A Sign of Progress

We are getting our arch-foes worried. And they remain eloquent but devoid of evidence in defence of their wobbly shiboleths. This is what I call good headway.

Leaf from Joy & Misery on Vimeo.

Women Priests

This is an interesting phase in the Catholic Church's decline. While it is suffering a severe crisis with regards to priest shortages it remains keen to keep a group of eager volunteers from following their vocation. This is rather like somebody floated atop the icy ocean spurning a rubber ring for being painted an unappealing shade, but it would seem that the Church is more interested in maintaining purity than getting their "Good" Word out.

Which is the way I like it. This reticience to catch up is admirable and to be commended.

Suffer Not...

The mark of a successful artist is challenging preconceptions, so when it comes to me there are oh-so-many failures. This one managed it, though. What I had anticipated my reaction being was "Look at the expectations forced upon children by our twisted culture". What I found them being was: "Look at these children pursuing their desires".

What I fail to grasp is how the conclusion which most would draw from this, that this somehow is much better than the former observation, is in any way true. Binary based society has twisted young minds into imaginging that they should limit themselves along lines supportive of a nonsense system of sorting them into their places and identities. And now this is all that they covet, this is all that they can covert.

In a world under binary these children are the ultimate successes.

Transgressions Against The Binary

After both The Atlantic and Penny Red wrote articles on the matter my mind began to ponder in earnest the phenomenon of total gender deviants. The former article gives an overview of the matter in America, with a focus on children, while the latter (as usual) gives the most rational feminist view possible (still not as rational as the post-feminst argument, as ever, but remarkably convincing. With regards to Victoria Beckam being as "fake" a woman as any transexual is, that is. The whole Whipping Girl argument that disdain for transexuals stems from disdain for feminity, though, is nonsense: if that were the case female-to-male transexuals would attract no negative attention, which those with even a basic knowledge of the life of Brandon Teena will know is not the case. Transexuals are targetted because they are damaging to the Mighty Binary fiction and destabilise the worldview of its believers. And society's disdain for masculinity is substantial as well: energetic warriors have no place in the classroom. Frankly its unsurprising that both misandry and misogyny are rife: nobody likes a cliche. But feminism doesn't offer much to combat the root of gender problems in the contemporary Anglosphere since it remains focused on the tiresome, outmoded "Men as oppressor" model. Until we get a decent movement attacking the Mighty Binary rather than the already defunct Patriarchy we aren't going to change much).

I would also continue to point out along with my condemnation of the known bigot Julie Bindel that this is the sort of thing inevitable with a movement that aims to advance women's rights in the stead of aiming to wiping out gender inequality (along with, as far as possible, the entire notion of gender rigidity). Such an ideology is bound to attract misandrists and narrow minded fools. But this is not to be yet another piece of polemic concerning the inadequecies of feminism for confronting the confusing world of re-inforced binary but rearranged bigotry and re-directed bile. No, I type today to talk of transexuality. 

The most interesting part of the Atlantic piece was the way that childhood transexuals have somehow come to be used as the ultimate put-down for believers in gender as a cultural construct. This nonsense is hard to even comprehend, so I'll leave the explanation to this extract:

Diamond now spends his time collecting case studies of transsexuals who have a twin, to see how often both twins have transitioned to the opposite sex. To him, these cases are a “confirmation” that “the biggest sex organ is not between the legs but between the ears.” For many gender biologists like Diamond, transgender children now serve the same allegorical purpose that David Reimer once did, but they support the opposite conclusion: they are seen as living proof that “gender identity is influenced by some innate or immutable factors,” writes Melissa Hines, the author of Brain Gender.

This is the strange place in which transsexuals have found themselves. For years, they’ve been at the extreme edges of transgressive sexual politics. But now children like Brandon are being used to paint a more conventional picture: before they have much time to be shaped by experience, before they know their sexual orientation, even in defiance of their bodies, children can know their gender, from the firings of neurons deep within their brains. What better rebuke to the Our Bodies, Ourselves era of feminism than the notion that even the body is dispensable, that the hard nugget of difference lies even deeper?

I am afraid that they will have to do much better than that. Gender is a concept which exists to be embodied, with a set of ideals and heroes just like any other of its kind. In addition to there being characteristic behaviour, speech and thought there are certain individuals or characters that epitomise the notions. The most obvious examples for girls are already endlessly commented upon, but copious examples are present for boys as well which receive rather less attention. An example is this sinister character:

His name just about says it all, doesn't it?

The two characteristics of both masculinity and femininity pertinent to our present consideration are that they are both a totality and they are both appealing. By 'a totality' here I mean that they are a complete set of mannerisms, garb and attititudes for the acolyte to follow. Both of these traits are necessary for their continued existence: if they were incomplete then they would not suffice for the construction of a rigid binary. If they were unappealing nobody, let alone an overwhelming majority, would want to attach themselves to either.

So how does this 'attachment' work, exactly? Simply, and early. The behaviour which those such as Dr. Diamond alleges is inherent appears long after differing treatment begins. Studies have shown that nurses will treat children dressed in pink in a different fashion to those dressed in blue. We can see clearly that this treatment predates by a good few years any divering behavioural traits and as the difference in treatment pre-dates the difference in behaviour it would seem that this parental treatment is the origin of the differing character, rather than visa versa. But this is an old and long-ago won argument. What relevence holds this to transexuality?

Children are, from birth, introduced to the two complete and conflicting concepts: feminitity and masculinity. Each defines the other, via contrast. They are conditioned to adopt the one 'suitable' to their genital set. Transexuality is simply the child failing to latch onto the correct one.

This is highly problematic for a binary-reliant society exactly on account of the aforementioned self-contained nature of gender: if they latch onto the wrong concept there is a fully outlined set of traits for them to take up. They are a 'boy' or 'girl' in all respects that a 'real' boy/girl save the set of privates that their culture considers correct. That's it, in all other respects they have all needed. They have a complete system to inform their conduct. But does the fact that they act precisely as the opposite gender and wish to alter the greatest trait that belies their chicanery truly indicate the physically rooted origin of gender? No, it simply demonstrates the extent to which the binary brooks no ambiguity.

Booze, Birds & Yglesias

A combination of my interests of gender malleability/inherency and hard liquor is to be found here. Matthew does what gender conservatives loathe most: applying scepticism and denying assumptions. The rage from reactionary "Hector" which follows is quite a joy to behold.

(I shall be demure and withold my own drink of choice. Anyone truly interested can email me on the matter.)

In heaven all the interesting people are missing.

Of all the tiresome divisions placed up between genders by contemporary culture the restriction upon female self-pleasuring is perhaps one of the most infuriating. It is a subtle but highly effective measure, a hang-over from the dreary anti-utilitarianism which institutions such as The Church were previously dependent upon. If human beings could bring themselves bliss and satisfaction, what need for a Grand Deity? Furthermore the possibility of making an instinctive human instinct something requiring forgiveness from the Church was of great use. The Sacrament of Confession has always required ashamed people to serve as its fodder: with this embargo upon the generation of joy in place it could convince people to feel relieved that the burden the Church gave it had been removed.

Beyond this cruel captivity there are the puritans, who of course simply loathe pleasure and take measures to eradicate wherever they are able.

Their success with boys and men has been eradicated near totally by a wave of references and normalisation, but for girls and women this liberation has yet to come. The female orgasm has become something which men are expected to generate but beyond this obligation there has been no expectation that women would wish to reach such a state through their own efforts until recently. However with the rise of "Raunch Culture" (indeed, central to its ascendancy) has come the sublimation into the mainstream of devices designed for precisely that end.

There are limitations to this: the commodification is questionable and some have argued that such machinery is superfluous, but the notion of a woman enjoying her own company has surely become less of an outlandish prospect.


However a worrying quantity of women continue to retain the absurd anti-pleasure hang-overs from a thankfully by-gone era. Too much pleasure remains denied by women to women and too much wariness of auto-orgasmic experiences has been retained. Too often have we encountered women who are reluctant to notch their own belt. The Mystery Dyke Squadron urged them to get a grip upon themselves.

Link of the Season

A snatch of footage from the RNC. A reference to "this machine" daubed across brass and an extraordinarily pretty girl on screen for under a second.

Let us hope that her face evaded the truncheons.

Some People Get What They Deserve

Q: Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

As the name suggests I'm not the most cheerful of individuals.

There are, though, a few things that will reliably put a smile on my face. Things like this:



Ah yes, I could stare at that thing all day and feel nothing but contentment. You see, Nietzsche saw this all coming. "Christianity came into existence in order to lighten the heart;" he wrote, "but now it has first to burden the heart so as afterwards to be able to lighten it. Consequently it shall perish." No timeline was given, but the process can be observed before our very eyes. In my otherwise dire lifespan I suspect that I shall find little more entertaining.

Firstly let us consider the Protestants, those who would have trimmed the Church's excesses. It should first be noted that once freed from the Church's confines those that split rather gained a taste for it. They since developed the habit so severely that there are over 30,000 denominations in existence and an average annual growth of around 300.

This tendency is quite simply preposterous. An understandable consequence of everyone picking up the "good" book and giving their own view as it probably is the long term effects seem likely to be every Church consisting of a single pastor and his immediate family.

The divisive urge to split and sever, though, is a deep running one. Even supposedly polite and bland denominations fall victim to it, with the most obvious example being the Anglicans. This is a mixture of theological liberals and hard-cases so beyond reason that a letter from Archbishop Rowan Williams in which he admits that he doesn't really hate faggots was enough to trigger a major crisis. Their schism will not be a clean one, with a massive row over property (of course) to be had and the exact division which they will take in countries split over the issue still far from clear.

This sort of thing is the natural consequence of a split, but another is the weakening of the churches that result in a deeper and even more harmful fashion. Institutions only exist on account of them having developed deep enough roots to weather the storms of circumstance. Part of the process of the upheaval required for a split is necessarily the removal of much of this growth. We are left with a smaller number of churches with shallower grips upon the soil, eventually ones so tiny and weak that they are liable to blow away in a breeze.

And, let no mistake be made, the winds are rising.



Let us turn, then, to the Catholic Church. This mighty edifice serves as a stark contrast to the squabbling and seemingly endless division rife amongst the Protestants. Although its own form of rot has set as a consequence Catholicism is a united front of like marshaled believers, all of whom are taught that they are entirely dependent upon it to purge them of the sin which it demands they feel.

However this set up has been challenged by the excesses of the Church, which were recently and devastatingly exposed, receiving the full attention of the press and other media. Rather than being contained and forgotten the revelations gathered further revelations and soon enough the Church was engulfed in the crisis which it remains in today.

As you are doubtless already aware the priesthood was riddled with paederasts, predatory monsters who's prey of choice were those who's souls they had supposedly been entrusted with the protection of. Instead they used their positions to go about arranging some rather more carnal positioning. They were discovered by the Church but internal procedures for dealing with this seemed to consist of bishops performing a grand shuffle: they were simply relocated rather than removed from office, given a fresh set of boys to lust after and claim and allowed to resume their lives.

A few prayers, confessions, assurances that they would change their ways and their punishment was through.

No doubt this proved endlessly useful for the Church in the short term: the paedophiles were saved exposure, the Church did not lose increasingly needed priests and the face of the institution was temporarily safe-guarded. Once the wave broke, though, this deceit was swept away.

The Church in its present position has lost vast sums of its (still substantial) wealth in legal fees and massive pay-outs. It seems likely that it will lose much more as the number of their victims are legion. Worse, though, its the besmirching of its reputation. Despite the Pope's, doubtless hollow, apology their position as a source for reliable moral guidance has been severely impaired. This would be crippling to a standard religious institution, but for one which attempts to throw its heft into political matters constantly the consequence could be outright fatal.

It retains a vast amount of assets and believers, but to operate in the contemporary industrialised world the Church has always required itself to establish a counter-cultural position. Although most westerners wear condoms and do not abstain before marriage, the Church has had to say, Catholics are opposed to this culture and so will not engage in its practices. This requires establishing the Church as the leading institution in a counter cultural movement. To do so while the memories of rapists are still fresh in millions of minds (and the issue has struck near to me: a nearby boy in a neighbouring parish was a victim even after the initial scandal broke) will most likely prove impossible.


So these dreary doldrums please me, yes. But I can not say that they leave me deeply thrilled. To truly put a grin on my features we need something a little more severe:



It would seem that the Scandinavians have once again taking to annihilating places of worship. This time around, though, they have spared the longships and gone for more local establishments. I am informed that the trend is related to black metal listening neo-pagans, who despise the monotheistic institutions stamped across their lands and have taken to ridding their surrounds of them using the torch.

I should stress that I find the musical tastes of this youth movement utterly deplorable and no decent person would accept them. It is only their aims and methods which I deem admirable.

Will this trend spread to other areas of the world? We can but hope, but even if it fails to I am of the view that it will matter previous little. Whether ignited or simply abandoned the outcome is the same: the death throes of Christianity are finally subsiding and its long deserved fate is upon it. Let us hold out strong against pompous wretches who would seek to replace it with the empty husk of "Rationalism", for they offer us something far less foul but no more true. But let us not forget the utter malignity of the religion who's demise we are privileged enough to witness.


There is precious little in this existence worth of celebration but this is clearly one of the glorious few.

Let's face it; if you'd consider WKD, it's all you're worth.

"The most pitiful example: the corruption of Pascal, who believed in the corruption of his reason through original sin when it had in fact been corrupted only by his Christianity." - Nietsche

On the Correct form of Monasticism

It can hardly be denied that monastic living is not just a good way to live, but superbly beneficial to wider society. What better way to aid society, one must ask, than to engage in non-societal dwelling of a non-societal nature? But the merits of monasticism vary between the forms thereof. It would serve no one to remove oneself from societal dwelling in the wrong way!

Some have proposed the life of a hermit. Others, a collective form of holy (literally, here, "set apart") life alongside others of a similar order. (We consider here the monastries and nunneries most familiar to the reader, those of Medieval Britain, to be unholy frauds of the true model of non-societal dwelling. In such places, the doors were often known to be open to all, and attempts were made to better society in the form of rudamentary medical provision and broth for the disposessed. Such "welfare", however primative, doubtless earned monks a good deal of praise, but likely sacrificed their souls. How one can attempt to live beyond earthly societal contact, yet try to better the sinful world, beggars belief. And beggars, we shall find, rarely believe. But one digresses.)

The life of a hermit is an elephantine battle with self-importance and self-righteousness. As the hermit meditates on scripture, he will find himself unable to reconcile his attention-seeking with the message of said writings. Instead, he will find that such an overtly holy life in a cave outside town is barely preferable to the heathen oracles of old, where misguided pagans sought to consult the heretic demi-gods. "Wisdom", or some vile perversion thereof, was dispensed at high cost to the misguided soul, and to the benefit of the daemon in the hills. In exchange for morsals of food, hermits adopt the role of sage, and pronounce vague judgements on the souls seeking solace. The pained soul has access enough to scripture to garner vague pronouncements of judgement without seeking a hermit as an intermediary! So one must remain vigilant to anyone claiming wisdom of any kind, especially those seeking to present an argument on matters eternal. Such things are the subtle work of the Deciever.

It must be argued that just one monastic model will suffice. Where the individual alone in a cave is led astray by his carnal desires for food and water, and the collective monastry becomes too easily embroiled in interference with the World of the Flesh, one must look to the most practical aspects of both models of life. Having found these to be the provision of care for the poor and hungry from the monastry, and the provision of scriptural instruction from the hermit, we must cast the daemons aside at once! Of what use to the heathen are the words of even the most honest hermit? And what pagan stomach will truly be filled by a nun's broth? The redeemed must take themselves from the World of the Flesh and withdraw into solitary communities of their own. Only then will the Unbelieving recognise the chasm between this World and the next.

Such communities must not be viewed in the traditional sense of the word. Living alongside others should serve to keep the Forgiven from sinning, while vows of silence and intrusion ensure that no carnal desires are expressed between one another. Vows against such sinful frivolities of the Flesh as electricity will prevent a reliance upon all but the most central relationship between the Almighty and the Forgiven. Ten hours of personal prayer should be followed by another ten of copying scriptures, manuscripts of which should be burned for warmth to remind the Forgiven of their reliance upon the Word for all things. Self-made paper has many nutricional qualities little understood in the World of the Flesh. Children, should they be so provided in passionless union, must be educated in the arts of reading and writing only in so far as to facilitate copying Scripture. This will, hopefully, prevent them gaining by the hands of the Deciever the ability to ponder matters beyond the realm Eternal.

As has been argued, the Forgiven have no role in debate, discussion or persuasion of any sort. Academia is not the realm of the Holy man. They need not fill the pagan's stomach with broth for fear of sacrificing their own soul, and should keep scriptural understanding within their order, not to pollute it with exposure to the World of the Flesh. All forms of communication are inherently sinful, therefore, and do grave damage to the Word as given to us. Personal, private meditation on the Scriptures should form half of one's waking hours; and personal, private prayer to the Almighty the other. There is no benefit to corporate prayer, or public "wisdom" from the Scriptures. In fact, prayer of any form public is sinful in the highest, making one more like the regulation-bound Pharisee than the graceous tax collector! It is with these considerations that the present writer has lived for approaching six decades, having been snatched from the Flesh. The Promise is mine.

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

These the words of Paul, in his epistle to the Philippians. The failures of every Scriptural translation are evident to the writer, but such a discussion is to be the next consideration to be made on this Weblog soon. This weblog iself is bloody good, isn't it? Anyhow, while this site is in consideration, perhaps your thoughts would be appreciated in the comments section. Your participation in the consideration of these issues would be welcome.

To close with a prayer popular in the order,

Almighty,
Keep us from the evils of the Flesh.
From worldly contact and communication.
From the comforts of furniture and colour and light.
From fulfilment in all but the pleasures of the Word.
Bear fruit in our solitude.
Amen

For As Long As The Patriarchy Is Dead

We shall remain Post-Feminists



















Let us first emphasise that the corpse is still twitching.

Remnants exist, this can not be denied. Scattered around us are the debris, the toxicity of which should neither be underestimated nor understated. But this is the same as dropping a bomb upon a house filled with asbestos: to declare that the house continues to poisons is truth, to assert that it still stands is falsehood.

Secondly we must hesitate to criticise the legacy of feminism. Although the means of their success are largely mistaken (the Suffragettes achieved a few broken windows and burnt houses, the Suffragists brought about female suffrage) both the First and Second Wave brought about their aims of votes and jobs, respectively. The demolition of the Patriarchy is a gaping Leviathan of an achievement, for which all who live in the areas graced by movement feminism should be appreciative for.

But this establishes Feminism's historical importance. It does not secure its position as a relevant movement for the present day. So, thirdly, let us try and determine this.

Having praised it highly before it may seem treacherous to turn on it now. But what is required at present is something entirely other to what was needed for the entirely dissimilar task of tearing down an edifice of Male Rule. A bulldozer is an appropriate tool for demolition work, but for the delicate work which we now are required to perform it simply will not suffice.

This is because the device in question is inherently ill-suited to the role which is required of any ideology hoping to clear the mess of contemporary gender: an ideology which attempts to advance the interests and rights of women can never achieve the aim of the elimination of gender. And let us be bold about this issue ladies, gentlemen & in-betweens; this is what is required.

A Prayer for the Merging

Almighty God,

Allow us this day and every day to realise the power and totality of your Love,
Accept the way which you spread it: the same to each and none without,
Realise that the importance of this transcends markings made by mere mortals,
Acknowledge that separations have been, by humans, brought into existence, but
Commit ourself to ending these divisions through whichever means are apt, and to
Remember that all of us were made to worship and love your eternal splendour,
Recall that this renders our differences an irrelevance, minuscule by comparison,
Bear in mind that edifices thrown up by man must fall: nations, states, races, all,
Decline the temptation to see these temporal constructs as keys to identity
Rely upon only your Word, which came before these things and all things

And will exist after,
Amen

I call Christianity the one great curse, the one enormous and innermost perversion, the one great instinct of revenge for which no means are too venomous, too underhand, too underground and too petty - I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind.

-Nietzsche

Feeding the Machine

Its an enticing, if over-recited metaphor. Mankind as a mechanism, its methods of arrangement much like an endlessly intricate system of levers, cogs and valves. The idea has been kicking around since our (and by that I mean industrialised) society came to be dominated by the machines that did the majority of our labour, then the idea came to dominate the majority of sociological though when the functionalists ascended, the peak of their control being in the 1950s.



The functionalists were largely positive in their view of society, though, deeming the meticulous operation of it and the institutions that ground it into motion to be a broadly positive formation. To them the workings of this grand device were to be admired and the order which it brought to the world cherished through analysis and understanding. Not so those that followed, with "The Machine" being seen as a foul mechanism by the radical thinkers of the decade that followed the functionalist's grip being at its tightest. The only appropriate response to understanding its hold was to attempt to escape its clutches. Tear it down, rend your way free, fuck it up. There was a division between those who thought you should liberate yourself and if it came crashing down then that was a consequence not worth mourning and those who wished to see everyone saved from its relentless operations, but all were certain that they wanted out. This wave of resentment died down but survived and festered, culminating in a band referencing the name becoming on of the most popular in history.

In effect, though, this only resulted from a shift in perspective. The same machine was still being considered.













Unlike so many influential tropes this one seems to be likely only to grow in relevance rather than become tired and increasingly obsolete. This is because the relationship with humanity and machinery seems likely only to grow more intimate. I speak not of our increasing dependency in contemporary life (ranging as it does from central heating to mobile phones), nor of the speculative sciences of cybernetics (which at the moment can allow a crippled man to walk through a swimming pool if he's rich enough, but struggled to mend the harm inflicted upon victims of Thalidomide).

Instead I wish to discuss solely pieces of technology that are entering more frequent human usage. Not as means of communication, but instead which entail direct human interaction with machinery. There are variety of gains that can be obtained from as much but the most striking is sexual.

The device to the left of this text is a fuckmachine. Its used as part of the rapidly expanding mech-porn sub-industry. These devices penetrate women in lieu of men and the sight is increasingly popular, with websites springing up and turning in healthy profits.

The immediate, intuitive response from most is to find these contraptions bizarre, outlandish. But on a smaller scale are these devices not the primary supplanter of a genuine for the modern woman? Are they not now available at Boots?

For let us not allow the feminists to cast the cock-bots as yet further evidence of male strangeness an insecurity (although so strong a wish not to see a real penis does suggest a rather severely excessive heterosexuality). More laughably still let us not cast this as another instance of the male exploitation of women and their forcing of them into foul acts. Women than men are far greater perpetrators in this carnal merging of flesh and metal. This has been the case for a considerably lengthier period of time than most imagine, with batteries and marketing being the only two advantages that the modern equipment has over the wind-aways of old.


Let us shift the topic from pleasure to health, and it is hear that things grow truly remarkable. For the temporary entrance of substitutes for sexual flesh is a single thing, and the permanent for organ flesh another.

A pacemaker is a simple machine that brings about the regulation of the heart using electric pulses, as you are no doubt already aware. What is rarely considered is how close this device drags us unsuspectingly towards post-humanism: the failings of the human body are amended and the natural irregularities of a failing system adjusted for using mechanical means. This remains natural: tool-making skills applied to problems are the hallmark of species seeking the perfectly standard aim of self-preservation. But it also sets up apart, fuses the once distinct animal and machine in a fashion that authors of science fiction had long predicted.

The same is true of the shunt, used upon sufferers of hydrocephalus.


This device extracts the liquid that would swell and damage their brains to their abdomen, where it can be safely vented through their bladder along with the rest of the body's excess fluids. Earlier versions were manual but present ones make use of magnetism for superior salvation.

In these ways a merging of machinery and humanity results either in the delivery of immense pleasure or the aversion of immense woe. When bodies and bolts inter-sect in such beneficial ways it can only by surmised that the technocrats were perfectly correct: both in that humanity can be improved upon and in that through mechanical solutions our lot is enhanced.



It is also easy to imagine that given these advances further progress might be accepted a good deal more easily than conservatives would imagine. The creators of Google have spoken of wishing obtaining knowledge could be a matter as simple as speaking a question into the breeze and having the answer whispered into your ear, as gossip of Midas' ears in reverse. This would require technology barely more sophisticated than that in existence already. Indeed, reconfigured it probably could be done.

This opens vistas of possibility that are difficult to exhaust, simply by us mingling as freely with computer and code as we should do each other. Already there are those who would implant micro-chips in their arms purely for kicks. No doubt these technophiles shall be joined by many others as their augmentations grow other than superfluous.

Those in need of assistance from machines, be it in seeking pleasure or a regular heartbeat, have their needs met. Increasingly they are not judged as strange for it. All that restrains us, therefore, is that machines can not fulfill our every need.

Yet.

What I said for chickens...

...makes me a moderate, you see. Really.


Tool from Joy & Misery on Vimeo.

Mystery dykes go walkabout (the unburnt offering)

I went for a walk today.

(Forgive my deviation into meatspace; but I wish to discourse amusingly in a vague and anecdotal fashion. Normal quasi-misanthropism will resume soon.)

Limited as my existence is to a suburban dystopia which I shan't name for all our sakes, this inevitably involved an encounter with shops; and, indeed, the ubiquitous T*scos.

I am not hugely fond of T*scos. Or, indeed, supermarkets in general; the ultra-concentration of material for the sole purpose of massaging capital and the servicing the material needs it fuels through its own advertising somehow irks me. People - meat, walking meat - wander round aisles buying meat raised in caged aisles with the specific, consuming desires of that walking meat in mind. A blatant assertion of species bias; to raise an animal with the specific purpose of slaughter in mind suggests you feel it is inherently permissible to kill that animal even if unnecessary, which suggests in turn you feel yourself to be superior to it. And, given that, in order to purchase that carcass you must subject yourself, for a time, to the cramped and stifling conditions in which the animal lived (or, rather, suffered), I see little basis for such a conclusion of superiority.

Yes, supermarkets repel me, and so I try to stay away; or, if that fails, I make a mess. Which you might say happened today, more or less. Approaching the graveyard of chickens that is the frozen meatspace (for you, it's a shop. For them, it is the holocaust. Or, the apocalypse, given how holocaust actuallly derives from the word for conflagration. Fucksticks. The tyranny of language indeed.), I decided to erect a memorial. One frigid bird mounted another as I slowly constructed my mausoleum (and a somewhat ugly metaphor to accompany it.)

Incidentally, if you're ever in a frozen goods section and try to construct a wall in protest at man's inhumanity to chickens, try lamb instead. It's easier to stack.

This attracted a crowd. That was, I suppose, a step; you can never quite pass on a message if no-one is listening. Unfortunately, I suspect none of them were listening anyway, the central topic of their thoughts and whispers being what they no doubt conceived of as my spurious mental stability (fools.)

They clearly needed instruction. And so, as Zaranthustra climbed a mountain and spake as though he had something worth saying (as though anyone really does), I finished my mausoleum. There was a sign nearby offering these poor, dead creatures at a price of 3 for 2; I tore it from its holder and scrawled "DACHAU" on the back.

(Accustomed as they were to the standard nadir-wards plunge most make in their references I suspect that that one passed them by.)

At this stage, security arrived. They challenged me; I provided my usual response, with an added diatribe on how, as corporate slaves to the suits who commissioned the slaughter, they were party to attempted genocide and so under the precedent set by the Nuremburg Trials should be hung.

They threw me out. Little did my entreaties to them to renounce their ways (I even promised not to hang them!) help; little did my point that, all land being held in common (clearly, no-one is born in possession of the land, and so long as there might be a common use, none have the right to take it. ~Take possession if it is for your own good, and doesn't impinge on the good of others. But don't assume a private right to any land or material naturally held by none.) T*scos, and thus they, had no right to determination over the patch in which I had erected the shrine.

Thus ended my escapade. I suspect I am now banned from the premises; but why should that stop me? Land is held in common, and I must make my point.

So, next time, I may invite the press...

A casual stroll through a lunatic asylum will show that faith does not prove anything.
-Nietzsche

TAZ - The runway?

I note the following:

Noting the squalor which has overtaken blogging the Mystery Dyke Squadron has come to the decision that an enclave from the filth, an outpost of good honest depravity, must be formed.

Excellent; for this suits my purpose so far as I have one. (So far as any of us have them? That this takes place on the internet at all would suggest otherwise, given the medium's utter proclivity towards complete banality at times. Ah, but such potential...)




And that's rather the (point.) The internet has such potential; and yet it's wasted. We have, in effect, the potential for total freedom, a new society in which tired old barriers of gender, race, age, class, religion, nationality, physicality and conventional morality could be abandoned. We have anonymity, and we have space limited only by whichever tricks of technology preserve us in our incorpereal congress.

You know the shiz.

But, yeah, that went wrong somewhere, didn't it? Everywhere we turn on the internet, we find the same hives of mental filth. We had the tools to create an anarchich utopia devoid of the tiresome trappings of physical reality. And yet; websites for old and meaningless imagined communities, dead gender paradigms (I mean boths sides, thankyouverymuch), etc, etc. The conflicts of the meatworld find their way here and ruin our space.

But that was inevitable. People are rooted in their physicality; the transcendence of that reality usually requires some extramental aid. (Perhaps, though, that can be avoided. More later.) Their minds find a home in their bodies, so the problems of those bodies are transferred into a space reserved for those minds. Fine. Whatever. Etc, etc.

We need an escape, though. I want to escape the fleshworld; the fascists, the fuckwits, the Liberal Democrats. And so we need this.

Hakim Bey suggested the best escape from a world of overwhelming control was to be elusive. Create temporary, mutable structures which evade all forms of social control; temporary autnomous zones. (For those with the patience and good taste, the actual essay is here.)

The internet is perfect for such zones. It could even be considered the largest one in existence. We may not be able to escape the fleshworld in its entirety; but we have anonymity, and we have an ever changing space. We can occupy a space, say there are no rules, and there will be none. Our only vulnerability is to the host, and the ISP - but to thus, they become immovable objects, like the seas and winds were for Pirate Utopia's. We live with them as best we can, and if they get too much, we fly elsewhere. Simple.

So, this is our (my, at least; I can't speak for the Squadron Leader or whichever other batshitters its found for us) TAZ. Here, there are no rules. Any attempt to impose them will be met with ridicule.

Happy?

Opening Strafe

Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings. Post-Feminism is the rational notion that miscegenation is needed.

Noting the squalor which has overtaken blogging the Mystery Dyke Squadron has come to the decision that an enclave from the filth, an outpost of good honest depravity, must be formed.




We're not (quite) pretentious enough types to go about crafting a manifesto, nor tenacious enough to put the extended effort into crafting one even if we possessed the collective will. And the idea of a "Statement of Intent" is far too hackneyed a concept for us to consider without retching. In fact, there's a lot of things that induce nausea in us.

We aren't interested in talking about matter civil. We've enough nastiness in the depths of our closets to pelt the state with if it dares knock down our door.

As far as We're concerned correctness is madness gone political.

We don't seek to disabuse anyone of the notion that they're in control of their existence. Its this illusion that's kept civilisation upright since it started. We'll whisper our message to elm trees instead, since those things can stand up by themselves and so there's no harm to be caused there.

We consider it only a matter of time before people come to realise that Elijah Wood deserved to die.

We think you'll find that the Patriarchy lies in shattered pieces coating the floor & we'd like to invite you for a dance.

We are recruiting so if you can manage to send a piece of yours to mysterydykesquadron(@)gmail.com then you're bright enough to be put under consideration. No bores, no bigots, no dullards.

The other public members of the Squadron will begin contributions shortly. I'm hardly going to prejudice you by presuming to know what sort of content to knock out so you'll just have to suck and see. Fuck knows that's a lost art.

Now if you're ready to free yourselves from the rigid confines of the endless series of restraints
and limitations that your precious "Identity" doubtless consist of, we can begin.