexually harassment is about power, when did I have the power?"
The female claimed he did it. In trying to say that he did it her lawyer was suggesting that Tom, who was attracted to the woman, had just "lost control" and had to have sex with her. Lost control? isn't that the opposite of being in control– having power? So, his lack of thought would have made him commit a crime. (not of course saying that raping someone because you are aroused is an excuse.) and they were just trying to get him to admit to raping her. This is all just fiction, of course, but I still have to question.
Of course sex itself is/can be about power. Which kinda confuses the sex/power myths about rape.
Mostly, I mentioned the movie, because a women can sexually harass a man. Due to the nature of the sexes it is less likely to happen, but it can.

I'm reading at the moment a Year of Living Biblically at one point he states that the idea of avoiding a woman while she's on her period isn't misogynistic– it's like grieving for the death of a potential life, but do we grieve for ever sperm a male ejaculates that doesn't end up as a life??

at the mall, today my boyfriend and I were looking for the Borders again and I was like "oh, it's this way. by the naked girls. Did you not remember passing the naked girls?" "No," he said. "because I am happily in a relationship." "I notices the naked girls." I don't know how he missed or forgot about the mostly naked girls.

Not Sex

This post is about sex and related topics, btw. (also, I should be working on homework.)

The thing is I'm also not sure where to start. I can start with this: I was involved in an internet argument about rape. also I just read a book about rape. a Natural history of Rape, actually. Written by scientists. (biology, Mr. Thornhill and anthropology, Mr. Palmer) Stating and making a case for rape being about sex and less violence or power. (it states that males with less influence, wealth, thing women want would be more likely to rape, but men with access to women will rape too.)

The argument was whether or not dress had to do with the likelihood of getting raped. My stance as most of the people that were vocal (except the opposing opinion, one woman)was that wearing revealing clothes will draw attention to the young woman in question. Her argument was we were blaming the victim. We were not, we were saying that a rapist would notice someone wearing revealing clothes and depending on the situation would be more likely to rape her-- provided she was vulnerable. Not saying that would be the only possible woman a rapist would pick.

I decided to read the book because, of another internet argument. I wondered if rape could be genetic. I did a search and found a site about scorpionflies. (pieces from the book of the book) Female scorpionflies (I can't find the page I read) prefer to mate with a male that brings a gift of saliva or a dead bug. She will avoid males without gifts. If a male does not have a gift but still wants to mate he has some sort of limb– a clamp located on the top of the abdomen. He will use this organ to hold a female while he mates with her. The organ has no other purpose; if the organ is covered in beeswax it prevents the male from forcing sex, but he can still mate with her if he has a gift.

The book argues that the majority of woman raped are when they are the most fertile (15ish to 22ish) and that they have the most psychological pain compared to younger or older females raped. This is because it greatly impairs their reproductive success. (they didn't get to choose; their mates might leave them; etc) (I was called out in the debate, because of that. "funny that was the first thing that came to your mind." I cited my source later, but she'd already said it was a mysogonistic thread and left.) The book states that rape is either an adaptation or by-product of one (the authors disagreed.) The fact that most rape victims are young women is one of the reasons they say for rape to be sexually motivated.

If rape was all about power why wouldn't rapists just beat women? and why do women experience more psychological pain after being raped versus being assaulted? If men rape just to prove their manliness, why wouldn't women rape to prove that they are more powerful then the patriarch? Some social scientists, the book states, would say that rape is entirely learned and getting rid of the patriarch would stop rape, but again if it's about power that also wouldn't work, especially if it was a matriarch. (of course, that's not a statement for it being biological(genetic and environment)/about sex.) If it is about power why do most rapists only used enough force to subdue the woman and most let them live?

If rape is about sex, wearing 'sexy' clothes will attract more attention from a rapist. That does not mean that only sexy women get raped. This also doesn't mean it is her fault. It is just something she should be aware of. It's not her fault. It is not the only reason women don't report rape. (because they think they will be blamed because they dressed sexy.) One other being their males might leave them, believing they have damaged goods or that she wasn't raped, but was covering for consensual sex. reproductive success is lost by a rape.

Just because it most probably have evolved does not make it right. I am not blaming any victims of rape for being raped.

Conservapedia Fun!

I am sure-- if you actually are reading this that you know what Conservapedia is. This post is dedicated to me commenting on things from then Feminism article.

Feminism originally was an expression used by suffragettes - who were predominantly pro-life - to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the United States and the United Kingdom. By the 1970s, however, liberals had changed the meaning to represent people who favored abortion and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole.

abortion was illegal by 1870, before women's right to vote and well they were kind of more concerned with getting rights. Please tell me why women can't have the same roles as men? Yes, I have said their are genetic differences between the sexes, but it doesn't mean that a female can't do the same things that males do.

"Specifically, a modern feminist tends to:"

* believe that there are no meaningful differences between men and women (The most significant belief underlying contemporary feminism is that there are no sex differences; therefore advocacy for equal rights must be extended to advocacy for equal results or outcomes.)

Yes, uhm, yes? let's see differences... body structure, better ability to see color (males have a better time with depth perception and stuff about how objects take up space. I don't know if that's what it is. It was developed for hunting.) different sexual preferences, (women tend to want men with resources, are more picky about mates) but nothing that makes one sex better then the other. different, but equal.

* oppose chivalry and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes)

Yes, because otherwise we are expecting all the rights of men while being treaded better then them. We cannot have the best of both worlds. If I hold the door for you I expect you to enter and to thank me, that is all. I do not want you to stand there ad insist I go in first. (there was an instance of this where my boyfriend was holding the other door and he stopped to insist I went in first, but did not for my boyfriend) side note: the "see battle of the sexes" is there because that was a link to another part of the site that did not go there.

* view traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal

a traditional marriage is a patriarchy. Especially if we look in the Bible.

Gen4:19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
Ephesian5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

etc,etc...

Under English common law, which was adopted by the states after independence, the identity of the wife was merged into that of the husband; he was a legal person but she was not. Upon marriage, he received all her personal property, and managed all property owned by her. In return, the husband was obliged to support his wife and children. A married woman, therefore, could not sign a contract without the signature of her husband.

again I probably could find more. (sorry, that wasn't cited it was making my computer run slow.)(also, that was of course, changed)

* detest women who are happy in traditional roles, such as housewives, and especially dislike those who defend such roles

If you are happy, fine, as long as you are doing so freely.

* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking

no, I sew. I do not know how to bake and have no interest in learning. Of, course, should I wish to bake a cake I can read directions, but so can my boyfriend.

* support affirmative action for women

meh, whatever.

* prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do

No, but they shouldn't feel like they need to wear a dress at any occasion, ever. (Men can wear dresses if they like too, I prefer they look good in them, because that's what women's cloths are usually for-- looking good.)

* seek women in combat in the military just like men, and coed submarines

While, I don't approve of most combat. I see no reason why a female cannot join the military if she so wishes. She is just as capable. Perhaps more so if it is so that childbirth is more painful then kidney stones. (I do not know.)

* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.

Why should she have to? She isn't his property. What if she doesn't like his last name? It also gets rid of the idea that people should have sons to carry on the family name. again, she can if she wants.

* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (Eg: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)

He had six wives! there was more of them then of him! besides his wives he is also known for separating the church of England from the Roman Catholic.
as for "distorting" history. I have no knowledge since that is the only example he gave. But since women weren't important they would not have been written about as much.

* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey"; object to other female-only names, such as "temptress"

Temptress isn't even a complement! The jury for myself is still out on "Ma'am" as for "sweetheart" and "honey" Sometimes I get annoyed when Boyfriend calls me "dear" and I am not sweet or made of honey. Besides, I'm pretty sure some guys get called that. Oh, bytheway I really don't like it when a guy who is not my boyfriend calls me such. I've gotten used to it as far as females go. They have a habit of calling people "hun" and "sweety" and such. and hun goes for any gender. So, it's not all that feminine in how girls use it.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a staunch advocate of civil rights and non-violence said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection."

Irrelevant, just because he was an advocate of civil rights does not make him infallible.

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for American Thinker, links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and Marx, is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the state."

as opposite to... slavery of the husband/father? or are your just upset, because if that's true you will be a slave to the state too and you won't have any slaves of your own? Besides what's wrong with Hegel and Marx? also, you are the only one saying feminism is grounding itself there?

The rest, while some of it isn't hateful toward men, most is and it is just saying that feminism is what everyone else has so-called taken from their Limaugh word "femi-nazis" The rest is just perpetuating the fact that most people now of this generation won't call themselves a feminist for fear of being called someone who hates men or thinks women are better. That is not what Feminism is. That is an extreme version-- kind of like reverse racism. Treating some other group of people like shit, because they used to treat your people like shit doesn't work. The people you are treating like shit didn't have anything to do with the ones that used to treat your kind like shit besides being the same-- whatever. Follow me? If we repress another group, later they will rise up and repress us again.

I have a problem

Boyfriend is a writing major and, knows the possible implications of words, very rarely calls me sexy, hot, or variants of those. He will call me pretty, beautiful or elegant. (and he has a habit of kissing my hand. Hence the drawing of us as knights) This is not the problem. I'd rather him call me what he does then what he doesn't very much.

The problem is the only think I can call him is handsome. Cute is for fuzzy animals-- usually, anyway I think he might take a fence (okay, okay, offense) to that. Well, Handsome is what I always think is a guy is wearing a fancy outfit. (of course, he needs to be good looking too.)

Well, it doesn't matter, handsome is well enough.

Cake!

Boyfriend's argument about cake.

Let's bake a cake! Gather all the necessary ingredients and put them together in the proper way in a dish. Okay! let's put this in the oven and see how it turns out.
Now, five minutes after putting it in the oven take it out. Is that a cake?

Now, let's make a human! Gather all the necessary ingredients and put them together in the proper way. Okay! Now, five minutes after conception let's take it out of the womb. Is that a human?

just because all the parts are there does not make it a cake. Yes, it can only become a cake or a pile of junk, but that does not make it a cake. It does not mean you threw away a cake.
You can't have a feminist blog without some statement about abortion. Besides that Cake argument I don't know what to say. (if anyone does read this, it's probably where I'm likely to get crap.)
Let's go with some basics.

Rape. Someone gets raped. She doesn't tell anyone. She gets pregnant. She knows that if she has the kid. That kid will remind her of the rapist and not be treated well by her. (or by any boyfriends she might have) She also knows that if she gives the child up for adoption, the kid would probably have a terrible life. This is ignoring the pregnancy and birth process.

Danger for the mother. The mother is in danger. She might die. If she wants to live, well the unborn will have to die. Making her sacrifice herself for the child is not her sacrificing herself. It's the law sacrificing her. (Note that this is the only type of abortion legal in the third trimester.)

Failed Birth Control. It happens. They tell you it can happen. I don't think that people should use abortion as birth control. (but via cake, I don't see why they can't.)

ICHEB: I'm detecting another life-sign.
SEVEN: Where?
ICHEB: Inside Lieutenant Torres. It could be a parasite.
(Star Trek: Voyager) I wish I had a better quote, but it's the only one I could think of.

Twilight and Rape

Twilight raped my six year old sister.

Of course this isn't true-- books can't rape people. However, it can-- well, it's not the only book/thing that- affect young women/girls view of themselves and what they think love should be like.
We should all wait for "true" love. If that love is a stalking, possibly abusive boyfriend, oh well, that's "true" love. [just search it for sites.]
Edward is supposed to be a vampire. As I understand myth, vampires are scary bloodsucking humanoids, who also as I understand, tend to view humans as lesser creatures. Hm, like food. They are predators; they stalk and drink their prey-- humans. Why would they date or be anywhere close to kind to their prey, anyway? So, it's not like it's particularly surprising he wouldn't treat her well.
Other things I have heard. It's-- besides the lack of good writing/grammar(which we all know I don't have)-- it's okay for pulp. There are some lulls though.
Bela is apparently somewhat of a developed character. (I don't want to say that without the somewhat) After she's with Ed she becomes less of one. In fact two of my friends who read it didn't find the first one all that bad and in the end Ed leaves her and she has to deal with it. But in the other ones Mr. Sparkly comes back. I don't know where Werewolf comes in or what he's like, but I'm pretty sure Bel stays with Ed. Now, if Jacob was a good werewolf guy it should (for being pulp) end with her going with Jake and realizing what a terrible guy Ed was. That would also end with the obvious moral of knowing and being able to avoid abusive relationships (even if they are sexy vampires)
Another opinion is that Bel is just a placeholder character for any female to slip into-- "a choose your own adventure novel in disguise" Of course, you can't change what Bel does. If you decide that Jake is hotter you can't go with him. He was a bad guy in an earlier book, no? That still give the element of danger. It would probably still give the element of a rape fantasy. I guess, no rape fantasy would be complete without an abusive guy. One site I saw said that this makes it "romantic" That without him being abusive the story wouldn't continue, because it would be "happily ever after" which, as I understand, is what the last book is like. Alright, so they can't have problems or things to get over and it being all "romantic" without him treating her badly?

This leads me to question my earlier hypothesis of woman having rape fantasies being somewhat genetic. Rape is about power/show of power. Woman are naturally attracted to more powerful men. (although, for some reason, at the moment, I believe that men who rape are more likely to feel powerless and that is why they do it.) A powerful man is more likely to be able to care/protect the child. So, would that make a rape fantasy about having a powerful man to take care of any children?
or is it because we have been a relatively "misogynistic" society? (which may somehow have lead to changes in female genetics, possibly, maybe, I don't study these things) Is it because people like Stephanie Meyer write romanticizing abusive relationships. (which, as a side note, American culture does sometimes to rape– romanticizing it.) Stories which are supposed to capture teen sexual tension or whatever. Stories that are generally for girls, show that abusive relationships are romantic and she should be married and with a kid by the time she is, what? 18? was that it? something terrible. She should be en-soi (being in itself, like an object. Simone de Beauvoir) and live only for her husband, who of course is God. And she shouldn't do anything she wants to do– no wait, she should do what she wants to, but she wants to live only for her god. If he is not there she is nothing. He, however can go and do whatever he pleases. Oh, wait, now it's not even a rape fantasy anymore, because now she isn't a person. If this is romance (which is the kind I don't like) then girls should not be interested in it.

Are girls actually influenced by this kind of thing? If Bel is a placeholder character then...

Sell by Objectifying

I was at that terrible Wal-mart place today and I say a young woman walk by wearing a t-shirt that said "rub for luck" that is a sexual harassment waiting to happen. I doubt she would have taken it too kindly had someone gone over there and grabbed her boob. Or maybe it was some sort of artistic statement, maybe, but for some reason I don't think it was. If I had only a little less inhibitions then I do, I might have actually gone over to her and grabbed her boob. Probably not, but I had the urge. To prove a point? or because her shirt said to?

In middle school I was at the mall with some friends and they seemed to like a shirt that said "Objects under are larger then they appear"

Refer to the blog link Open Source Stitches' "blame it on the ovaries" for why I looked up Abercrombie & Fitch's child's(7-14) line.

The Abercrombie's kids' homepage is –dramatic pause– a (b&w)photo of a guy– not a boy– he's past puberty, standing with an open button down shirt and his head is cropped off.

Do boys need/want to were cologne? and $30.00 cologne at that?

The nude photographs aren’t pornographic at all, the company says — they’re wholesome and beautiful. Besides, the clothing and marketing campaigns aren’t intended for anyone over 22 or under 18 — Abercrombie & Fitch is all about college students, who are hip enough to understand the A&F Quarterly’s sly sense of humor. If you don’t get the joke, then you’re just too darn old.

-Megan vs A&F

Naked people are funny? haha! you're naked! also "wholesome and beautiful"? what they what everyone to think is beautiful. "..it's an excuse to look at naked women." Oh, Wait I know why it's funny, because everyone in their pictures (especially the nudes) are :swearing: perfect! I get it! Haha! And the only way I can look like that is to buy your clothes and run around naked! That way I will look like a photoshopped picture!

Oh! then it must be 22 year olds who run the company. I see, That's pretty awesome. Oh, it's not? then can only "hip college" kids find this funny? That's because it's not and it's just "you can't possibly understand, so you can't get mad at us."

"cute butt leggings"? I'm still on the "kid's" site. (7-14) the only swimsuits they have for girls are bikini's. There is one one-piece in the woman's section. (it still wasn't covering much) And again they need $30 smelly stuff. The gift card is a man with out a shirt and a woman leaning on him.(the adult line is just a male without a shirt) They did not change there branding at- no it's not there branding they needed to change- wait naked people is their branding. They need to change that(and some of the clothes) to get a difference between their "kids" line and there "college" line.

I can't look at this stuff anymore. Their stores smells bad too. They spray perfume and stuff on the clothes. They must not wash it before hand. (you know, after the models had sex on them)

(I didn't even touch on the child thongs (they used to have?) or anything else mentioned in Megan vs A&F)

I blame Truman

Something that usually pisses me off to no end– anime girls. huge eyes and gravity defying boobs, skinny waists and a lot of them have a habit of being all sweet and innocent like. Innocent, in those clothes? I'm surprised they know what that means. Of course, it's not like they are real.
There are also the anime girls who have no boobs. Very rarely do they have normal sized boobs.

Definition, Chick flick: typically used only in reference to films that are heavy with emotion or contain themes that are relationship-based. (wiki) I have also noticed that they are usually more of the "romantic comedy" type deal. Of course, I don't watch those things, but my point is Love Hina. I have decided it is a chick flick for guys after watching the first episode. The boy, who told me I'd like it, insisted it was not. Haha, it's a romantic comedy with boobs. Also, it's more porn-ish (more of a soft core, of course) then most animes. That boy should have known full well that I do not like anything that has to do with relationships, especially when they pretty much call themselves a romantic comedy. Love? hel-lo, I said I wasn't going to like it upon hearing the title. On top of all that the dumb boy tells me who marries who in the end anyway.

I can sometimes get past the fact that anime usually centers around boobs– if it has a good storyline. "I need breasts!" (Pumpkin Scissors) The reason he said that was because he found a baby boy. "can we trade it in for a bomb?"

Those anime boobs don't help when the boy you are dating is practically drooling over drawings. There is no way I can look like that. I am comfortable as I am and am told that I am beautiful and all sorts of things, but seeing things like that doesn't make me feel good at all. His line was "Well, at least you know I won't cheat on you." That kid was fully capable of it. This isn't about him is it?

This is about anime boobs (this is not about anime boobs, it is about Banshees)

A bit on the Manlinessless of the 'hurt' emotion

The other night I was looking at a weird painting I'd done a while ago. I made when I was dating someone else. We sort of got into an argument I'm not sure what it was or anything. It was probably ridicules. I painted this. I told that guy that I wanted to show it to him. He said no, that he didn't want to see what I made out of being upset with him. As I was staring at this painting that concept seemed like a terrible idea.

After a while, I got up and showed the painting to Boyfriend. He told me about it. I did not decide to share the context of the piece to him. You aren't supposed to bash your ex to your new boyfriend. Hm, I guess I'm a fail, because I do it all the time. Well, usually when I do it– it's more like "he would never do that" or whatever– implying that Boyfriend is a better person.

I asked Boyfriend– hypothetically, if he would want to see it. He, at first, thought I wasn't being hypothetical. (because very rarely those things are) He begrudgingly said sure, anyway. (and asked when I was upset with him. I said no, it was a hypothetical question.) He again said yes and read some of what I previously wrote.
"That's awesome! If you are ever upset with..." him, he hopes I makes something that cool and be productive with my upsetness.

"I made you feel bad, but I want to pretend it didn't happen. Don't show me art that reminds me of that." ? Pretend we have no feelings? feelings are bad. Erm, what? He didn't want to be reminded he upset me? yeah, he's never broken up with a girl face-to-face. Be manly– Men don't have feelings. Men aren't supposed to care about people or well be worried about people they don't care about. Of course, actually, the people I hear things like this from don't actually think that only men should do that.

Boyfriend and I got lost in some terrifying New England city. (everyone knows New Englanders don't like outsiders) It wasn't the first time we got lost there, but he got upset that he got lost. Later Boyfriend apologized and I said that it was okay, he's allowed to have emotions. I believe he made a comment to the effect that isn't how some people see it. I didn't say anything. I'd much rather date someone who gets angry sometimes then someone who pretends not to have any feelings and they don't think you should show yours if you aren't going to talk about them. Well, if you are dating them shouldn't they know you well enough to tell, regardless?

Was this really what I wanted to get into? Ideas of masculinity and guys who are probably too afraid that they might not be manly enough have to hide themselves behind "masculine" characteristics. I'll probably ramble more on this when I decide I'm going to talk about some philosopher.

Back to the guy who never broke-up with a girl to her face. I'd gotten into a fight with him and told him that I didn't want him to stop talking to me (he had done previously) or I might have to do something I'd regret, because I wouldn't be able to handle that, again. Sometimes, I think that he broke up with me so that I wouldn't hurt him. Random aside: He had said he still loved me. Let's break up with someone you love without really trying to make it work out. Or was that supposed to make me feel better? (Never fish in Booty Bay)

I once knew a guy who was going to cross-dress for a con. He– on multiple occasions– had to say that he read online that you aren't necessarily gay if you do that. He also said that one time he was horsing around with a younger bro of a friend. I notice that he never said it when he mentioned that he used to be in wrestling. That tends to be considered very homo erotic.

likes - OMG facts

I was on facebook one day (everyday) and on my feed someone liked one of those really long "OMG facts" before facebook changed it to not showing the whole thing if it was past a certain length. This is not a rant about the titles that are a paragraph long, but rather what one was about.

The sad thing was that I couldn't say why I didn't like it. I had to ask my boyfriend.

Having sex can reduce a fever because of the sweat produced. Sex is also a pain reliever, ten times more effective than Valium: immediately before orgasm, levels of the hormone oxytocin rise by five times, determining a huge release of endorphins. These chemicals calm pain, from a minor headache to arthritis or migraines, and with no secondary effects. Migraines also disappear because the pressure in the brain's blood vessels is lowered while we have sex. So now we see that actually, a woman's headache is rather a good reason for having sex, not against it. - OMG Facts

I actually copied the paragraph and sent it to him saying "I don't like this, please tell me why?" I mean I'm sure I knew why I don't like it. I just didn't have words. It was the last bit that really got me. About the headache. I figured that was just an excuse for not wanting to have sex– instead of just saying "I don't want to tonight." or whatever. For people who don't just like no without some sort of reason. Like "I don't feel like it." isn't good enough.

Boyfriend said that it "promotes the pressing of the issue", because husbands can now rape their wives. It must be that he has to presser her until she says yes so she can't calm he raped her.
"it's supposed to be a witty way to overcome the excuse" (One of the (many) reasons I like him is because he could tell me why I didn't like that paragraph.) While the chemical/hormone changes do have that effect, how hard is it to forget you are in pain to get to that point? Or maybe she just said she has a headache, because she knows that her partner doesn't accept "I don't want to." as an answer. I already gave that example.

for some reason this leads me to "make me a sandwich." and the response (facebook group) of "more girls go to college then guys, so why don't you make me a sandwich?"

Pants

I have a pair of purple pants. I really like the color purple they are. They are almost a jean-type fabric– kind of stretchy. (I'm not sure.) The pants are a really nice color and they weren't that expensive. I got them at JC Penny or a place like that.

The problem I have is that I really don't like wearing these pants. From a little above my knees down they are wonderful. They are skinny jeans, though and I really don't have many shoes that can go with them, but I have a friend (with relatively the same shoe size as me) who is totally into this 'fashion' thing.

What I really don't like about these pants is that they have very very small little pockets good for nothing. They might be good for condoms, but I can barely fit keys in them. I am afraid my phone will fall out of my pocket and my wallet– it always falls out, but I'm still into the 'gothic' chain wallet thing. I just kick my wallet around– it's okay. pick it up, put it back.

The pants come up to my mid hip. The fly is like two and a half inches long. If I take a belt and try to put it any higher, well, that's not very comfortable. It's not very comfortable down either. My crack is exposed when I sit– if I am wearing a short shirt. Even if I'm not I can still feel that my butt is hanging out. I don't need to unbutton and unzip these pants to take them off, but my fat still just (plllit) get pushed up into a nice muffin top. It could always be because of all the other female clothes I used to wear pushing my fats around.

This kind of woman's clothes is supposed to make people feel and look sexy. How am I supposed to feel or look sexy when my guts and my ass is exploding out of the top of my pants? Not that I really care to look or feel sexy, but that is the intend, am I wrong?