thinking shit out

Why is time my biggest known fear? Being afraid of time; is it relative to being unable to living in the present?Life seems to be moving so fast, its difficult to slow down so when you do– you slow down too hard. Where’s the medium? Where is the line for how much you’re doing or how much you should be doing of the things that you love or other priorities? There is no line. We must be reminded that no line exists. You should be present in every moment. You should love every moment of your existence. Be there, take it in and enjoy the moments you GET  to spend at work as well as the moments you get to sleep in, equally.


what sucks

You know what sucks?

My brother’s death sucks.

My father’s sickness sucks.

Aging sucks.

Bills suck.

Illogical law enforcement sucks.

$120 every other week for probation sucks.

Not knowing I would be called to court within weeks of buying a car sucks.

Spending a day in jail doesn’t suck.

Being forced to ride buses to class sucks.

Being inevitably ten minutes late for two classes sucks.

Paying to park every day sucks.

Getting parking tickets where you work, in the parking spots that your restaurant built sucks.

Hitting the $300 mark on the amount of money you’ve paid in tickets/towing, parking at work sucks.

Parking downtown sucks.

Being forced to pay $180 on the spot, before class, for unpaid parking tickets downtown sucks.

Living with 6 dogs, 2 cats and 6 people kind of sucks.

Having a mild social disorder sucks.

Having sensitive skin and regular, painful cysts sucks.

Driving a person who I used to be friends with until I grew up and she didn’t and her friends and brother around on her birthday only for her brother to puke in my new car sucks.

$312 car payments suck.

$350 rent sucks.

$100 utilities suck.

Being really bitter sucks.

Having a tolerance for pot sucks.

Ignorance sucks.

Consciousness sucks.

Being in two weddings this year sucks.

Being in a cousin’s wedding that you can’t make yourself care about sucks.

Meeting your cousin’s fiance the day he proposed sucks.

Being unable to change ignorant decisions that take place before your eyes sucks.

Marriage sucks.

The nonworking student population at UGA sucks.

Tuition sucks.

Student loans suck.

Interest sucks.

Rednecks suck.

Most of my family sucks.

Being aware but knowing you’re still so unaware sucks.

Being in debt sucks.

Not being able to see your parents sucks.

Knowing that your parents are hurting but not being able to see them sucks.

Not being very close to your parents sucks.

Knowing you’d be closer to your mom and be in less debt if you lived closer sucks.

Following your dreams suck.

Wandering who will be in your life in the next two years sucks.

Inevitable change usually sucks.










we can all pee standing

I have always been an active dreamer and more than capable of recalling bits and pieces of dreams, following a good sleep. Nonetheless, nowadays I never remember my dreams; at least not the kind of dreams you have while asleep. The majority of my days hold at least ten minutes of daydreaming. I am not merely referring to the inevitable thoughts we have when we are not speaking. I am referring to in depth, lasting scenarios imagined during long walks, driving long periods of time or just moments of stillness throughout my day. Sometimes I will acknowledge occasions when I have had such penetrating daydreams and sometimes I will not. I elaborate on the essence of my daydreaming only to mention one in particular that I have on a reoccurring basis. These dreams are not specific scenarios in which the same things take place, but a positive change of societal norms that my mind finds blissful and interesting enough to venture off into the possibilities of on a regular basis. Usually this type of dream is sparked by acknowledging how someone is treated, being treated or how I may or may not be treated, if it is relevant to the identity that myself or someone else is displaying. I’ll dream of all characters being treated in the exact same manner as the person in front of, beside and behind them. A place where they have sex, but do not have a sex; because it is universally acknowledged that there are as many sexes as there are people[1] (27). I have no reason not to assume that because of the reoccurrence of this scenario in my mind, it must be mentally harmonious to myself at the very least. Buddhists may argue that we are capable of controlling our thoughts through meditation. Nonetheless, meditation is not occurring in the moment of these daydreams, so I have reason to believe that they are out of my control, to an extent at least. If these reoccurring dreams that just so happen to be blissful scenarios are out of my control and I am not personally causing them to be blissful or reoccurring, this only leads me to believe that the reality of them would be even more blissful than they are displayed in my mind. Although I cannot actually prove that these reoccurring idyllic and irrepressible daydreams take place, I intend to argue that because of reasons mentioned, the reality of my daydreams are not only possible in this world but their occurrence would provoke agreeable consequences. I understand that an argument is pointless if its supporting factor lies in one’s claim of daydreaming, alone. I will support my argument with not only my own logical rationalization and scenarios in which a single-gender society would be the most beneficial, but with brilliant ideas from Johnathan Stoltenberg ‘s Refusing to be a Man; “How do men have (a) Sex.” My intentions are to elaborate on matters relevant to how our sex and gender are illogically determined for us at birth, the sexual dilemmas that are funded by society as well as why we live in a world with these issues and what harvests them. In explaining these predicaments I will bring awareness to the idea that a world where sexual individualism is embraced in every instance would be a more peaceful place to inhabit as I argue that this is not out of reach for society.

I find it hard to believe people exist in the world that are aware and not bothered by the idea of picking and choosing biological attributes of newborns that are seen most representative and labeling them into one of just two categories that will socially and sexually define them from that moment on. Biologically, Doctors merely inspect a new human’s outward appearance and give them a label that they must live up to in order to live suitably. We are all being expected to daily exhibit traits that are outnumbered by a vast number of attributes that a doctor deemed irrelevant. “It would be silly to lock anyone into a lifelong category based on a capability of a variable that may or may not be utilized (27).” At birth they are given a sex and from then own they are given a gender[2] but both of what they are given involves standards that these labels are suggesting they adhere to. Higher education at a liberal college should not be required of one to recognize that when someone is categorized by physical appearance alone, there are a vast number of attributes on the inside that are being deemed irrelevant. Although there are no discrete points in which a man can be called a man and a female can be called a female, men are supposed to be masculine and sexually lust for women (women are supposed to be feminine and sexually lust men), in order to be considered masculine and this is all due to a quick physical at birth.

What does it mean to be a certain sex[3]? What does it really mean to be either a male or female and why are such heavy circumstances put on either option, when it takes all of two seconds for a doctor to determine which you are[4]? Men grow and learn in a world that makes them believe that the first valuable thing that they fell comes from their penis. Sex has become only to be known as a form of lustful penetration and little more[5]. Men are supposed to want to “fuck” women and if they do not have this desire, they are considered less of a man[6]. Men supposedly have this erotic wiring and sexual tendency that is genetic stronger than a women’s. So they are expected to have sex[7] (For the sake merely addressing my point we will not discuss the effect that the sexual expectations of men has on women). I imagine a place where we are all different sexes so the term sex as a noun disappears altogether. The term sex as a verb would also then refer to the intimate bond by acknowledging that we are all the same and so different all at once[8]. Is it so absurd to say that ridding of the very short process of determining ones sex at birth could eventually be completely avoided? I envision a place where we are all different sexes so the term sex as a noun disappears altogether. We intimately bond by acknowledging that we are all the same and so different all at once.

We live in a world in which the moment we are born, we are lawfully labeled as either a male or female. Not only are we limited to two categories, but when we enter the world we are blindly instilled with identities that we must live up to in relation to the gender that we were first identified with. Why is this? The only explanation I find evident is the moment in which the first to document a newborn into one of two genders decided to do so. This person must have been influenced by the idea of only two distinct sexes being the first sign of human life on earth. Where would this idea originate? Perhaps the idea was governed by literary works produced centuries after the first human beings existed, funded by word of mouth from lineages of the human species’ parents. Need I elaborate further for you to assume my subtle reference to religion? Statistics are not needed for you to agree that the popular theology– of places in the world that more frequently reject sexual freedom and enforce distinct gender categorization and expectations– consists of religions that very much condemn actions that oppose male and female being the only existing genders as well as the only two genders that should be sexually intertwined. The attribute of condemning anything other than heterosexuality is not shared by all world religions. On trait that for sure is shared is without a doubt “the golden rule” (love your neighbor to a greater extent than you love yourself). What I cannot determine reasoning for is why not all religions will disagree with sexual freedom but will however argue for the demand to love one another. I understand that romantic love is not the love that religious doctrine necessarily refers to when demanding that we love everyone, so using the love doctrine of theology would not withstand arguing for homosexuality. Nonetheless, witnessing the way in which the religious have portrayed their views against sexual freedom make it difficult to believe that it was on behalf of a holy creator or doctrine. Why would they display these views, then? Perhaps because straying from the heterosexuality and gender assumptions that we are born into is something that some have never been provoked to do; so when they witness it, they are uncomfortable and act hatefully not on behalf of their God-induced conscious but because of their unjustifiable discomfort. If you want to reproduce, do it. I do not believe that anything that is changed in the way society functions will take away the ability for you to have children.

An instance that would provoke me to reverse my reason would be to hear from someone (disagreeing with my argument) who has undergone society-induced trauma, due to merely being heterosexual. Matthew was labeled as a male at birth. Matthew grew up and into his homosexuality. Matthew was ridiculed and denied love from not only peers, but family members– after expressing a sexuality that was evident long before he verbalized it. Matthew replaced the love that he was denied with drugs, from meth to prescription. Matthew lived a life of poverty, in and out of jail for the use of his love-substitution, smothered in depression and seclusion. Matthew died from a massive heart attack at age thirty, due to the damage on his body from a life of substituting love with drugs. Obviously the acceptance Matthew lacked from the origin of his life (in a small conservative town) to his last day was very detrimental to him and those who did love Matthew. To you who may disagree with my vision of sexual individuality; are you contributing more to your religious duty (and or moral standards) by attempting to chose who Matthew should love by condemning him for not adhering to a heterosexual way of life that you were convinced before you could walk is the only true sexuality; or by celebrating the capacity he has to love another? My mother, as a heterosexual, is forever damaged from the hatred of those who would disagree with my argument. Although she loved him in every moment of his life, no one person could contribute enough love to replace the love that was hatefully denied to Matthew by the world; because of the stereotype that he was born into and his “refusing to be a man.” Imagine the scenario of meeting someone in which the first few milliseconds of your encounter does not involve assuming their sexuality or whether they are male or female. What if you are not capable of guessing their gender? What if you spend time wondering which categories they fall into? Why would we spend time trying to figure this out? Is it so that we can assume certain attributes pertain to this person according to their sexuality or gender? I envision a place where this does not exist and the time spent presupposing one’s identity is replaced with a deeper and more productive first interaction.

[1] “We call them sex hormones, they call them individuality inducers (27).”

[2] Gender can be defined as the range of characteristics differentiating between femininity and masculinity.

[3] Sex can be defined as either of the two main categories into which animals are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

[4] “We are sorted into one category or another at birth based solely on a visual inspection of our groins, and the only question that’s asked is whether there’s enough elongated tissue around your urethra so you can pee standing up (31).”

[5] In a society predicated on the notion that there are two opposite and complementary sexes, this idea not only makes sense it becomes sense.

[6] I would follow by saying that “women” are supposed want to “fuck” men but they are not supposed to want to “fuck” “men” at all, unless of course a “man” wants to “fuck” them.

[7] Each person experiences the idea of sexual identity as more or less real, more or less certain, more or less true, depending on two very personal phenomena: ones feelings and ones acts. For many people, for instance, the act of fucking makes their sexual identity feel more real than it does at other times.

But the act of fucking happens to be a very good example of the correlation between doing a specific act in a specific way and sensing the specificity of the sexual identity to which one aspires.

[8] The nerve networks and interlock of capillaries through our pelvises electrify and engorge as id plugged in together and pumping as one. That’s what we feel when we feel one another’s feelings (34).


A Man Gotta Have a Woman or He Don’t Know He’s a Man

A credible reference considers the term rape to be defined as forcing someone to have sex when they are unwilling ( The origin of the term misogyny is Greek derived; misos defined as hatred, gune defined as woman; altogether representing an idea that holds hate for women, who are inferior to men. Would it not be required for one to hate or at least hold supposed power and disrespect in order for one to force sex upon another? Is it not rare for a man to be raped (other than men who are confined to a place where there are no women)? Since women are the prominent victims (by far), would rape not be considered a misogynistic crime? Here I will mention why rape occurs, whom the fault is given to as well as some history of this occurrence; with hope to explain why rape is an act derived from a misogynist culture and why there is no limit to how informed one should be regarding the crisis.

In Christina Hoff Sommers’s Rape Research, the question arises to whether rape is prominent in our society because we have a violent society or because of misogynistic intentions. If rape occurred because of mere violence, more men (not imprisoned) would be raped (by men). It is women they chose—therefore it is misogynistic. Does one need more of a reason for sex without consent to be because of a lack of respect for women and their wishes? The rapists are the same patriarchal men who see it as part of their nature to belittle women (although they would never refer to it as belittlement). They do so in infinite ways, without second thought. They are so deeply convinced in their lack of fault, their victims believe the same, preventing women from believing that anything happening is anything out of the ordinary—“He’s just being a man.” My concern is when the actions of men reach the boundary of falling into the category of “just being a man?” Lying on the couch while one’s wife does all of the household things after she too has just gotten home from a long day of work is obviously considered just being a man. Having drinks after work while one’s family prepares for bed is just being a man. Expecting your wife to be aroused whenever one is, despite anything her body is going through, is just being a man. Hitting on the young waitress or letting one’s eyes wander with no boundaries is just being a man. Speaking to a woman with no filter while expecting them to withhold their inferior response is just being a man. Beating one’s wife because she is there when one is mad is just being a man, as well as forcing penetrating to the matter just because one would be knocking out two birds with one stone on one’s agenda of being a man. What will always shock me is how men are okay with being a man[1]. They wish to be excused from being moral beings, simply because they are men. Nonetheless, who exactly is responsible for this in the greater picture? These men are born into an environment that promotes this type of behavior and they have rarely witnessed otherwise. The fault is theirs for not acknowledging the horrible standards they are adhering to but the most frightening issue is how blinded many of them are from any part of the truth; that they are not supposed to have control over women. To any whom may claim a victim wanted, needed or enjoyed being raped; if any of these were apparent in the scenario, it would only be because the victim is brainwashed by one’s misogynistic mentality and those one has surrounded oneself with. The women who put up with this live in an environment that enables them to believe that degrading behavior from a male is the norm or at least normal enough to endure some pain because of.

Many women in or out of relationships often assume that it was their fault that they were raped. This is a repetitive accusation: male who faults the female for not having sex with him after becoming aroused because it is her fault that he is aroused; the guy at the party who penetrates the unconscious girl but it is her fault for getting drunk and passing out in her own apartment; the husband who is drunk and forces his wife to have sex with him because they are married and he has nothing to lose (because he is a husband and this is his right); the woman who is taken from the street and raped because she was out alone and she should know better than that. From the smallest instance to rape-induced death, women have been trained to believe that they are always responsible for the sex that is forced upon them. When considering women surveyed who did not consider themselves victim of rape, it is important to consider: women in denial because they would rather not accuse their spouse of being guilty of something so bad, overly-conservative women who were influenced to adhere to whatever men wish regardless of their pain, women who are under the false idea that men are naturally more aroused than women—the list is infinite[2]. Rape research and statistics are so far from ever being completely accurate. The matter should have strong forces at aim to prevent occurrences, regardless of statistics. One reason for the constant inaccuracy of rape statistics is because there is only one word to use when referring to any sexual intercourse without mutual desire; rape. Therefore, more extreme rape occurrences have the same label as the less threatening situations, obviously making rape research and statistics more difficult to perform. By attempting to disprove what may be considered exaggerating feminist’s research, one will fail to remember that 1/100 is still too high of a percentage of raped women. We all know more than one hundred women; imagine any of them being forcibly raped. At The University of Georgia, a group met on campus before going downtown to drink. This group referred to themselves as “Return of the Kings.” Members of this group deem it completely okay and necessary for any women in their home to be raped and the websites that they affiliate with express this clearly. Why? Men rule and women drool, that’s why. Their moral conduct requires no motive other than the simple fact that men are greater than women. This group was on the campus that I visit every day. How can we possibly be too aware of sexual assault or undermine any instance of forced sex?

How can one consider that the reason rape occurs is because of a violent society rather than a society that belittles women when the highest number of rape occurs in patriarchal societies? Yes, an extreme number of male prisoners are raped, which is also terribly disturbing. Nonetheless, who could deny that if women were in prison with them, they would be victimized instead? We have lived in a misogynist society since the beginning of time. This is demonstrated religiously and politically and has always been. Why was Scotland motivated to start war for their freedom from English rule? They were tired of Englishmen taking their wives and raping them before they could marry. I am aware that times were more violent then but how would you explain why they did not rape the men instead without it being due to the lack of respect for women. Sure, it is disrespectful to the men who’s partners were being raped but the disrespect implied towards the women is too intense to be considered mere disrespect; as if they do not exist as beings and are pieces of other men’s property– stolen and penetrated. This is just one of many examples of history implementing the degradation of women. The world has politically progressed as far as misogyny is concerned. Yet, religion belittles the roles of women persistently today. Religion will manipulatively claim that women are better at performing certain roles, naturally. Nonetheless, this prevents women from prospering in ways that they would do so, if given the chance. This also instills sub ordinance to men and the idea that women know less about what is just, making women less likely to assume their spouse is wrong by forcing her to please him sexually. Why is the Holy Bible’s Eve portrayed as being responsible for Adam’s corruption and ‘responsible for the fall of man?’ Did Adam not possess the willpower to resist? Eve was created in order for Adam to have someone to love, not to be forever known for corruption; punished by cycles and childbirth. This form of history was produced by, as one would assume, men. As a young lady, church convinced me that my womanhood was punishment, not privilege. There are countless examples of religious- inspired belittlement of women that I need not elaborate on, many of which give sexual rights to men any time they please. It is hard to believe that the misogynistic characteristics in most all religions has not impacted the prevalence of sex forced upon women, the primary victims of rape.

The only susceptible reason that one might aim at proving violence to be the cause of rape instead of misogynistic intention is to keep conservative values in tact or make sure society does not become too aware of rape and why it happens. Are there men that are being protected here? Maybe Sommers does not want men worry about whether or not what they are doing is considered an act of rape. Assuming rape is a misogynistic act does much less harm than blaming a violent society. Women are being raped, women are taking the blame and women have been doing so throughout history. If rape is written off as something that would not occur if it were not for the violence in our world, no progression would be made in this culture of forced sexual encounters. If it requires some women to assume their instance of non life-threatening rape is just as important as a rape-induced death, so be it. If that is what it takes to prevent the traumatic and misogynistic rape crimes from occurring, who would dare resist? It is difficult to understand how Christina Sommers could be blinded to our misogyny-influenced culture and unfortunately this may mean that she is a primary victim of the blindfold that it provides.

[1] Sexual identity is an idea; constructed by society. Behavior follows identity though it should be the other way around.

[2] Just because someone does not know that they are being offended does not mean that they are not. This is relevant in all cases of discrimination and crime.


The problem with being habitually suppressant  is; the moment you realize the pain will never leave –ya know, when you lose your fucking mind and start to feel– you begin crying but don’t really remember how to cry because there are too many painful things running through your mind to produce tears at pace. You start making loud crying noises but can’t wake your roommates up so the attempt to prevent a loud breakdown only adds to the hyperventilation you feel the start of. You call your very closest acquaintances, those who you’d be comfortable saying “I’m insane, please just talk about anything so I can focus on something else to prevent the panic attack that’s about to occur (and force me to wake my roommates up)” to. But no one answers. You gotta get high.

the things that make me the most upset are the things I don’t have answers to. Usually when I write or talk it out I can figure it out. Lets start with the basics.

I don’t know how on earth I managed to have no money to my name while always being at work. I don’t know why every time I’m at work something bad has to happen. I don’t know why I’m paying $10,000 a year plus interest for an education. I don’t know why I’ve been in college for six years and don’t have a degree. I don’t know why my dog pisses in my bed sometimes knowing he shouldn’t. I don’t know why my washer has to break right before he does it.I don’t know why my dad has to develop a disease that slowly deteriorates cognitive and physical abilities at a point in my life when I never get to see him. I don’t know why it must happen during the stage in my life where our views on major life genres are becoming opposites. I don’t know why my brother had to die right before my dad was diagnosed. I don’t know why so many family members of his rejected my brother because of his sexuality. I don’t know why society and religion trained so many people in his life to be so mean to him. I don’t know why I called him a faggot when we were kids and fighting. I don’t know how the world convinced me that being gay was an insult. I don’t know why his father had to write him a letter explaining how he wanted nothing to do with him, long before he displayed any sign of homosexual character (like, a very young age). I don’t know why his dad came to his funeral after completely avoiding contact for 27 years only to greet a family with condolences that display nothing more than sympathy for the loss of someone. No guilt, no apologies, no tears. “Some people just go down the wrong paths. I hate that he had to,” you said. I was a moment from letting you hear everything you have needed to for so long but my mother displayed the strongest reaction she could have as her kind heart simply told the man that she had not seen since her and her four year old son walked in on his cheating on her that “you really missed out on a great child.” I don’t know why I’ll never get to sit outside and smoke cigs while talking about men with my brother again. I don’t know why I didn’t force him to move to athens with me so I could turn his life around. I don’t know why I didn’t call him more, knowing he was depressed. I don’t know why my mother has had to endure so much pain. I don’t know how she stays so well-kept. I don’t know how she takes care of all of us. I don’t know why my parents must leave me too later, or sooner.

I don’t know why people get married. It costs so much money and the only benefit is a couple of financial occurrences. It costs the wedding parties tons. What’s the difference in getting married and not? I know why love happens but what is the purpose of marriage?

I don’t know why I feel so strongly for you. You are so honest. I feel like you subconsciously rationalize everything you say in your head before it comes out. So, often times, others may react as if you’re insane but then realize that you’re not wrong. It’s so fucking charming. Sometimes you have the most assholey demeanor but you have respected me in so many ways that you don’t even realize. When you grabbed my face and told me to look at you when we fuck, it may seem like a misogynist thing to say but you made me realize that I have very rarely ever looked at anyone when I fuck them. I only focused on my ability to sexually function. Like I’m supposed to be some kind of fucking robot. When you forced me to look at you, my body worked on it’s on. Sex felt effortless for the first time and it was the best I’ve ever had. You’re so smart. Smarter than anyone I know, other than my dad, and that’s debatable. You could make me laugh at a funeral. As much hell as you give me for my memory or lack of certain knowledge, I am always more than entertained in your presence. That face of yours. Heavens to fucking betsy. Your eyes are honest. Your dimples are perfectly positioned to appear just in the moments when I need something to appreciate. You have the cutest bare man ass I’ve ever seen, regardless of how much you fucking fart. I trust you. I know that regardless of my lack of reason to, I trust too easy. I’m not turtlelly naive. I know that you shouldn’t actually trust anyone because we can’t really trust ourselves. We don’t know what we’re gonna do next, so how can we know what someone else will do and if their actions will cause a feeling of betrayal. But you get it. You get it all. I want to talk to you about things that I realize but I feel as if you’ve realized them long before I have so I will just seem naive. But I know you’ll listen if I wanted to.

Well, I answered one of my wonders.

i feel. better?