Tentacles! (Seriously, what else needs to be said?)

There are three things that anime had taught me as a child:

1. There is nothing in the world that cannot be made better with giant robots. NOTHING!
   
2. Physics and Ninjas cannot exist in the same place at the same time.
   
3. On average, it takes six months to fight someone.

As an adult I learned, via the (apparently black) magic of the Internet, two more details about the culture of the Land of the Rising Sun.

1. Breasts have have a force field that cancels out gravity.
2. The way that a Japanese girl becomes a woman is to have at least three feet of tentacle in each of her orifices.

If you're familiar with anime, or for that matter, the Internet, you're probably already aware of shokushu goukan, known to English speakers as tentacle porn. Upon seeing it, your first thought was probably OH MY FREAKING GOD! THAT DOESN'T GO THERE!

After the initial shock has worn off and you realise to your horror that you have an erection, you might start to wonder who (besides Satan) is responsible for what you just witnessed.

Nobody is certain, but one of the first examples is by a dude by the name of Katsushika Hokusai, whose design, The Dream of a Fisherman's Wife, shows a woman getting jiggy with a couple of what I think are octopii. It first appeared in a novel by the name of Kinoe no komatsu, which, since I'm unable to find a translation of the title, I'm forced to assume it is Secret Confessions of the Little Mermaid.

Dear Fisherman's Monthly, I never thought that it could happen to me...

It turns out that most Western audiences will see most images of tentacle erotica as "tentacle rape" because it apparently boggles the western mind that getting it on with Squidward from Spongebob Squarepants might be a pleasurable experience. The Japanese however, took it as referring to a particular episode in Japanese mythology. This story involves a jewel stolen from the Dragon King, two octopodes and a woman who enjoys herself greatly.

Seriously though, who DOESN'T want a piece of that?

Modern day tentacle stories tend to be less based around the infidelities of Fishermen's wives and more about the fact that demons like sex. While demons liking sex is hardly surprising, the reason that this particular fetish came to be prominent might be.

Until you consider that this phenomenon, y'know, originated in Japan....

In Japan, they tend to try to change laws a lot less than most Western cultures. Instead, they work around them. The tentacle violation that we know and cry ourselves to sleep remembering were initially a way of getting around censorship laws that stated that the penis couldn't be shown in pornography. Penetration by other things was fine, just as long as there was no wang. There was also the plus of bondage without having to know any of those pesky knots.

Not pictured: Japanese Erotica

There you have it, a shabbily written and brief explanation of tentacles and why they exist in modern pornography. If this was your first exposure to the idea of tentacles in porn, then let me be the first to say "Welcome to the Internet!"

Another Anti-Gay Activist Caught With His Pants Down...

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Stephenie Meyer Ruined by Comic Book Physics

Okay folks, it's time for another illusion to be ruined by a liberal dose of gruesome, gruesome, reality. This time, I'm turning my attention to that hormone-fueled piece of illiteracy known as the "Twilight Saga". Now, I'm pretty sure that people are aware of the basic plot: Disco Ball meets Vapid Girl, Disco Ball and Vapid Girl fall in love for no reason beyond the universe revolving around Vapid Girl, a bunch of shit involving werewolves, vampires and other pointless stupidity occurs, Disco Ball and Vapid Girl live happily ever after with a pet werewolf that has "imprinted" on their mutant baby. Now, I could go on and on about what I hate about this anti-literature propaganda, or I could dive right into what I find to be the dumbest plothole in this series:

The nookie.

Despite all the slavering fangirls wanting it to happen since oooh.... about page twenty of the first novel, Stephenie Meyer decided to not let it happen until the disco ball and vapid girl were married, which in and of itself is too unbelievable to accept unless there was also a witch somewhere in Twilight. For argument's sake though, let's assume that they waited until they were married and then went to do the deed.

Despite what every Twilight fangirl on earth thinks, there is no possible way on earth that it should have ended well. The reason for that is found in that most glorious of sciences, comic book physics.

Twilight: Less believable than this.

Now, we'll ignore Stephenie Meyer's attempts to explain vampire sperm and concentrate on certain aspects of the actual act of boom-chicka-wow-wowing.

One thing that I know about is superheroes and the lonely lives that they lead. Even if they are dedicated to the public good and are all sweetness and light, there are some superpowers that do not translate well to intimate relationships. One of these is superhuman strength such as that possessed by Mr Edward Cullen.

Now, yes he is perfectly in control of his strength at all times, but there is one point where it doesn't matter how much control a person has, what's gonna happen is gonna happen. Anyone know when that time is?

Those folks with dirty minds might've already guessed it.

It's the moment when a dude orgasms.

Just ask Batman

Larry Niven, writing about a similar situation with Superman, put it best when he wrote:
Electroencephalograms taken of men and women during sexual intercourse show that orgasm resembles "a kind of pleasurable epileptic attack." One loses control over one's muscles.

What this means is that the big final thrust that Edward gets to jam "lil Eddie" home is most likely going to shatter Bella's pelvis and pretty much ruin her chances of ever walking again. Not only that, but also consider Edward's sperm. While they won't have the projectile capacity of Superman's sperm, they will bust through Bella's insides like nails from a nail gun going through water balloons.

The only way that Bella would survive the sperm's impact would be if by some bizarre quirk of evolution, Edward's little swimmers were slower than Forrest Gump trying to rap. It would still not save her from the initial pelvic thrust of death though, which means that she'd look less like a blushing bride and more like a shotgun victim.

On her own website, Stephenie Meyer pointed out that there were some involuntary functions that no longer occurred, since they have no longer have a valid function. Unfortunately though, since sperm still apparently have a function for vampires, both Bella and Stephenie Meyer's credibility are screwed.

I just wish that
A, Stephenie Meyer had decided to use physics, and
B, Bella had decided on giving Edward a blowjob at the end of the first book, which would blow her freaking head apart, thus saving us from the rest of this abominable series.

Thank you and good night.

The Evil Empire's Latest Boylove Scandal

Once again, Catholicism is in deep shit in regards to child molestation charges. This time, people are pointing their fingers at the Vatican, especially since Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State, let this little nugget out:

"Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relationship between celibacy and pedophilia. But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem."

I find this hard to believe. Especially since the dude doesn't actually give any details beyond "That is true." I'm sorry, but that doesn't prove anything except that Cardinal Bertone is VERY selective about what his mental filters allow him to see. As Arthur G. Broadwell has pointed out, celibacy might not cause pedophilia, it doesn't exactly make it go away. For fuck's sake, humans are on the whole, sexual creatures.

Even Pope Palpatine....

In effect, we're being told, "this is true because I said so." The logic being followed, as far as I can recognise it, is that since it's mainly been priests abusing choirboys, it's a gay problem. The Saarlac sized hole in this logic is that while there are many gay men that enter the priesthood, it is not only males that are being molested, which the SNAP Network are working their arses off to show.

I'm not arguing that paedophilia is caused by celibacy, mainly because that would be stupid, but I will argue that a person with a sex drive, when forced into a situation that is not natural, will find that their sexual urges will often be warped. Unnatural conditions will create seriously fucked up results.

It really is that simple.

We know it.

They know it.

Hell, Marvel Comics has been using that logic in superhero origin stories since the 1960's.

Pictured: Warped Sex Drives.

There is also the logic that paedophiles, recognising that they are morally unable to act upon their sexual compulsions, join the church to help them combat these urges with the help of others living a celibate lifestyle. This is where the issues begin, as they are placed in a position of privilege and are protected by an international organisation that has a long history of shit being swept under the table. While trying to overcome paedophilia is definitely taking the high road, following the high road into a place full of choirboys is not really conducive to a penitent paedophile's goals, is it?

1930's Germany had a similar stance in regards to gays, but at least no one in this particular clusterfuck is blaming the Jews.

Oh wait...

The worst thing about all this is how many folks are going to be hurt by this. Catholics, on the whole, have a tendency to be good people, but something like this shakes the entire church, which is going to hit they laypeople hard.

More Crappola about the Filter

Once again, I'm blogging about the Australian Government's idea to filter Australia's Internet.

Recently, we were told that it won't be a crime to circumvent it.

Fan-MidgetFisting-Tastic!

So tell me, boys and girls, who is this actually protecting again?It's been claimed that this filter will only block out certain topics from "inadvertantly" being shown to kids. There aren't too many things that kids are going to accidentally wander into, although if the Google safe search filter is turned off, then the results could be unfortunate if they're looking for pictures of "girl on horse."

That being said, there isn't too much that you can "accidentally" walk into. The viewing of material on the internet is largely intent-driven, which means that maybe if Mr Stephen Conroy keeps on "stumbling" into inappropriate material online, then maybe he should be a little more honest about his viewing habits and actually stroll into a pornographic site like a mature adult!

Amid the bullshit though, there is a teenaged beacon of hope.

Behold! The Leader of the Revolution!

Tom Wood, the lad who managed to bust John Howard's sad attempt at a filter in less than half an hour, has spoken up and stated that he's gonna get around it and frankly, that it didn't protect anyone from a damned thing.

So, we have a filter that we can freely navigate around, that will slow our internet speeds down, that tackles none of the real issues that are posing a genuine problem, such as internet addiction. Pictured: Internet use.

So while the peer to peer swapping of kiddie pictures and trolling myspace for teen boys continues, we can all sleep knowing that at least the process of downloading pictures of Little Orphan Annie to whack off to is going to be abysmally slow. Is it any wonder that people are convinced that Mr Conroy doesn't know how to do his damned job?

Folks, for all that it will take to get around this filter, I'd suggest going here for the info. This person's done their research and I think that they have a lot of valid points. I personally will be going around the filter as an act of dissidence and I'd like a lot more people to get involved as well.

Brain Damage for Wisconsin Students...

I've not written anything for a little while due to having a six year old running around like a madman, but he's gone back to his mother's house, so I'm back. I also have a Wisconsin induced headache.

Recently a state law was introduced to ensure that Wisconsin teens can receive age-appropriate sex education and information on how to not get infected with sexually transmitted infections. You'd think that it'd be pretty cut and dried, right?

Nope.

It appears that the education has come too late for somebody as Juneau County District Attorney Scott Southworth has already caught stupid. Now I don't want to sound harsh, (Oh hell, yes I do. This schmuck has it coming) but this chump is effectively trying to sabotage the efforts of the schooling system, who are trying to ensure that the school isn't full of knocked up teenage girls.

The chump in question

The gist of this guy's argument is that the new law apparently promotes "sexualization and sexual assault" of minors, which many people (myself obviously included) are loudly calling bullshit on. There is already plenty out there that is sexualizing children, but the schooling system isn't on that list.

This new law dictates that sex education shouldn't only teach children about birth control, but also how to use it. If I'm reading this correctly, previously it was okay to teach high schoolers about the Pill as long as you didn't point out "You swallow it." Apparently, this is akin to "teaching children about alcohol use, then instructing them on how to make mixed alcoholic drinks."

This is why people are calling bullshit.

I hate to break it to ol' Scotty, but abstinence based programs haven't worked. Hell, the only study that has shown any evidence of abstinence only programs working showed that students that underwent abstinence-only sex education had sex one to two years later than expected, which you'd think is a success until you look at the details:

1. Given to 12 year old African Americans
2. Held on a Saturday
3. Delivers the message of "abstinence until ready," as opposed to the government-funded and woefully ineffective "abstinence until marriage"

VIRGIN!!!

Sorry, but I've gotta say that if you're willing to go to school on a Saturday voluntarily, I'm not sure of your chances of getting laid in the first place. Also bear in mind that the control group was TWELVE! Apparently, because a bunch of kids waited until they were fourteen to bone, this study was seen as a success.

So... getting back to ol' Scotty.... He's also claimed that the new sex ed removes parents and teachers from the decision making process of what's best for their children. The thing that a lot of people seem to ignore is that sex is EVERYWHERE.

And I DO mean everywhere

What this means is that the kiddlywinks are going to catch glimpses of it all over the place, but without the proper education, their explorations are going to be a lot more dangerous and probably end with more teen pregnancies and high schools rife with STIs. While I agree that parents should have more of a hand in their children's education, the sad truth is that the result of this is often one of three results:

1. Little, as the parents assume that their kids're gonna learn this stuff at school...
2. None, as the kids are gonna be told "Jesus doesn't want you to do that..."
3. None, as parents are going to assume that the kids are gonna learn from somewhere else any way, so why bother?

Very few parents give their kids the "Birds and the Bees" talk anymore and the result is that schools are taking over. Now I could see some of ol' Scotty's points, although a lot of them I disagree with, but when he claims that adopting these mandates will make his job as a District attorney more difficult by "converting objective human growth and development programming into a radical program that sexualises our children as early as kindergarten" I have to say that this guy is not trying to protect children but push his own moral agenda. He uses phrases such as "high moral standards" and appears to be claiming that anybody that wants their child to undergo a comprehensive sex ed class apparently doesn't have the same "high moral standards" as he and other evangelical folks.

Look, one way or another, teens are gonna find out about sex and hiding information about how to protect themselves from STI's and pregnancy is NOT going to stop them from getting down and dirty. All you can do is educate your kids and hope to hell that you raised them to be smart enough to know when they're ready.

Or introduce them to World of Warcraft.

The Joy of ...WTF?!!! Pt 2: Pillars of Manhood and other propaganda

In the previous installment of The Joy of ...WTF?!!! I commented on the rather...interesting... conclusions that Alex Comfort came to in regards to the vulva in his book, The Joy of Sex. I have to say, that Dr Comfort has well and truly followed in Freud's footsteps in regards to it all being about the penis. While apparently, the vulva is a devourer of manhood and the stuff of children's nightmares, the penis is both aesthetically pleasing and also more magical than Dr. Strange and Merlin combined.

More magical than Ron...

Some of the apparent penis worship:
"More that the essential piece of male equipment, even if it is often and expressively described as a 'tool', the penis has more symbolic importance than any other human organ, as a dominance signal and, by reason of having a will of it's own, generally a 'personality'. No point in reading all this symbolism back here, except to say that lovers will experience it, and find themselves as treating the penis as something very like a third party. At one moment it is like a weapon or a threat, at another something they share, like a child "

I'm going to ignore the reference to the sharing of a child here as it seems a little out of sorts in a paragraph about penises. So between the vulva being some sort of monster and the penis apparently being a weapon, the act of having sex went from being a taboo subject to some sort of bizarre fantasy novel where the monster must be slain in order for male to survive....

Classic erotica?

After that, I'm pretty lure that I don't need to comment any further about that. On to the issues he seems to have with homosexuality.

I'd like to draw people's attention back to Pt 1 for a moment. Consider this statement:

'Luckily, few of these biologically programmed anxieties survive closer acquaintance, but are the origins of most male hangups including homosexuality.'

Now I'll ignore the implication that men have issues with sex because they're afraid of vaginas (as opposed to, oooh I dunno, incompatible personalities?) but I have to ask: did he just claim that homosexuality was a "hangup"? I thought that I'd read too much into that statement until Dr Comfort also commented:

'Straight man-woman sex is the real thing for most people - others need something different but their scope is usually lessened, not greatened, by such needs.'

That particular statement concludes the section marked Bisexuality and seems to imply that if you are not heterosexual, then there is something wrong with you. I understand perfectly that this is a book for heterosexual couples, but every so often it seems that Alex is trying to defend heterosexuality to the reader. Seriously Alex, I don't think it's necessary.

All in all, I can see how The Joy of Sex would have shook the world of 1970's folks, but it is far from the be-all-and-end-all that people claim. There are many other books out there that answer the questions that today's reader wants answered. I'm reserving judgment for the New Joy of Sex until I've read it.