wine, drink of the ignorant snob

vapid, empty, and self-loathing – the perfect woman

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9849949-39.html

okay, okay; it’s not just wine.  if this stanford/cit study proves right, it could mean the end of objective comparisons in many categories.  it’s just that wine connoisseurs always seem like such asses, so why not pick on them?  anyways, for those people who think a fine palette for fermented grape juice lends some amount of refined dignity to your character, let me be perfectly clear that you are a tool.

“Researchers from the California Institute of Technology and Stanford’s business school have directly seen that the sensation of pleasantness that people experience when tasting wine is linked directly to its price. And that’s true even when, unbeknownst to the test subjects, it’s exactly the same Cabernet Sauvignon with a dramatically different price tag.”

your brain is simply tasting what it wants based on expectations.  so, all those stupid classes you took in napa valley were for naught.  it was actually just a huge scam to part a fool from his money, and it taught you a meaningless lesson that covered up a very basic and simple idea; the more you pay, the more you enjoy.

to anyone hoping to become a wine aficionado, i would strongly suggest curbing that urge.  of course, there are those people who are just such huge tool sheds that no amount of self control will prevent them from indulging in every superficial avenue of ego stroking and opportunity to be a smug bastard.  to those people, i would like to announce that we are on to you.  your worthlessness is beyond repair and no matter what you do, people will see you for how meaningless your existence is.

the long winding road to fast cars

recently, i lost my one and only copy of call of duty 4 to an act of violence unparalleled in modern history. i cannot think of a single moment, let alone a stretch of time within the past two centuries in which more violations to human rights were committed than in the single instance my dad scratched up my cod4 disc. surely forced relocation and non-consensual euthanasia pale in comparison to the atrocity of losing the best online multiplayer game in recent years. it was also like $50 when i got it. needless to say, i’ve been forced to revisit my games of yore, sometimes reaching back as far as a year. talk about retro gaming. anyway, i’ve taken up relearning the joys of kissing the apex and tuning gear ratios with a fun little game called forza 2 motorsport.

during a particularly tedious run of the nürburgring nordschleife track (not nearly as fun as pronouncing the name), my mind began wandering off as i grew weary of the monotonous forests of germany (this explains my traffic record). soon i was pondering how best to answer a question that’s been popping up occasionally among the girls i know. “why do they advertise 0-60 in car commercials?” or the declarative variant, “i hate when they advertise 0-60 in car commercials.”

the argument goes that it’s needless to purchase a car for its acceleration or performance because it is so rare that one can truly enjoy the g’s when driving during the typical excursion. nor is it rational to purchase a car with racing credentials when you are clearly not a professional race car driver. while i am quick to cede the argument that performance cars are not rational purchases, i find it ironic to hear women preaching the virtues of rational spending.

to put it in the simplest terms, performance sports cars are luxury items. they fall into the same category as designer shoes. clearly, you don’t need 20 pairs of shoes to get by, nor do you need one that’s worth over $500. you’re never going to use them, just like the 500 ft lbs of torque we will never use on the road. it’s not a matter of practicality, it’s a matter of luxury. you’d be hard pressed to find a person who doesn’t dream of indulging in some needless expenditures, whether it be a 6 bath mansion, a $3,000 guitar, or even a 52″ plasma. it’s just that simple. in america, we value luxury. if you want a no-frills lifestyle, i suggest moving to guatemala; and unless you’re prepared to swear off all the frivolous crap you enjoy, i would suggest you stop asking why 0-60 is a legitimate concern to some people.

insight in incest

thank you, wonder showzen, for this extremely disturbing/hilarious insight into the intricate implications of incest.  wash those dirty hands, boy.

activist guilt

it is no secret that i view activism to be a very amorphous and unstable endeavor, but recently i came to a unique understanding. it is something i have dubbed activist guilt, something i wish i’d see more of. this is the guilt that one suffers for being an activist in a cause that does not effect him/her. a prime example is the war on iraq. we all know that everybody is a-hootin’ and a-hollerin’ about how misguided and terrible this war is, but consider how many people are actually negatively impacted by this war. the only people who truly suffer by this act are the soldiers and their families. the rest of us americans are simply losing a bit of money in the way of taxes and hopefully, we’ll make that up in the form of oil in the near future. even if we don’t, we can’t possibly compare our economic grief with those of the families who must actually sacrifice. however, a great many of us are in opposition to this war as if it were a child molester trying to put an early end to our childhoods, even though we have no direct connection to the effects of the conflict. we rage on and on about the moral wrongness of this military endeavor, yet we have given nothing, lost nothing, felt nothing of the consequences. does it not seem slightly foolish for one such as myself, who has given nothing to this war, to raise my voice and cry foul like i’ve sent my dearest child to be killed in a foreign desert? what of the families who willingly and bravely part with their sons and daughters for the sake of this war, giving them up for a cause which people who have given nothing so vehemently attack and oppose. aren’t they the only ones who truly have a moral right to object? consider this on an even higher scale. for everything that improves, something else must degrade. that is the fundamental law of this world. to become richer is to take another’s money. in order to live better, someone else must live worse. if you want socioeconomic equality for the less fortunate, then you must bear the consequences on your shoulders. pay those sweat shop workers higher wages and everything you buy will increase in price. if you let the middle east use their oil to better their national infrastructure and support their citizens, then you must be willing to pay the oil prices that inevitably begin to rise. so, to simply speak of these things in agitation and thoughtless emotional outbursts is a slap in the face to those who must actually bear the cross upon their backs. without your own personal sacrifice and action to truly make change, you are doing nothing more than mimicking the frustration of the poor souls that actually suffer. there are those who exhibit this quality of insubstantial concern for matters which they do not fully understand or are unwilling to sacrifice for, most commonly the apple demographic. their lifestyles are a superficial concern over the appearance of injustice and moral wrongness, but an inevitable lack of initiative and understanding for how things truly work. sadly, most of them are probably too weak-minded to even understand why i attack them, only that it’s not very nice. for those of you offended, please accept my apologies. you are great people. i’m amazed how you are able to maintain social awareness and political activism while also managing to be so trendy. your lives are an inspiration to us all. i can only hope that one day, my macbook helps me to solve poverty in latin america like yours undoubtedly can. also, you’re always so pretty and well-kept. you’re great at sports. you’re funny and witty. despite your beauty, people are interested in you because of your engaging personalities. you will one day be great humanitarians and be known for your great deeds of compassion, as well as your popularity, trendiness, and aphrodite-like comeliness. people will be so awestruck by your many qualities of greatness that they won’t know which to worship more and simply fall into an ecstatic state of incapacitated convulsing brought on by the overwhelming sense of reverence; unable to control their bodies, they can do nothing but arch their backs in the orgasmic joy that your presence alone elicits.

higher thinking

lately, a question has been making appearances in my head every time i blaze up. it’s a strange question that i can’t ever get an answer to, but a question that interests me with its profound implications. is there someone out there who thinks the way i do when i’m high, but when they’re sober? allow me to clarify. clearly, when a person is high, their minds function slightly differently. i personally notice more things on a social level. i tend to empathize more quickly and more extensively with other people, even if it’s just my personal interpretation of their behaviors. i will envision histories, personalities, backgrounds to people i’ve never met and know nothing about, solely based on my first impressions of their appearances and behaviors. i am quicker to believe things, more willing to lose myself in a movie or tv show. i analyze situations and pick up on little details. for example, in the new j. j. abrams movie 1-18-08, i realized that apparently everyone in manhattan is beautiful and they all go to parties where other beautiful people congregate. now, my question is, aside from the lack of focus and slow reaction time, is there a person who thinks like that normally? is it too difficult to believe that the psychotropic effects of thc include a kind of personality shift? i think not. it’s an interesting idea to juggle around. it opens one up to the possibility that the experience of life is limited only by our psychological schema and that there are ways of thinking that we simply aren’t capable of when our minds are normally adjusted. i’ve often wondered about the deficiencies of human experience and this question touches on the same nerve. a monkey could never understand the full and complete mental processes of a human. so is it too difficult to believe that human thinking is just a step away from another, more comprehensive, more enlightening, and currently incomprehensible form of consciousness? like monkeys to men, are men just apes to another higher form of thought?

top 10 things that make you feel manly

10. smoking a cigar

9. winning an argument, especially if you know you’re wrong

8. watching sports on tv

7. owning ur friends at any game; monopoly, halo, basketball, oiled greek wrestling

6. listening to a girl moan in your bed

5. making a girl cum

4. killing a huge animal with a rifle

3. pretending to be colin mcrae in a really expensive car

2. 2 girls at once

1. providing for your family

now, because so many men can do this, the number one manliest feeling doesn’t seem exceptionally manly, but it is the kind of thing that you won’t understand fully till it actually happens. if you just think about it for a second, providing for your family is the epitome of being a man, as it fulfills every emotional, social, and even evolutionary need of the male half of our species. it was a hard choice between providing and 2 girls at once, but in the end, i figured that while 2 girls at once might be extremely pleasing, it only impresses half of the population, whereas being a good provider impresses everyone, boys and girls, and we all know that every man wants to be admired.