All About The Beekeeper

It was World Women’s Day last week and everyone’s favourite Coco Chanel sunglasses owning blogger, CaoimheB, decided to go all John Stuart Mills and act feminist for a while. I enjoyed it. Of course I did, because I love World Women’s Day. I wish every day was World Women’s Day. Ever since I learnt how not to confuse the words “lesbian” and “feminist”, I have had a voracious appetite for all things equalitarian. Maybe the word I should have used in that last sentence was egalitarian but I am not sure enough to put it in there. Criticisms of my vocabulary can be made through comments.

Still, the 24 hours of utopian saphhic respect that was last Tuesday (well, one of those days- the day where everything worked well) passed by and we are back in a world where J-Lo is regarded as an ideal for women to reach to and the place where most power is invested in females worldwide is in domestic purchases (80% of household items are bought by women). It is the staggering weight of history as a synonym for patriarchy that makes me a big fat, heart on my sleeve, every area of life feminist. I’m not just interested in the books written by hottie feminists like Naomi Wolf. Ddmmyy is like that. He is a feminist for the chicks.

Next year, someone warn me in advance (I hardly ever read the mail from which I presume is some feminist lobby group neuro supports) that World Women’s Day is coming and I will assemble my famous argument that Jesus was the first feminist. Its famous in that I think it is really convincing. But seeing as I missed it this year, here is a deadly link that I got emailed on the Day The Ladies Ruled.

Fetishising Pixels
Continuing on the feminist theme, I thought I would write a little bit about a matter that isn’t really very close to my heart: porn. Like every guy (and most girls) I have ever talked to about it, I enjoy porn. But unlike most guys I know, I was exposed to feminism from articles and books I found lying around my house and one of the common discussions was whether porn was a barrier to the feminist ideal of equality. I am 23, so this was back in the day when the web existed out there somewhere but the average person didn’t even know that email was possible, never mind know how to nick cheap music through a legal loophole in Russia. I was also, as a result of the kind of people I share a family with, online. As such, I could tentatively investiage these debates I was reading first hand by typing “sex” into yahoo. Back then, back when I was an annoying and pretentious atheistic socialist, I decided that porn, while obviously attractive in its own way, was ultimately a bad thing.

Now, as a slightly more annoying and pretentious Christian I have lots more reasons to think that porn is wrong. The Christian in me says that sex between two people is much too cool to dilute by removing the people from the equation. The socialist left in me says that our bodies (and almost universally the bodies of people with very strong socio-economic disadvantage) shouldn’t be commodified. On a doubt-filled day, the atheist in me would argue from personal experience and say that the one of the best definitions of porn; anything which becomes very uninteresting after orgasm, reveals the very empty promise of “adult sites”.

Yet if you strip away the moral argument, the Christian argument (those two things are (and always are) very different- I’ll talk about that some other day), the socialist argument, the subjective personal argument, the feminist argument or whatever other argument you can find and dismantle, the fundamental reason I try to resist porn is that it is a bad habit. Let me quote my feminist friend Naomi Wolf,

“After all, pornography works in the most basic of ways on the brain: It is Pavlovian. An orgasm is one of the biggest reinforcers imaginable. If you associate orgasm with your wife, a kiss, a scent, a body, that is what, over time, will turn you on; if you open your focus to an endless stream of ever-more-transgressive images of cybersex slaves, that is what it will take to turn you on. The ubiquity of sexual images does not free eros but dilutes it.”

Porn isn’t the worst thing in the world. Well, it certainly isn’t if you are not involved in actually producing it. But I still don’t think that makes it positive or even neutral. Whether my best friend agrees as his battle reaches its mid-way point, I don’t know. I certainly don’t think banning or anything along those lines is appropriate and I need to point that out. That having been said, I personally, for a range of reasons, try to fight the temptation to retreat into pixels as a no-emotions-attached alternative to a real person.

The best response to the habit-forming negativity of porn is, co-incidentally, from some very excellent Christian guys. The rest of Ms. Wolf’s argument can be found here.

The Sane Christian’s Dilemma
As you are probably are aware, I really like Jesus. I like him more and in a very different way than a teenaged girl likes Orlando Bloom. But sometimes I really dislike Christianity as a religion. I dislike the crazy “God whispers in my ears and tells me personally that he thinks I should be allowed to own semi automatic weapons” fundies I end up writing about alot on zoomtard and I really dislike the “all religions lead to God I don’t want to offend anyone so I will stand for nothing, especially Jesus” guys I end up writing about alot on zoomtard.

Yet today I want to bring you two especially depressing images from the 1st Fundie School For Depressing Obstinate Ignorance. The first comes from Jack Chick, the bile-filled sectarian cartoonist. I won’t link to him because he angers me too much. But he produced this recently:
Man, that argument really convinces me. Thanks for that Jackie.

The second is a crazy hallucinogenic wing of theology called dispensationalism. This school of thought popped out people’s heads in the 1700s and it basically says that God has split history in sections and in each of these sections there is a different meaning of life. The bad news is that we are in the last couple of years before the final judgement folks so you only have 28 years before the meaning of life changes. Here is the diagram so you can study it and make sure you aren’t caught out.

Zoomtard in the key of Mimi
Alongside my Christian squareness, one of the recurring themes in Zoomtard is how much I think Mimi Smartypants rocks and that her website is the most consistently funny I’ve ever come across (though neuro and Ddmmyy needs mentioning). Over the weekend, I got to spend lots of time with my delightful junior family member and therefore I get to join defective yeti and Heather B. Armstrong and mimi and Ian’s favourite, Mrs. Kennedy, in the world of blogs about kids.

I would like to be a father to some incredibly lazy and fussy and bored and self-obbsessed 12 year old some day but not yet.


“7 month olds should not be drinking” was all his parents could say. They weren’t even appreciative of the expense involved in trying to cultivate the kid’s palette early in life. They should be thanking me in advance for the ditch drinking days. Its hard to be satisfied with 4 cans of Bavaria if you were raised on Moet and Bollinger.

Your Correspondent, A Hyundai enthusiast

8 Responses to “All About The Beekeeper”

  1. neuro-praxis says:

    I forgot to tell you I don’t want to have children sorry.

  2. I can’t have children because I’m a man. That’s bitch’s work anyway.

  3. Andy says:

    Tis true, it’s a bad habit alright.

    There is the arguement that as vices go it’s not the worst.

    However, one could turn that around and say drinking heavily is ok because it’s not as bad as a good old fashioned crack addiction.

    You only realise the effect something has on you when it’s missing. In the words of Joni Mitchel “You don’t know what you got till it’s gone” although she was probably not addicted to porn. I think cocaine was her thing…

  4. adrian says:

    I note that in your okcupid profile, under religion you have: Christianity: laughing about it.

  5. neuro-praxis says:

    Adrian, what on earth is your point? Is that a question? Are you looking for an answer? I have the same thing on mine – so does Dave for that matter.

    What are you trying to ask/imply in a roundabout way here?

    Also – what does your question have to do with this journal entry?

  6. adrian says:

    My point is that if you truly can laugh about being Christian why is the cartoon so infuriating? It’s hardly supposed to be a theological argument, now is it? It’s just a joke. Only mildly amusing perhaps, but what’s so wrong with laughing at the idea of creationism?

    Still, this should check you up:

    it’s in cartoon form, thus it can be enjoyed by the likes of Adrian.

    Jesus saves, etc.

  7. adrian says:

    Oh sorry, I think I may have misunderstood. I’d have deleted those two comments if I could. PLEASE IGNORE!

  8. Christianity, though true, sounds completely crazy, and many of its adherents are (quite unintentionally) fucking hilarious.

    What’s not to laugh about?