this is not an exageration

This is pretty accurate. I may have cleaned up the dialog a bit. He gets a potty mouth when he is dieing. 

snowy mush

I drew a bird!

So there is actually a funny story about how this drawing came to be.
I "awoke" around 3 am, barely awake. In my sleepy state I started a drawing for seemingly no reason, probably fueled by something in my dream. I got the torso and the wings drawn in pencil and finished the head in ink then promptly fell back asleep on it. This morning I woke up, feeling as if I had a screwdriver 20 minutes before with the paper pressed to my cheek. I was confused. My cat was not quite 6 inches from my face with my pen in her mouth. I finished the drawing after I woke up a little and here it is.
Not that great, but not that bad.
Yay, sleep bird.

in all seriousness

Putting aside my silly comics and frivolous posts on eating disorders, art, and other such distractions there are things I am fearful of and tend distract me in other ways.
Sign this: http://www.globalzero.org/en/sign-declaration
This is an official petition supporting the removal or nuclear weapons across the globe.
Nuclear attack is something not to be taken lightly and it seems like something that is more than likely to happen in our lifetime. We have come close many times over and we can sleep easy not knowing what goes on behind closed doors away from the prying eyes of the public. But here we stand with the chance for action before us.
I don't care how preachy I sound.

There is a documentary called Countdown to Zero that gives an unbiased look on nuclear power and the global impact. It has left Joshua unnerved in ways I had never seen before. This is There Will Come Soft Rains by Sara Teasdale: (not the be confused with the short story by the same name by Ray Bradbury, which is equally haunting)

There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,

And the swallows circling with their shimmering sound;

And the frogs in the pools singing at night,

And wild plum trees in tremulous white;

Robins will wear their feathery fire,

Whistling their whims on a low fence-wire;

And not one will know of war, not one,

Will care at last when it is done;

Not one would mind, neither bird nor tree,

If mankind perished utterly;

And Spring herself, when she woke at dawn

Would scarcely know that we were gone. 

My Friends' Species Identification Cards (to be continued...)

There are more to come.
I intend to collect them like pokemon cards. Gotta have 'em all.

I got the idea from this blog: racheldraws. I have provided the link in my crucial links area. Check her and her sister out. Quite hilarious.

Joshua and the things he loves: part 1

It didn't bother me, I just found it amusing. We are married, they are like half his now. Why ya gotta be so sneaky? Is it the catholic guilt creeping up on you again? 

I am curious, however, as to why he thought this wouldn't wake me up. 

Dave and Christine

com

Irony? Ironic...irony?

On any given day I hear one or more people misuse the word "irony." Even I might do it from time to time, but the point is that people do not take the time to educate themselves on the phrases they use regularly. It's sad in a big way. I'm not one of those people who likes to debate it either. I don't stand nearby ready to interject; "Ehem, actually that's not irony...."
There are actually 3 common uses of Irony:
1. Verbal Irony (the most common)
          This is when a speaker says one thing but means another. Most would call this sarcasm, though many scholars argue that sarcasm is not irony (despite it being the original definition). Example: "Yes, I would LOVE to get a root canal sans the anesthetic."
2. Dramatic Irony
          It is used in narratives when an event occurs that the audience may be aware of while the characters are still in the dark.This is a little harder to explain and understand, my literature teacher in high school it explained it as so: In the play Romeo and Juliet she fakes her death. The entire audience knows she is simply asleep, but Romeo believes her to be dead. People often confuse this with situational irony.
Sorry for that spoiler for those of you who still live under that rock.
3. Situational Irony
          This is when something happens and the opposite of what you would expect occurs. This is like buying a gun to protect yourself to only be shot by said gun or taking diet pills to lose weight that end up making you fat.

By now I am sure most of us have heard the song "Ironic" by Alanis Morrisette. Most of those situations mentioned are purely just unfortunate coincidences or events. Rain on a wedding day is not ironic unless you were using a weather machine to make it sunny and the opposite occurred. Good advice that you didn't take it just stupidity, not irony. One could argue that her phrase "It's like 10 thousand spoons when all you need is a knife," is a little bit of situational irony as you would expect a knife somewhere in the mix. Having no bowl would be more ironic. But I am not going to break down all the situations she presents us with. But it's a little ironic that her song isn't actually ironic, perhaps Alanis is more clever than we thought.
What is ironic is the American Board of the Preservation of the English Language attacking Alanis Morrisette claiming she was an example of Americans dumbing down the English language. She is Canadian.

O'Henry is the master of Irony. Perhaps you should give him a read for some good examples.

And just understanding irony doesn't give you the right to say whether something is a good example of irony. If it is ironic than it is ironic. Don't be that guy.

My complete and utter DISDAIN for Marquis de Sade

Oh, Marquis de Sade, you both nauseate and infuriate me. He is, somehow, considered one of the best writers of France's history. His erotic writings helped coin the term "sadism." This can give you a nice hint as to the overall theme of his writings. I find him to be a vile and deplorable individual. His exaltation in the literary world is baffling. He was not enlightened, he was not an existentialist; he was simply a dirty man who wrote about dirty things. If you think James Joyce's love letters were dirty then you have no idea what you are in for. His work was viewed almost as an exploration of sexuality, but it is just pure smut.
He was born in 1740 in Paris and only child to an aristocratic family. They were wealthy and powerful, he lived an ideal childhood, given all the opportunities available to him. When he got older he served in the military, even fighting in the Seven Years War. Later, 1763, he married a young lady of another high-ranking family; Renee -Pelagie de Montreuil. Then things got...weird.
In 1768 he captured an tortured a prostitute. Word got out and the police warned all the brothels as he was considered a threat to all prostitutes (he was feared more than Jack the Ripper). As years passed he was found guilty of all sorts of sexual crimes ranging from public indecency to brutal acts of rape. Later he would seduce and get his sister-in-law to participate in an orgy, enraging both his wife and mother-in-law. Things actually get worse from this point on.
In 1772 he is given the death penalty for his crimes but escapes to Italy. He was then sort of banished from Paris and sent to his wife's family home in Normandy (why she was still with him I haven't the foggiest idea). From 1773 - 1777 he had a harem of young girls he used as sexual slaves. He arranged orgies and had several more scandals before being sentenced to 27 years in prison, that death sentence seemed to go away. It began in a dungeon in Vincennes. During his imprisonment he decided to curve his boredom by writing sexually graphic novels and plays.
After an escape attempt he was transferred to Bastille in Paris in 1784. During this time he wrote Les 120 Journess de Sodome. This became an underground "classic" for over a hundred years. A movie of the piece was made sometime in the 1970s. He was released from an insane asylum in 1790, after which his wife finally obtained a divorce. I am still curious as to why she waited so long.
He then wrote and published Justine (1791) and Juliette (1797) the sequel. These are two of his most famous works. These were about two sisters who, upon being orphaned, begin leading separate but equally depraves lifestyles. He sent a copy to Napoleon in 1803 and this only upset him. He then refused to say de Sade free, since he gone back into prison during this time.

de Sade's explanation for his work goes a little something like this: God is evil and denying this fact only gets you punished, hence Justine's awful treatment in the story (I read one excerpt from it and could hardly stomach that one paragraph). He believed it was our nature to be wicked and act accordingly. He thinks you should act on your instincts...nope. The people who's instincts are to rape and other such things wind up in prison for good reason. We punish these things not because we are trying to make people unhappy but because we want to protect individuals and uphold a good and moral society.
What bothers me the most is how he managed to survive the French Revolution. The only way he avoided being beheaded was to write a eulogy for Marat, the subject of controversy during the Revolution as well as the subject of my favorite painting by David. He played his cards effectively.
It is interesting that in the century following de Sade there was a very definite split between sexual perversions and a complete turn away from anything even remotely sexual. The Victorian era showed us angel-like women with heroic men juxtaposed to a seedy underbelly. The release of de Sade's work created a disturbing awakening. Things people previously thought were wrong became something to try.
"Maybe my depraved thoughts are normal. I shouldn't be worried about my soul."
No. No they are not. You should be concerned that these thoughts enter into your mind.Orgies and brutal rape are not and never will be okay. You feel ashamed of these acts for a reason, some are less sensitive to it than others but the shame is there all the same. People often cite the love letters of James Joyce, but I have read those, and while a little weird, they are pretty tame. These sexual perversions we so readily accept as eccentricities are leading a swift downfall of any honor. dignity, or pride our society had left. de Sade is why snuff films are made.
People will argue with me that de Sade was just writing what we think and want to do. But that can't possibly be true. There are people, upon reading his work, said that those thoughts had never occurred to them and the idea was revolting. de Sade and his followers represent the minority. de Sade believed in decadence and violent, sexual acts. He was everything any decent individual would vilify. They were called perversions for a reason, this isn't a miss-labeling, it is an accurate depiction of how truly far a society can crumble. See that abyss over there?

vegans...

Normally, i would never really be bothered anyone's choice to partake in or avoid the consumption of meat or other by-products of animals. But recently I was at work where I was scoffed at for ordering a chicken sandwich. If you don't eat meat, that is just fine, I don't care. Judging me for the consumption of meat is a waste of both of our times. I am not going to get into some argument with you (and I know you are just waiting for me to argue with you so you can fight about your stance - and I know this is not true for all of them) But the fact is, your refusal of meat products is in and of it self a judgement on me for eating meat. Every time you eat the veggie burger while I eat my regular burger -with cheese- it's like a snide comment or eye roll. I'm not gonna make a big deal about it so why are you? And besides, it is nearly impossible to be entirely vegan, and here is why:

So, unless you plan to live in the woods and live off the land without any modern materials...you are not a true vegan.
This isn't meant to offend, more to inform and sort of vent. If you don't eat meat because it's a health issue or just a diet you are trying (like my friend Trey) that is fine and acceptable, if you think eating animals is wrong that is a whole other issue. I don't think you're awesome because you don't eat meant, I love animals too (I have the cutest cats ever), but I am also logical. I have seen animals killed and it does make me sad, but so do lots of thing. God didn't make chickens just so they could be adorable, he also made them yummy and full of protein and other vitamins our bodies need.
 Just taking ethics out of the equation we are left with whether or not it is entirely healthy to be vegan. When you first start eliminating things from your diet your body goes through a detox that is very good for it, I do it myself from time to time. But eventually your body will need to go back to eating meat and getting dairy. I mean a vegan diet is high in fiber, low fat, and full of all sorts of nutrients, it has it's benefits. The better idea would be to have a well-balanced diet.

Hybrid Animals: Our Favorite, Morally Questionable Science Experiment

So today Joshua and I were "stumbling" on the internet. We can across a web page all about various animal hybrids, while I know things like the liger existed before, some of the others things listed bothered me. I'm all for an adorable, but ridiculously impractical zebra-pony hybrid, but this only opens up the flood gates, or can of worms if you will, to other increasingly terrifying animals. I'm willing to accept the cama and the pumapard, but explain to me the need for the spider-goat. While this little guy is utterly adorable, I can only imagine the unavoidable chaos that will ensue when they become more spider than goat. Scientists claim their goal was to create this deceiving chimera was to harvest the silk from their milk for it's various applications, like random medical uses with ligaments and tendons. While that reason is all well and good...why are we involving goats, or any mammal for that matter? (sort of sounds like a weird pokemon...but what type could it possibly be?)
We should probably start with some basic explanations about hybrids and how they are possible:
1. single cross hybrids - results from the cross between two true breeding organisms and produces and F1 generation (F1 meaning filial, all meaning first offspring). That's like breeding a black cat with a white cat, to put it simply. Does anyone remember those mendel boxes in science glass sometime in junior high? Kinda like that.
2. double cross hybrids - results between the cross of two different F1 hybrids.
3. three-way cross hybrids (not in the dirty way, just the equally morally questionable way) - resulting from the cross between and F1 hybrid and one from a different inbred line. No banjos here.
4. triple cross hybrids - resulting from crossing two different three-way cross hybrids.
5. population hybrids - resulting from crossing plants or animals in a population with another population. These include crosses between organisms such as inter-specific hybrids (these are from the same genus, like horses and donkeys, hence the mule).
These population hybrids are the increasingly disturbing ones, and I still don't know where the spider-goat fits in. Though I fully support the creation of real life pokemon. Make me a Squirtle and a Piplup, I will evolve them myself! But that isn't even the most disturbing of the hybrids I have read about. And this brings us to the parahuman hybrids. Yes, human. We are this close (holding my fingers very closely together) to having a real life The Island of Dr. Moreau by H. G. Wells. Scientists have successfully put human DNA into mouse embryos as well as produced mice that produce human eggs and sperm. And in 2003 the Chinese successfully fussed human DNA with rabbit eggs. Then they made a mouse with a brain that was 1% human. Why? WHY?
Scientists argue that doing this can give us better knowledge as to how the body works, and help us produce better drugs or antibiotics, better immune-systems to study AIDS and create more viable organs, and blah blah blah. Say what you will scientists, we all know you are just doing this for fun, to push the limits as far as you can. Eventually we are going to create a hybrid that is more human than we could imagine. Then we are going to go all king Minos on it, a reference to my Minotaur post. What will we do with him/her? Study them in a lab the duration of their life? Remember the movie Splice or The Fly? Nothing worked out for anyone, pretty sure God was just pissed. Making a human and nonhuman chimera is unethical, let's be honest. The only reason we are doing this is to elongate human life. Our fear of death and the afterlife is so crippling that we will do anything to stave it off. Sounds like something Mr. Burns would fund.
Make your Zonys(ies?) and Ligers, but stop trying to make mice that can create human DNA or goats that create spider silk for whatever reason. There are plenty of hybrids that exist naturally of course, but we are just pushing the envelope now. I'm also against designer babies, by the way. Eliminating the chances of getting genetic disorders is acceptable, but aiming for the perfect blue-eyed girl seems a little 1930s Germany to me.


But seriously, make me one of these:
I will name him Edwin.

Joshua's views on John Lennon