Author Archive
Politics out of control
by J on Oct.15, 2009, under Bullshit
Meghan McCain is being roundly criticized for posting a certain picture of herself on her Twitter. She took it down, so here it is:
Apparently Meghan McCain is expected to hide her awesome rack while she is in her own house late at night dicking around on her computer. Were I to be reminded of the said awesomeness of said rack, I would have to begin bitching and moaning in the press about how upsetting this was. That is, if I were some liberal homo.
Look, this is really serious. When you start to put politics above boobs, you are crossing a line I am absolutely not prepared to cross with you. Ever.
The headline should have been “HOLY SHIT, MEGHAN MCCAIN HAS FANTASTIC BOOBS” and then, way down on the page, there could have been a little mini-story with a header reading “Liberal Fags Appalled, Wish Obama Had Tits and a Twitter.”
Her picture was the least gay thing I’ve ever seen on Twitter. That means her breasts managed to overcome the presence of Andy Warhol-related material in the photo*, and he was like some sort of gay superhero. The fact that it generates bullshit objections from anyone is genuinely alarming.
*Yes, there’s a book in the photo also; go back and check it again, or just download it for posterity
BULLSHIT REDESIGN OF TINKER BELL
by J on Oct.13, 2009, under Bullshit
Tinker Bell is kind of hot for a fairy. Weird to just come out and say it, yeah, but if you thought so too, don’t worry. Because Walt Disney himself specified she should have a “playful sex appeal.” So she looks like this: 
And now they’ve redesigned her into this:
WHAT
Do you think you put enough clothes on her, you fruits? Will she be voyaging to the Arctic in your next Disney straight-to-DVD piece of garbage?
We’ve grown too politically correct to have hot fairies. Disney wants tween girls getting all slippery over the Jonas Brothers, but Tinker Bell is TOO SEXY.
You know, Walt Disney may have been an anti-Semite, but…
I’ll just start that sentence over. Walt Disney was pretty cool, and knew how to make a hot, scantily clad blonde fairy.
Women and bullshit: the nature/nurture question
by J on Jun.08, 2009, under Bullshit
It is, of course, an indisputable fact that women are constantly spewing bullshit. But is this an inherent tendency, or one acquired from many years of exposure to other women’s bullshit and exposure to men who pretend to care what women are talking about?
Watch the following and decide for yourself:
http://richards-creations.net/Videos/Are-women-born-like-this.html
Loss of perspective:
by J on Jun.01, 2009, under Bullshit
Apparently he has a direct line to God on what’s right and wrong, but God can’t give spelling advice for shit.
Down to business.
by J on May.30, 2009, under Bullshit
Hi, I’m J. I’m going to respond to one of the earlier posts on the site.
“Hi everybody. I’m Chunky Tuna, the newest addition to the lifeisbullshit.com writing crew. This is my first post. If you don’t like it, you can go fuck yourself.”
Why are you sharing it with the public if you aren’t interested in their viewpoints?
“What I want to know is, why do men lie to women? Why do they fake being interested, exchange phone numbers with them (and/or email addresses), endlessly text and email but never call? Why do they act like they’re all interested one minute, then turn into pushy, insensitive and all out douchebags the next? Simple. They only want the poonanny.”
First of all, you haven’t mentioned any lying. Did any man claim to you he wasn’t interested in sex? How is wanting sex not being “all interested?” You’ve established a man sends you text and email messages and that you believe his goal is sex. You haven’t established any dishonesty.
“Example: I was talking er TEXTING… to someone who used to be an acquaintence of mine, someone whom I haven’t talked to in quite a long time. We got to texting about hanging out again, meeting for dinner or something. Now, to understand where I’m going with this you have to understand that he is the classic ignorer. Doesn’t return voicemails, will email me but never respond, will text message the hell out of me though, but never call. I finally got sick of his bullshit and called him on it.”
So you’re claiming something is “bullshit” based on some hierarchy that you invented yourself, in which telephone calls are superior to emails, emails are superior to text messages, and responding is superior to initiating contact. You’re surprised that no one else can follow this system?
“He accuses me of being mean, then being the condescending asshole that he is, says that I should just shut up and give in to his manly demands. THIS IS BULLSHIT! I am not your slave nor am I a whore. Or YOUR whore in particular. He needs to get over himself and I hope he has fun doing it alone.”
So suddenly we have jumped to the issue of you being, or not being, a whore. The person contacted you, and you gather he wanted sex. Though we can’t be certain, this seems reasonable enough. He didn’t offer money, or you’d have mentioned that. So we can conclude that he wanted sex, and did not want to talk to you on the phone, so he didn’t call you. He chose to communicate his desires through alternate means. Your response is that you are not a whore.
So if he’d communicated his desire for sex to you and you’d agreed to it, this WOULD make you a whore? I’m afraid I don’t follow this. If someone is attracted to you and initiates contact, he is hoping the attraction is mutual.
Similarly, if he’d communicated his desire for sex to you and you’d agreed to it, in what way would this make you a slave?
If he didn’t want to talk to you on the phone and so didn’t call you, isn’t this honesty? Wouldn’t it have been dishonest for him to pretend to have an interest in hearing you yap about whatever?
“The lesson for today is: Don’t treat a woman like shit and lie to her, then expect her to want to fuck you, mmkay?”
I don’t see where any lying or dishonesty has been established. Here’s what I see instead: you have a bizarre view of communication and sexuality in which you are doing someone a favor by having sex with them and you get nothing out of the deal. Thus, to you, a woman approached by a man for sex who likes him and thus agrees to the sex is a whore and a slave. In your version of the universe, to be a non-whore and a non-slave, you want payment from the man for sex. You want the payment in the form of having him pretend to want to listen to you talk. You have equated what your previous comments established as a clear expression of sexual interest with being treated “like shit.”
Here are things you need to understand:
1. No man actually wants to listen to you talk. Ever. Talking isn’t where babies come from.
2. You’ve got everything backwards. A dishonest guy would pretend to care what you had to say in order to get you in the sack. Sounds to me like this guy was straight with you, and wasn’t willing to “pay up.” Good for him. You could do worse.
The entry referenced above is an example of how women’s brains are unable to detect bullshit. They do not think logically, so while whining and complaining and backstabbing one another, they are producing bullshit. The overall fecal content of the planetary discourse is on the rise. Women are hoping to use what is between their legs to buy a world in which men will give Oscar-winning performances as they pretend to care about what women are thinking, and they stigmatize women who aren’t silly enough to buy into this as “whores.” Black is white. Up is down. Honesty and directness become more and more rare in human interaction.
In conclusion, here’s some hi-res continent porn. It’s Africa nailing South America (naturally giving it the AIDS).
