The Halloween weekend is over, and I managed to get out to Bound on Friday. I even had a good time (thanks for the vibrator experience James). As expected, there were some great costumes, like Dolphy's hot cop outfit, and several floggers flying in the air and electricity demos. I was the French Resistance member, with a black turtleneck and beret (I put my outfit together at the last minute), but only Officer Will got it without me explaining it. But that's okay. I can't wait to see the pictures, Maverick. And it was great to see everyone again, even though Madame Klawdya wasn't there.
The new space is great, bigger (which made it easier to avoid a certain someone than it would have been at the Green Lantern) with more room for scenes, but, as I was discussing with someone on Friday, the bar isn't so great. The Green Lantern had an amazing bar, with that Smirnoff drink special. I heard that Jeff left the Green Lantern, and we need to get him over to Lime. Because as I'm sure Bound patrons will agree, Jeff is one of the best bartenders ever, and I missed him at Lime.
Entre Nous' Halloween party on Saturday was packed, which, like Jennifer said, detracted from the enjoyment. It was nearly impossible to get a drink or find a place to sit down, and people ended up dancing in the lounge area because the dance floor was too crowded. One minor complaint aside, it was a good night. I met a great new couple (dressed in caveman and cavewoman costumes) and saw some old friends. Jennifer (the hostess, not my friend Jennifer) was looking very hot in her Snow White costume, and the other Jennifer (with red hair) was equally hot as a sexy nun. I was Veronica Lake, although the wind destroyed my hair. My intended date for the evening got sick, so I went alone. It's a shame, I think he would have had a good time. I loved Cat's dark angel costume, but I love Cat too, and she looks hot in anything. But the best costume of the night, as determined by the contest, and I agree, was Lady Godiva, wearing nothing but a long blond wig and a flesh-toned thong. I just wish DJ Larry had been there with his 80s metal set.
Bound is having another Halloween party tomorrow, the Hell Ball, and I'd love to go, but I don't see how I can. I don't have a car, and the Metro stops running at midnight during the week, and I'm not about to lose a shitload of money taking a cab back to Takoma Park. If I can go, I'll try to get Wednesday off of work (I made the mistake of going to work the day after the Goth Prom at Alchemy in May, and could barely stay awake). Maybe the Hell Ball will be worth the cab fare home. Hopefully you'll see me out tomorrow night. I can't think of a better place to spend Halloween.
Monday, October 30, 2006
Friday, October 27, 2006
DC hates goths
Alchemy's last weekly night was last night, Midian's gone monthly, Midnight sucks, all of which leads me to believe that there is a widespread DC conspiracy against the goth subculture. If this is happening in other cities as well, please let me know, and we can form a gothic guerilla warfare troop and take back our clubs.
There is one gothic/industrial venue left, for those who don't mind a bit of fetish/S&M mixed in: Bound. I will be going tonight for Halloween, after a long absence due to the inconvenience of the new venue from the metro. I will do my best to fight my fatigue and get out there, though I may have to leave early. It's at Lime, in SW, next to the Crucible (I know, not the best neighborhood, but worth it). Even if you're not interested in the fetish elements, there are some great DJs who spin the best in goth and industrial (you'll probably see me out on the dance floor). And Halloween is the best time to go. It's our high holy day, after all.
There is one gothic/industrial venue left, for those who don't mind a bit of fetish/S&M mixed in: Bound. I will be going tonight for Halloween, after a long absence due to the inconvenience of the new venue from the metro. I will do my best to fight my fatigue and get out there, though I may have to leave early. It's at Lime, in SW, next to the Crucible (I know, not the best neighborhood, but worth it). Even if you're not interested in the fetish elements, there are some great DJs who spin the best in goth and industrial (you'll probably see me out on the dance floor). And Halloween is the best time to go. It's our high holy day, after all.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Muslim cleric blames women for rape
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061026/ap_on_re_au_an/australia_muslims
I think the title of this article should sufficiently explain my outrage. This cleric compared uncovered women to uncovered meat, ripe for predators. Since he was in Australia, which is not an Islam theocracy like Iran, he felt compelled to apologize in the face of public outcry.
One cleric aside, this is a common belief among the more devout Muslims. In Pakistan, a woman must present "witnesses" to her rape to bring charges, to assure the (male) law enforcers that the rape wasn't somehow her fault. In Iran a while back, a murderer of prostitutes was briefly considered a national hero, "cleaning up the filth" of "loose" women. It was only after the murderer revealed that he had had sex with his victims that his unofficial "hero" status was revoked. The comparison to "uncovered meat" says a lot about how fundamentalist Islam views women (please note that I do not include all Muslims here), not as people, but as pieces of meat, dangerous and open to predators if left to their own devices.
This ideology of women being covered so men can control themselves is not only offensive to women, but should be offensive to men too. It implies that men are unable to control their lust. Yes, the rape statistics in the US are staggering, but every single woman walking down the street, no matter how "revealing" her clothes, is not raped. Men, no matter how annoying they can be at times, are able to control themselves. The ones who can't are still a minority. Ascribing such an animalistic view to humanity (comparing women to meat and men to cats instinctively drawn to prey on the vulnerable meat) is ironic for a fundamentalist religion, as it almost guarantees the theory of evolution. I'm not aware of the Muslim creation myth, but I'm sure evolution would run counter to it. But, even with evolution, humans are more evolved than cats, and should be treated as such. Humans can reason, think critically, and are bound by laws, not only instinct, as those who blame women for their own rapes insist on using to defend rapists and villify victims. This kind of thinking leads rape victims to hide their identities, when they should be able to stand up and accuse their attackers without fear. The rapists are the ones who should be hiding in the shadows ashamed (This is paraphrased from Elizabeth Wurtzel's book Bitch:In Praise of Difficult Women). False rape accusations also lead to the skepticism of real rape accusations. Women who make these false accusations do a severe disservice to real victims, discrediting their claims. Because although the false rape claims are still less common than real rapes, they generate press and are used by defense attorneys, accused rapists and the general public to further villify the victim instead of the rapist.
Now, my ranting aside, I am looking forward to this weekend. I'm meeting up with a friend tonight after work to jump start the Halloween weekend. And, thanks to another friend, I just might make it back to Bound for the first time in over a month tomorrow night. Halloween is a great time of year.
I think the title of this article should sufficiently explain my outrage. This cleric compared uncovered women to uncovered meat, ripe for predators. Since he was in Australia, which is not an Islam theocracy like Iran, he felt compelled to apologize in the face of public outcry.
One cleric aside, this is a common belief among the more devout Muslims. In Pakistan, a woman must present "witnesses" to her rape to bring charges, to assure the (male) law enforcers that the rape wasn't somehow her fault. In Iran a while back, a murderer of prostitutes was briefly considered a national hero, "cleaning up the filth" of "loose" women. It was only after the murderer revealed that he had had sex with his victims that his unofficial "hero" status was revoked. The comparison to "uncovered meat" says a lot about how fundamentalist Islam views women (please note that I do not include all Muslims here), not as people, but as pieces of meat, dangerous and open to predators if left to their own devices.
This ideology of women being covered so men can control themselves is not only offensive to women, but should be offensive to men too. It implies that men are unable to control their lust. Yes, the rape statistics in the US are staggering, but every single woman walking down the street, no matter how "revealing" her clothes, is not raped. Men, no matter how annoying they can be at times, are able to control themselves. The ones who can't are still a minority. Ascribing such an animalistic view to humanity (comparing women to meat and men to cats instinctively drawn to prey on the vulnerable meat) is ironic for a fundamentalist religion, as it almost guarantees the theory of evolution. I'm not aware of the Muslim creation myth, but I'm sure evolution would run counter to it. But, even with evolution, humans are more evolved than cats, and should be treated as such. Humans can reason, think critically, and are bound by laws, not only instinct, as those who blame women for their own rapes insist on using to defend rapists and villify victims. This kind of thinking leads rape victims to hide their identities, when they should be able to stand up and accuse their attackers without fear. The rapists are the ones who should be hiding in the shadows ashamed (This is paraphrased from Elizabeth Wurtzel's book Bitch:In Praise of Difficult Women). False rape accusations also lead to the skepticism of real rape accusations. Women who make these false accusations do a severe disservice to real victims, discrediting their claims. Because although the false rape claims are still less common than real rapes, they generate press and are used by defense attorneys, accused rapists and the general public to further villify the victim instead of the rapist.
Now, my ranting aside, I am looking forward to this weekend. I'm meeting up with a friend tonight after work to jump start the Halloween weekend. And, thanks to another friend, I just might make it back to Bound for the first time in over a month tomorrow night. Halloween is a great time of year.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Prison Break and Halloween
Last night's episode of Prison Break did not let me down. It was one unexpected twist after another: Sucre and Michael were in cahoots the whole time, with Sucre "stealing" the money, and in another twist, T-Bag switched the bags and got the money himself, when the whole purpose of stealing the money was to get it away from T-Bag. At one point I thought Sucre was a goner, when he was under the tree trunk in the water, but he survived. And he might get his girl back. Linc got LJ without attracting the attention of the Feds, he paid someone to beat up LJ so he could get him out of the hospital (at first I thought one of the Feds paid the guy to bring Linc out to defend his son). And Mahone. He's in cahoots with Kellerman and the conspiracy syndicate, who have ordered Mahone to kill all the fugitives. I really liked Mahone, and, call me naive, but I'm not ready to give up on him. I know I'm obsessed with this show, but it's an exciting reprieve from the workday. The gorgeous men in the cast (Wentworth Miller, Dominic Purcell, and in an odd way William Fichtner) don't hurt.
On the Prison Break Yahoo group (I'm a member, yes I'm that obsessed), someone submitted a list of all the casualties so far. In the Prison Break world, no one is safe:
1) tweener2) abruzzi3) governor Tancredi4) Bishop5) veronica6) agent hale7) Dr. Gudat8) quinn9) lj's mom: Lisa10) lj's step dad11) westmorland' s cat: Marilyn12) nick's dad13) President Mills14) Michael's pet Rat15) Maytag: T-Bag pocket holder #1 (died because Michael tried to get allen)16) Seth: T-Bag pocket holder #2 (because Maytag died, he became pocket holder target)17) Turk (Lincoln killed him during Riot)18) Crabs19) Leticia20) Fake Steadman in garage21) Westmoreland22) To the other unknown lost souls who tragically died during the riot23) CO Bob: T-Bag killed him during riot24) nick24) T-Bag's dead hand25) Lucas 26) Steadman's teeth27) Michael's toes
Halloween, my favorite time of year, is coming up. I have at least two parties to go to this weekend, and possibly one on the day itself, and I'm getting closer to finding a costume. Inspired by my costume last year, Rita Hayworth in Gilda, I might take another page from the classic movie cannon, after seeing photos of Veronica Lake. I can probably find a dress like one she's wearing, but getting the hair might prove challenging. And I'll have a date for at least one party, and we want to at least somewhat coordinate our costumes. I was thinking he could dress as Alan Ladd in This Gun for Hire (great movie, by the way), with my Veronica Lake outfit. Of course she was a blonde, and I don't feel like dying my hair. No matter what I end up wearing, the Halloween festivities are sure to brighten my mood.
On the Prison Break Yahoo group (I'm a member, yes I'm that obsessed), someone submitted a list of all the casualties so far. In the Prison Break world, no one is safe:
1) tweener2) abruzzi3) governor Tancredi4) Bishop5) veronica6) agent hale7) Dr. Gudat8) quinn9) lj's mom: Lisa10) lj's step dad11) westmorland' s cat: Marilyn12) nick's dad13) President Mills14) Michael's pet Rat15) Maytag: T-Bag pocket holder #1 (died because Michael tried to get allen)16) Seth: T-Bag pocket holder #2 (because Maytag died, he became pocket holder target)17) Turk (Lincoln killed him during Riot)18) Crabs19) Leticia20) Fake Steadman in garage21) Westmoreland22) To the other unknown lost souls who tragically died during the riot23) CO Bob: T-Bag killed him during riot24) nick24) T-Bag's dead hand25) Lucas 26) Steadman's teeth27) Michael's toes
Halloween, my favorite time of year, is coming up. I have at least two parties to go to this weekend, and possibly one on the day itself, and I'm getting closer to finding a costume. Inspired by my costume last year, Rita Hayworth in Gilda, I might take another page from the classic movie cannon, after seeing photos of Veronica Lake. I can probably find a dress like one she's wearing, but getting the hair might prove challenging. And I'll have a date for at least one party, and we want to at least somewhat coordinate our costumes. I was thinking he could dress as Alan Ladd in This Gun for Hire (great movie, by the way), with my Veronica Lake outfit. Of course she was a blonde, and I don't feel like dying my hair. No matter what I end up wearing, the Halloween festivities are sure to brighten my mood.
Monday, October 23, 2006
Finally
A new episode of Prison Break. I can't wait to see what Sucre's next move will be.
I had a great time last weekend, even if I didn't make it out to EN on Saturday. I returned from the weekend slightly more confident that there are guys out there who want to be with me, even if they aren't perfect (who is?). This new guy is far from my ideal (I think I met my ideal guy, but we can't be together for reasons I can't go into here), but he's interesting, fun, and I can actually talk to him. And this weekend I have all the Halloween parties to go to. But I still don't have a costume. That guy that used to cause me so much grief is rapidly receding to the back of my mind, but he's not yet fully out of my mind and trampled on the ground, which is where he belongs. I might even come back to Bound this Friday, if I can get a ride out to the club.
I heard something interesting over the weekend about the murdered Russian journalist. Apparently, the murder was committed on President Putin's birthday. Considering that the victim was "a thorn in Putin's ass," to quote a friend, that was one hell of a birthday present.
I had a great time last weekend, even if I didn't make it out to EN on Saturday. I returned from the weekend slightly more confident that there are guys out there who want to be with me, even if they aren't perfect (who is?). This new guy is far from my ideal (I think I met my ideal guy, but we can't be together for reasons I can't go into here), but he's interesting, fun, and I can actually talk to him. And this weekend I have all the Halloween parties to go to. But I still don't have a costume. That guy that used to cause me so much grief is rapidly receding to the back of my mind, but he's not yet fully out of my mind and trampled on the ground, which is where he belongs. I might even come back to Bound this Friday, if I can get a ride out to the club.
I heard something interesting over the weekend about the murdered Russian journalist. Apparently, the murder was committed on President Putin's birthday. Considering that the victim was "a thorn in Putin's ass," to quote a friend, that was one hell of a birthday present.
Friday, October 20, 2006
Going out tonight
But at the rate I'm going, I might not make it. I am tired, as I have been all week, and haven't exactly been productive at work. But I think I need to get out, and I have a date with a new guy, who hopefully won't turn out to be like the assholes I usually manage to meet: "I've only known callous love" -Bob Dylan
And yet, I still think about this one other guy, up in Boston, who I can never be with due to outside circumstances (it's complicated, don't ask). I know I need to find someone else, and I'm trying, but I can't stop thinking about him. When I was going through my recent guy trouble (which did not convince me that there are good guys out there), all I could think about was the one I left, who can't be with me, and how he would make it all better if we could just be together. Maybe I'm just clinging to him because I'm afraid to meet new people. On some level I am, who isn't nervous around someone new? But I guess it does afflict me more strongly than others. I look down when I walk, just to avoid eye contact with those passing by. I can't stand it when people try to talk to me on the Metro. I have a few people who I'm comfortable with, and I try to remind myself that they were also strangers to me at one point, but it doesn't help. But I've met one more new person, and hopefully this will work out. The times we've talked I guess I've been okay, but I'm always wondering what I should say next. A friend said I think too much before I talk, that I'm too worried about saying the wrong thing. I know everyone says stupid things, and usually the person they're talking to just laughs it off, but it still worries me.
We're going to a party tonight, where I'll know at least a few people, so maybe I'll be okay. It's a pre-Halloween party, and since I don't have a costume yet (I'm open to suggestions for a costume for next weekend), I decided to recycle my outfit from SMB, which seemed to go over well (the short black dress with my cleavage hanging out, and a velvet cape). Tonight should be fun. I just have to wake up first.
And yet, I still think about this one other guy, up in Boston, who I can never be with due to outside circumstances (it's complicated, don't ask). I know I need to find someone else, and I'm trying, but I can't stop thinking about him. When I was going through my recent guy trouble (which did not convince me that there are good guys out there), all I could think about was the one I left, who can't be with me, and how he would make it all better if we could just be together. Maybe I'm just clinging to him because I'm afraid to meet new people. On some level I am, who isn't nervous around someone new? But I guess it does afflict me more strongly than others. I look down when I walk, just to avoid eye contact with those passing by. I can't stand it when people try to talk to me on the Metro. I have a few people who I'm comfortable with, and I try to remind myself that they were also strangers to me at one point, but it doesn't help. But I've met one more new person, and hopefully this will work out. The times we've talked I guess I've been okay, but I'm always wondering what I should say next. A friend said I think too much before I talk, that I'm too worried about saying the wrong thing. I know everyone says stupid things, and usually the person they're talking to just laughs it off, but it still worries me.
We're going to a party tonight, where I'll know at least a few people, so maybe I'll be okay. It's a pre-Halloween party, and since I don't have a costume yet (I'm open to suggestions for a costume for next weekend), I decided to recycle my outfit from SMB, which seemed to go over well (the short black dress with my cleavage hanging out, and a velvet cape). Tonight should be fun. I just have to wake up first.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Ridiculous Scientology propaganda
Like there's any other kind. An LA reporter's coverage of a new Scientology-sponsored "museum" chronicling the "evils" of the cult's favorite whipping post, psychiatry, details just how absurd Scientology is: http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=3137&IssueNum=136 Andrew Gumbel's encounter with the Scientology publicist, who wanted to debate psychiatry while the reporter just wanted to discuss the structure of the museum, is particularly illuminating. All Scientologists assume they have to defend their beliefs, and have a persecution complex which adds to their sense of having misunderstood and suppressed insights into the human mind, much like conservatives' complaints about the "liberal media." What they overlook, however, is that most people just don't care about Scientology, or consider it an absurd lunatic fringe institution. But, as www.xenu.net illustrates (and Scientology has tried to shut the site down), Scientology is more than a group of harmless wackos. They bleed their followers dry, restrict access to information that is critical of their views (all while claiming to support "religious freedom"), and have an absolutist philosophy with absolutely no proof to back it up. Xenu.net's creator has had some highly entertaining, and unintentionally illuminating, email exchanges with inarticulately irate Scientologists, who accuse him of being a former mental patient, on Prozac or illegal drugs (which have no distinction in the Scientological mind), all of which, he tells them, are false. He frequently challenges them to find inaccuracies in his assertions, and not one provides a convincing argument.
According to the Scientology "museum," psychiatry is to blame for everything from Nazism (a surefire way to establish animosity toward anything is to link it to the Nazis) to school shootings to 9/11. Yes, according to Scientology, suicide bombers are engineered by psychiatric drugs, but provide no proof that the 9/11 hijackers were even on any of these drugs, and I find it hard to believe that they would be. And although Hitler used eugenic theory to justify his "Final Solution," the concept that psychiatry in and of itself leads to Hitler-level evil is unfounded. Hitler also misinterpreted Nietzche's theory of the "ubermensch" to justify the extermination of "undesirables," does that mean Nietzche is evil (although one may disagree with his assertions, such as his unenlightened views of women)? And if psychiatry was a tool of the Nazis, how do we explain the high number of Jewish psychiatrists, including Freud, the father of psychoanalysis? Why would Hitler use the teachings of a Jew, and he deemed the writings of Jews as "decadent," to justify their termination? Hitler is far too complex to be narrowed into one field of blame for his behavior, and his rise to power was allowed by fierce German nationalism in the face of the devastation wrought by World War I, not by psychiatrists.
But, as Gumbel points out, psychiatry is an easy target, with the questionable past practices of electroshock and lobotomies and questionable present practices of psychiatric drugs. But it's one thing to say that the field has made mistakes that need to be corrected through further research and more competent practitioners, and quite another to say that the field in and of itself is evil and beyond rescue. Psychiatry, unlike the pseudoscience of Dianetics, the cornerstone of Scientology, has evolved since its inception (whether for better or worse is open to debate). As an article on Xenu.net makes clear, Dianetics has not been tested by its adherents (though L. Ron Hubbard claimed to have tested it), does not stand up to scientific scrutiny (the "examples" Hubbard uses of "engrams" are ridiculous, in my opinion) and any criticism of the theory is suppressed by the Scientology elite. Psychiatrists, like members of all scientific communities, constantly disagree and debate theories within their field. That's how practices and the field itself evolve.
According to the Scientology "museum," psychiatry is to blame for everything from Nazism (a surefire way to establish animosity toward anything is to link it to the Nazis) to school shootings to 9/11. Yes, according to Scientology, suicide bombers are engineered by psychiatric drugs, but provide no proof that the 9/11 hijackers were even on any of these drugs, and I find it hard to believe that they would be. And although Hitler used eugenic theory to justify his "Final Solution," the concept that psychiatry in and of itself leads to Hitler-level evil is unfounded. Hitler also misinterpreted Nietzche's theory of the "ubermensch" to justify the extermination of "undesirables," does that mean Nietzche is evil (although one may disagree with his assertions, such as his unenlightened views of women)? And if psychiatry was a tool of the Nazis, how do we explain the high number of Jewish psychiatrists, including Freud, the father of psychoanalysis? Why would Hitler use the teachings of a Jew, and he deemed the writings of Jews as "decadent," to justify their termination? Hitler is far too complex to be narrowed into one field of blame for his behavior, and his rise to power was allowed by fierce German nationalism in the face of the devastation wrought by World War I, not by psychiatrists.
But, as Gumbel points out, psychiatry is an easy target, with the questionable past practices of electroshock and lobotomies and questionable present practices of psychiatric drugs. But it's one thing to say that the field has made mistakes that need to be corrected through further research and more competent practitioners, and quite another to say that the field in and of itself is evil and beyond rescue. Psychiatry, unlike the pseudoscience of Dianetics, the cornerstone of Scientology, has evolved since its inception (whether for better or worse is open to debate). As an article on Xenu.net makes clear, Dianetics has not been tested by its adherents (though L. Ron Hubbard claimed to have tested it), does not stand up to scientific scrutiny (the "examples" Hubbard uses of "engrams" are ridiculous, in my opinion) and any criticism of the theory is suppressed by the Scientology elite. Psychiatrists, like members of all scientific communities, constantly disagree and debate theories within their field. That's how practices and the field itself evolve.
Monday, October 16, 2006
Back from New York
I had a great time at my friend's reading at CBGBs on Friday. After watching him struggle to finish the book, it was nice to see him getting some recognition, and having his picture taken with Tommy Ramone and Handsome Dick Manitoba. Apparently, the guy sitting next to me at the bar before the reading knew some of these 70s punk figures, because John Holmstrom (of Punk magazine) and Tommy Ramone were both inches away from me at one point. I particularly enjoyed seeing Dick Manitoba come in and ask, "Where's this Beeber guy? I need to see him." And after the reading, Gary Lucas performed with his band Gods and Monsters, which included members of the original Modern Lovers and Television. I didn't get to spend too much time with Steven, because on Saturday he had to fly to Minneapolis for his interview at the Twin Cities Book Festival. But it was great to see things happening for him. And he signed my book.
The rest of my weekend in New York was a nice break from routine. I especially enjoyed going to a bar in the Village called the Slaughtered Lamb, with horror movie decor and hot goth girl bartenders. One made the second-best Cosmopolitan I've ever had (after the one Todd helped "make" for me on my birthday).
But I'm back now, and ready to trudge through another work week. I will definitely try to get back out to Bound for Halloween, but I'm not promising anything. DJ Panic offered to take me out to SW, since getting there has proven difficult. But location is only one reason I haven't been able to get myself to Bound recently, although I appreciate Johnny's offer. I really do know some great people, so why should I worry about the one who doesn't deserve any space in my mind?
The rest of my weekend in New York was a nice break from routine. I especially enjoyed going to a bar in the Village called the Slaughtered Lamb, with horror movie decor and hot goth girl bartenders. One made the second-best Cosmopolitan I've ever had (after the one Todd helped "make" for me on my birthday).
But I'm back now, and ready to trudge through another work week. I will definitely try to get back out to Bound for Halloween, but I'm not promising anything. DJ Panic offered to take me out to SW, since getting there has proven difficult. But location is only one reason I haven't been able to get myself to Bound recently, although I appreciate Johnny's offer. I really do know some great people, so why should I worry about the one who doesn't deserve any space in my mind?
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
The Bath massacre
http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/history/bath/index_1.html
In a previous post, I said that the Bath massacre, the worst school massacre in history, was over one hundred years old. I was wrong. It happened in 1927. I also called it a school shooting. That was also wrong. The forty victims were killed in an explosion. Andrew Kehoe, the perpetrator, blamed the school for taking his tax dollars, which he claimed was the cause of his poor economic status. So he took it out on the students. This is exactly the kind of warped logic one would expect from a mass murderer. If you don't approve of high taxes, you lobby to make them lower or vote in representatives who won't raise taxes (not that politicians are the types to be taken at their word, but that's another topic). You don't blow up a school because of school taxes.
Kehoe was a classic mass murderer, someone who felt like a failure, who felt insignificant, and took it out on his farm, a school, and himself. He blew up his pickup truck while still inside.
In a previous post, I said that the Bath massacre, the worst school massacre in history, was over one hundred years old. I was wrong. It happened in 1927. I also called it a school shooting. That was also wrong. The forty victims were killed in an explosion. Andrew Kehoe, the perpetrator, blamed the school for taking his tax dollars, which he claimed was the cause of his poor economic status. So he took it out on the students. This is exactly the kind of warped logic one would expect from a mass murderer. If you don't approve of high taxes, you lobby to make them lower or vote in representatives who won't raise taxes (not that politicians are the types to be taken at their word, but that's another topic). You don't blow up a school because of school taxes.
Kehoe was a classic mass murderer, someone who felt like a failure, who felt insignificant, and took it out on his farm, a school, and himself. He blew up his pickup truck while still inside.
Has Russia really changed?
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-anna11oct11,1,445255.story?coll=la-headlines-world
With a journalist recently murdered, after publishing disparaging articles about the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin (who discussed the crime with "President" Bush), how far has Russia come from the oppressive goverment of the Stalin regime? Yes, the communists have been deposed, which of course is good news for capitalist America, but if a journalist is murdered after criticizing the government, has anything really changed?
Putin, in a Bushesque move, granted a cursory sympathy for the murdered journalist, while implying that her articles "damaged" Russia and that she was killed not by government agents sent to protect Russia's interests, but by exiles seeking to tarnish Russia's international reputation. Using a tragic event to instill fear and patriotism in the masses. But unlike 9/11, which actually was committed by America's enemies (however ill-informed the US government was), Putin has no proof of his paranoid assumption, or at least hasn't made this proof public. Considering that the murdered journalist was a vocal critic of Putin, his comments are suspect to say the least. He appears to be trying to deflect the blame off of himself and his supporters (although it's unlikely that Putin himself had anything to do with the murder, but that might be the subject of another "paranoid theory" post) and onto enemies of the nation, just as Bush and his league of evil call their war tactics, which have left thousands dead and the Middle East no less in chaos, necessary to spread democracy and protect America.
But unfortunately for Putin, this murdered journalist had many admirers, who call her a "true patriot" for exposing the corruption that is undermining the liberties of Russian citizens. I can't say for certain how popular Putin currently is in Russia, but if his approval rating is anything like Bush's (in the 30s and falling), the public likely isn't buying his assertions. But if one journalist is any indication, or her articles detailing abuses by the Russian government, Putin and his staff and supporters do not take dissent lightly. Undermining the memory of a murder victim and using the crime to cast blame on real or imagined enemies. Funny, you don't hear Ann Coulter calling Putin a "media whore."
With a journalist recently murdered, after publishing disparaging articles about the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin (who discussed the crime with "President" Bush), how far has Russia come from the oppressive goverment of the Stalin regime? Yes, the communists have been deposed, which of course is good news for capitalist America, but if a journalist is murdered after criticizing the government, has anything really changed?
Putin, in a Bushesque move, granted a cursory sympathy for the murdered journalist, while implying that her articles "damaged" Russia and that she was killed not by government agents sent to protect Russia's interests, but by exiles seeking to tarnish Russia's international reputation. Using a tragic event to instill fear and patriotism in the masses. But unlike 9/11, which actually was committed by America's enemies (however ill-informed the US government was), Putin has no proof of his paranoid assumption, or at least hasn't made this proof public. Considering that the murdered journalist was a vocal critic of Putin, his comments are suspect to say the least. He appears to be trying to deflect the blame off of himself and his supporters (although it's unlikely that Putin himself had anything to do with the murder, but that might be the subject of another "paranoid theory" post) and onto enemies of the nation, just as Bush and his league of evil call their war tactics, which have left thousands dead and the Middle East no less in chaos, necessary to spread democracy and protect America.
But unfortunately for Putin, this murdered journalist had many admirers, who call her a "true patriot" for exposing the corruption that is undermining the liberties of Russian citizens. I can't say for certain how popular Putin currently is in Russia, but if his approval rating is anything like Bush's (in the 30s and falling), the public likely isn't buying his assertions. But if one journalist is any indication, or her articles detailing abuses by the Russian government, Putin and his staff and supporters do not take dissent lightly. Undermining the memory of a murder victim and using the crime to cast blame on real or imagined enemies. Funny, you don't hear Ann Coulter calling Putin a "media whore."
Monday, October 09, 2006
Front row seat to the end of an era
Maybe not exactly a front row seat, but I will be at CBGBs at least one night of its closing weekend (assuming, of course, that I manage to get Friday afternoon off from work). My friend from Boston, Steven Lee Beeber, is celebrating the release of his book "The Heebie-Jeebies at CBGBs" Read more about the book at http://www.jewpunk.com/ including the release party at the CBs Gallery.
It really is a shame that CBGBs has to close. With Nation in DC also closing earlier this year due to a new sports arena, there are getting to be fewer alternative clubs around for people like me to meet and hear some good music. We've all heard what passes for "music" these days. CBGBs closing because of a finacial dispute is just another symptom of the sickness.
It really is a shame that CBGBs has to close. With Nation in DC also closing earlier this year due to a new sports arena, there are getting to be fewer alternative clubs around for people like me to meet and hear some good music. We've all heard what passes for "music" these days. CBGBs closing because of a finacial dispute is just another symptom of the sickness.
Friday, October 06, 2006
Yet another lame come-on
I got another stupid message from a guy on My Space this morning. It wasn't even a real message, just the subject "u make me wana fuck" (it's a bad sign when someone can't even spell a colloquialism like "wanna" correctly) and a graphic of two people fucking. I looked at his profile, and he was clearly a "girl collector," one of those guys on My Space who tries to gather as many girls as possible into his "friend" harem. All I saw on his profile were girls and girl graphics. Why do guys continue to think that they can get a girl's attention with uninspired gestures like this one? If this was an isolated incident, I would attribute it to stupidity on the part of this one guy, but it isn't. I have gotten many, many messages like this, as those who read my blog know. What kind of encouragment have they gotten for this behavior? And why is it that I get swarms of pathetic, unattractive, stupid guys after me, but the few guys I do want either can't be with me or want nothing to do with me? Will I forever be a magnet for car-honking, sex solicitation-sending, baseball cap-wearing, porn-addicted losers, and the few times I can get a decent guy interested in me, it will never last?
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Amish school shooter update
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15128946/
Like JonBenet and John Mark Karr months ago, a new crime story has demanded my attention, Charles Carl Roberts' rampage in an Amish schoolhouse. More information has come out about the shooter, including claims that he molested relatives years ago, and, around the time of the shooting, was having urges to molest children again. Equipment found in Roberts' possession hinted that he intended to molest the girls he held hostage and later killed, but didn't have time before the police showed up.
Roberts' letters to his wife about a daughter who died shortly after birth, that he had "lost faith in God," indicate a suicidal mission. Why he chose an Amish school is uncertain, and maybe it was just the first stop he came up on (he was driving a milk truck) when the urge hit. It was probably unintentional, but a man who lost faith in God hits a town that is sustained after the massacre by their faith in God. The end of the article shows one of the scarier aspects of faith, the emphasis of the afterlife over the current life, almost like it doesn't matter that their children are dead because they're now in a better place, but maybe I'm reading too much into it. The people of the town also pray they will be able to forgive the gunman, showing the kind of Christian mercy in short supply in America's "Religious Right." But Roberts' daughter died years ago, what made him act now? Was it the urge to abuse children he said he was feeling again? With Roberts dead, that question will likely go unanswered.
Yesterday I saw the New York Post's headline about the case, "EXECUTED" against a bold block background. Nothing like the Post for lurid headlines. Oddly enough, the Post was once a reputable newspaper, before Rupert Murdoch bought it.
Like JonBenet and John Mark Karr months ago, a new crime story has demanded my attention, Charles Carl Roberts' rampage in an Amish schoolhouse. More information has come out about the shooter, including claims that he molested relatives years ago, and, around the time of the shooting, was having urges to molest children again. Equipment found in Roberts' possession hinted that he intended to molest the girls he held hostage and later killed, but didn't have time before the police showed up.
Roberts' letters to his wife about a daughter who died shortly after birth, that he had "lost faith in God," indicate a suicidal mission. Why he chose an Amish school is uncertain, and maybe it was just the first stop he came up on (he was driving a milk truck) when the urge hit. It was probably unintentional, but a man who lost faith in God hits a town that is sustained after the massacre by their faith in God. The end of the article shows one of the scarier aspects of faith, the emphasis of the afterlife over the current life, almost like it doesn't matter that their children are dead because they're now in a better place, but maybe I'm reading too much into it. The people of the town also pray they will be able to forgive the gunman, showing the kind of Christian mercy in short supply in America's "Religious Right." But Roberts' daughter died years ago, what made him act now? Was it the urge to abuse children he said he was feeling again? With Roberts dead, that question will likely go unanswered.
Yesterday I saw the New York Post's headline about the case, "EXECUTED" against a bold block background. Nothing like the Post for lurid headlines. Oddly enough, the Post was once a reputable newspaper, before Rupert Murdoch bought it.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
More on the Amish school shooting
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15113706/
One person interviewed for the story says that the school shooting in Amish country proves that "there is no safe place." While inner cities are still hotbeds of violent crime, it can happen anywhere, even among the God-fearing, technology-eschewing Amish.
Of course the gunman's wife, who he called in the middle of his rampage to tell her he was "settling a grudge" now says what a great guy Roberts was, that he was a good father. We still don't know much about him, except that he was shattered after he lost his daughter a few years ago. But many, many parents have lost children without going on a shooting spree. And at the momen, we don't know what that additional factor was that made him snap. But unlike the Colorado gunman, there is no evidence that any of the female hostages and victims in the Amish schoolhouse were sexually abused by their captor.
Unlike serial killers, who typically live alone, many mass murderers have been married, as Roberts was. Charles Whitman, of Texas bell tower infamy, was recently married when he went on his rampage. A man who left about 30 dead in a McDonald's (I can't remember his name at the moment) was married and had children, and his crime was likely a violent manifestation of his resentment at his failed businesses, which left him unable to provide for his children. Since Whitman, like so many other mass murderers, including Roberts, who shot himself, ended his rampage shot by police, his motives are unclear. But a recent development indicated that he had a tumor in the frontal lobe of his brain, which controls behavior. But it's still uncertain, and we will probably never know what set Whitman off.
That so many mass murders end with the death, either by the killer's own hand or "suicide by cop" is probably no accident. As has been frequently noted, mass murders are suicides with a higher body count. While the killer wants to exact revenge on the world he feels has wronged him (which was also likely Beltway Sniper John Muhammed's motive), his ultimate target is himself. School shooter Kip Kinkel begged police to shoot him (they didn't, and he's still in prison). The Columbine killers shot themselves. And the Colorado and Amish schoolhouse gunmen both ended their rampages by taking their own lives.
I use the male pronoun here because the vast majority of mass murderers, like serial killers and killers in general, are men. This is one element that criminologists and law enforcement officials have noticed and been investigating for years. Women get angry too, and have the same motives as men to rage against the world (I know there were times when I was in school that I wanted to destroy everyone in my path). While there have been female mass murderers (Brenda "I don't like Mondays" Spencer comes to mind), they are rare. I read an article about the Columbine shooting a few years ago, which offered a theory on this. When something bad happens to a woman, she tends to think it's her own fault, but when something bad happens to a man, he often blames someone else. Women usually turn their rage inward, and the majority of self-mutilators are women. But men are more likely to project their anger onto someone else. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, and whether these differences are the result of biology or social conditioning is open to debate.
On a different topic, last night's Prison Break was full of surprises. Mahone shoots Tweener, Linc breaks from the fold to get his son, who has been suddenly released and the murder charges against him dropped, Sara's father appeared to have killed himself (though Sara has her suspicions), and Sucre demands every bit of Westmoreland's money for himself. And I have to wait three weeks for a new episode.
One person interviewed for the story says that the school shooting in Amish country proves that "there is no safe place." While inner cities are still hotbeds of violent crime, it can happen anywhere, even among the God-fearing, technology-eschewing Amish.
Of course the gunman's wife, who he called in the middle of his rampage to tell her he was "settling a grudge" now says what a great guy Roberts was, that he was a good father. We still don't know much about him, except that he was shattered after he lost his daughter a few years ago. But many, many parents have lost children without going on a shooting spree. And at the momen, we don't know what that additional factor was that made him snap. But unlike the Colorado gunman, there is no evidence that any of the female hostages and victims in the Amish schoolhouse were sexually abused by their captor.
Unlike serial killers, who typically live alone, many mass murderers have been married, as Roberts was. Charles Whitman, of Texas bell tower infamy, was recently married when he went on his rampage. A man who left about 30 dead in a McDonald's (I can't remember his name at the moment) was married and had children, and his crime was likely a violent manifestation of his resentment at his failed businesses, which left him unable to provide for his children. Since Whitman, like so many other mass murderers, including Roberts, who shot himself, ended his rampage shot by police, his motives are unclear. But a recent development indicated that he had a tumor in the frontal lobe of his brain, which controls behavior. But it's still uncertain, and we will probably never know what set Whitman off.
That so many mass murders end with the death, either by the killer's own hand or "suicide by cop" is probably no accident. As has been frequently noted, mass murders are suicides with a higher body count. While the killer wants to exact revenge on the world he feels has wronged him (which was also likely Beltway Sniper John Muhammed's motive), his ultimate target is himself. School shooter Kip Kinkel begged police to shoot him (they didn't, and he's still in prison). The Columbine killers shot themselves. And the Colorado and Amish schoolhouse gunmen both ended their rampages by taking their own lives.
I use the male pronoun here because the vast majority of mass murderers, like serial killers and killers in general, are men. This is one element that criminologists and law enforcement officials have noticed and been investigating for years. Women get angry too, and have the same motives as men to rage against the world (I know there were times when I was in school that I wanted to destroy everyone in my path). While there have been female mass murderers (Brenda "I don't like Mondays" Spencer comes to mind), they are rare. I read an article about the Columbine shooting a few years ago, which offered a theory on this. When something bad happens to a woman, she tends to think it's her own fault, but when something bad happens to a man, he often blames someone else. Women usually turn their rage inward, and the majority of self-mutilators are women. But men are more likely to project their anger onto someone else. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, and whether these differences are the result of biology or social conditioning is open to debate.
On a different topic, last night's Prison Break was full of surprises. Mahone shoots Tweener, Linc breaks from the fold to get his son, who has been suddenly released and the murder charges against him dropped, Sara's father appeared to have killed himself (though Sara has her suspicions), and Sucre demands every bit of Westmoreland's money for himself. And I have to wait three weeks for a new episode.
Monday, October 02, 2006
School shooting in Amish country
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15105305/?GT1=8618
Not long after a gunman terrorized students in Colorado, a truck driver took an Amish schoolhouse hostage, where he, like the Colorado gunman, focused on the female students. There isn't much information about the gunman, except that he threatened to shoot his way out if the cops called to the scene didn't leave. As the article points out, this is the latest in a long line of recent school shootings. I actually don't have much to say about this story, I just wanted to share it, because the headline grabbed my attention.
But the deadliest school massacre on record is over a century old. It took place in Bath, Ohio, and, while I don't have enough information on it for a detailed analysis, not one of the recent shootings in our "godless" and "permissive" era (as conservative critics are fond of placing the blame for contemporary violence on) has matched the Bath massacre's body count.
On the personal front, since I know all of you love to hear about my pathetic little life, things are actually starting to look up. I've met a couple of guys, made some new friends, and had a great time at Entre Nous last Saturday. And I've gotten some writing done. It will still be a while before I get to Bound again, but I hope the crowd doesn't forget about me.
Not long after a gunman terrorized students in Colorado, a truck driver took an Amish schoolhouse hostage, where he, like the Colorado gunman, focused on the female students. There isn't much information about the gunman, except that he threatened to shoot his way out if the cops called to the scene didn't leave. As the article points out, this is the latest in a long line of recent school shootings. I actually don't have much to say about this story, I just wanted to share it, because the headline grabbed my attention.
But the deadliest school massacre on record is over a century old. It took place in Bath, Ohio, and, while I don't have enough information on it for a detailed analysis, not one of the recent shootings in our "godless" and "permissive" era (as conservative critics are fond of placing the blame for contemporary violence on) has matched the Bath massacre's body count.
On the personal front, since I know all of you love to hear about my pathetic little life, things are actually starting to look up. I've met a couple of guys, made some new friends, and had a great time at Entre Nous last Saturday. And I've gotten some writing done. It will still be a while before I get to Bound again, but I hope the crowd doesn't forget about me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)