ARE MEN REALLY PIGS?

ARE MEN REALLY PIGS? (Frazer Chronicles)

I just read an article in Aljazeera, penned by Naomi Wolf entitled "Is pornography driving men crazy?" I for one can respond with a hearty "nnnnnnooooo!" Actually I have watched some porn on my computer, you guys ought to try it, it's graphic.....STOP, sorry I lost my composure for a minute, maybe this Wolf broad has something going with her "driving men crazy thing."

Pornography, in my opinion, isn't driving men crazy, men in fact are becoming more aware of women and respect them more then ever before in history. That said, I have to admit that "men have a long road to travel before they truly are aware of women in the world, and what they really mean in a man's life. 

In  her article, Wolf talks about "highly visible men in recent years have behaved in sexually self-destructive ways." Wolf contends that "powerful men have long been sexually voracious, but in the pasts were more careful," and continues that those "high profile" men were more discreet and generally  used better judgement to "cover their tracks."

Ms. Wolf is citing her  opinion, "which she is entitled to," which is based on flawed information. I can name many governmental leaders who were "un-discreet" with regards to their extra-marital activities. These long ago men had the benefit of security guards, handlers, political advisers, and..... the press.

Leaders deal with a passion in  their lives that only they know about. Almost every issues that they confront in their lives is a test of wills, a test of whether they can evoke their will on others, a test of how strong that they are, "that's every day." So, even though people might not agree with the philandering, "I certainly don't," these men naturally "tend" to force themselves on mostly receptive women.

There isn't any medical study necessary to "figure out if men's brain's are being rewired by being exposed to pornography." The resounding answer is "no," mixed in with a loud "how dare you."  It's like using an excuse for an activity that to many, many men is unacceptable to our gender and is demeaning.

I have been around three separate "gang bangs" in my time, non of which I might add I partook in. I found it repugnant to "do my business after others had already done theirs." It wasn't that I was so moral, or was above those others, I simply found the activity rather disgusting.

The one incident in  particular left a lasting impression on me, one that I will take to the grave. It happened in Germany, when I was stationed there as an Army medic. In a medical train car, 2 women were at either end of the car, and a line of waiting young soldier's "waited their turn" to get a little.

I decided right then and there that my sex with the opposite sex would be a one on one deal, and something that I was unwilling to share with others. For Naomi Wolf to intimate that watching pornographic "smokers,  as they were called some 90 years ago," and DVD's today, are breaking down men's resistance, and fueling a wanton sex urge in  a man is absolute crap.

Men by and large are cognoscente of women, and women's rights, we many get a little "horn Dogged" by what women ware when out in public, or surely at the beach, but we can control our inhibitions or impulses pretty well, "thank you very much."

Those men, or "boys" that give in to their impulses should get exactly what they deserve, a stint in jail, bunking with Willie, or Percy to get "straight," if you know what I mean. To anecdotally connect the increase in pornographic consumption among young men with the increase impotence and premature ejaculation of the same is, preposterous.

Young men forever have had premature problems, when it concerned to the opposite sex, it's the nature of the courtship, the circle of life, "if you will." It's how young women began to establish their superiority to the man species, and also how they learn to keep that little "secret" of superiority to themselves until they need it to reign in a man.  

It's a silly game played between men and women, one that both know is being played, those that play it better have more partners, those that don't, "men" can resort to barbaric and brutal activity towards women, it's not a "rewiring" of the brain by pornography, it's an emotionally weak individual, weak in life and weak with people.

According to medical studies, pornography rewards the brain with short term dopamine boost, much the same as snorting cocaine or winning at the gambling tables. So that explains why I feel so good before and during sex, and tired as hell after the deed is done, huh, I never knew that I was a cocaine addict. 

Look Naomi, and all you clinical (experts) who are doing all these studies, "I hate to burst your bubble," but men and women have been running after one another since the beginning of time, and the big reason why the Garden of Edan was a "bust" of possibly the very first sex education program of man-kind.

There is almost zero the number of women that want to be violently, violated, most want to be wined and dinned and romanced before they give it up. In many, many cases, the end result is, that they "don't give it up," and the majority of men except that result, and go home and play with their little "winker."

All the research in the world, all the clinical discoveries will not change a fringe part of society that has always been there and sadly always will be. Just because there might be more clinical studies going on doesn't mean there are more jerks tearing women's cloths off

  

  

THE MESSAGE IN A YARD SIGN, RICK "RICKY" PERRY

THE MESSAGE IN A YARD SIGN, RICK "RICKY" PERRY (Frazer Chronicles)

Can yard signs be like a message in a bottle, I don't think so. I used to drive a truck throughout the country and I've seen some yard signs that might curl your toes. During the run-up to the 2008 presidential election, I saw all sorts of signs down south that I couldn't believe. Not only were they racial, they were mean spirited, and suggested some really bizarre activity.

The "ride a cruise missil right up Husain's butt," or "keep America safe, stomp out Islam," or by far the best one I saw in 2008, "keep your damn hinds off my gins its my right to bear arms." That is exactly how it was written out and spelled, "no kidding."

The yard sign I am speaking about is one from a small New Hampshire town that proclaims that President Obama has launched more missiles during his term as President then any other President in the history of the United States.....that has won a Nobel Peace Prize.

I think it's important to take a look at exactly who Alfred Bernhard Nobel was, so that we all can get a more accurate picture of who the prize.....for peace was named for. Nobel was born in 1833 in Sweden and became a chemist, engineer, innovator and armaments manufacturer. Nobel's most famous invention was dynamite, while his armament company produced cannon and cannon balls.

It's probably a good thing that cruise missiles weren't around back when Alfred was blowing things up, or he'd have probably enjoyed playing with a few of the things, possible in his back year.

I am really, really disappointed in the Obama Administration, and the path that they seem to be taking with regards to war and war making. Bush at least said right up front where he was going and what he intended to do. Obama "fiddle faddles" around, talks about troop "draw-downs" and then goes into Libya, what the hell is going on?

It is true that Obama has launched more cruise missiles then any other peace prize winner, but you gotta remember, he's only in his first term, and the way things are going for him, he needs to set some sort of record. Maybe if he's elected to a second term, he can really set war records, kinda like sports figures do in their chosen fields, only time will tell.


JAMES RICHARD "RICK" "RICKY" PERRY, (Frazer Chronicles)
Does it sound like I'm disrespecting politicians when I insert my own personal nick-names, "kind of like I'm making fun of them? Well it's true, especially when they happen to be career politicians, those guys need to be "knocked down a peg or two."

Look, I don't begrudge a person being in politics for a really, really long time, but when that tenure starts to take on a life of it's own, and people start looking at his or her time in office like statistics for a baseball team, or a league, I start to get a bit nervous.

This "statistical reign" of Texas Governor Richard "Rick" Perry is starting to look exactly like a Texas gubernatorial power destiny for the Republican Party, and that is never a good thing. People need checks and balances for governance, a difference of opinion, "if you will."

"Ricky" is the 47th. governor of Texas, having held the office since December of 2000, when George W Bush resigned the office to run for president of the United States. Perry has been the elected governor since 2002, and has won re-election in both 2006 and 2010.

"Ricky" holds all records for Texas gubernatorial tenure, having broken Allen Shivers' consecutive 7 and a half record. Perry also holds the distinction of appointing at least 1 person to every possible state office.

Perry, a 5th. generation "Texican," "whatever that means," is Texas A&M University educated, "holding a degree in Animal Science," was a door to door book salesman during his college years, and after graduation served in the Air Force, working as a pilot until 1977. He then worked on the family cotton farm.

"Ricky" Perry was elected to the Texas state legislature 1984 when he was 34 years old and has been in the Texas politician machine every since. First a Democrat, Perry switched parties in 1989, and his political stock has been on the raise every since.

During my voting years, I have voted for Republicans, Democrats and independents. Through those same years I formulated a sort of governmental philosophical idea of how government should be operated. I do not feel that one party has "all the answers," nor do I believe that one party or the other lies more then the other, "they both lie, for their own good."

Perry (seems) to have somewhat radical ties to religion, maybe his own feelings, I don't know. Whenever a politician  talks about his beliefs about God, Buddha, Islam, or the Singing Bush, I get a little nervous. Although it isn't specifically addressed in our constitution, I believe that a separation of religion and government, "the separation of church and state," is germane to the successful operation of any government.

When religious organizations become more "muscular" in their approach to political issues of the day, like "gays are Nazis," or "Muslims should be converted to Christianity," or that September 11, 2001 was "God's punishment" for the countries "creeping secularism," keeping religion out of government, I need to take a Valium.

Richard "Rick" "Ricky" Perry may be the best candidate for the Republican Party, I don't know. I read that Wisconsin Governor Scott "Sleepy" Walker saw, after he was elected to the office, that his party had control of both the House and the Senate and decided to implement his own "somewhat" radical policies. He, "Walker"  was not elected to implement his own agenda, rather his was elected on what he said during the campaign for the office.

Way to many politicians figure, after they are elected have the right to change their course, the course that they were elected on. In to many cases, politicians operate on what is good for the favored few and industry.

If "Ricky" Perry is one of those "my agenda" type guys, he would be bad for the country, unless you feel that Barack Obama, who ran on quiting the war(s), and instead has ramped the  war(s)  up is good for the country. "Does anybody have a "hit" of marijuana?