#indefenseof

I carry a Swiss Army knife. Throughout my life, I've carried many Swiss Army knives. They are incredibly useful tools for the middle-aged man. I love their design, how they can get so many useful (and useless) tools into such a compact space. They’re a pocket-sized marvel of ingenious engineering. 

My current knife is the Victorinox SwissChamp Swiss Army Knife. I got it for Father's Day in 2016 after my last SwissChamp was confiscated by an over-zealous security guard working the metal detectors at an Astros game.  

"You can't bring that knife in here, sir. You need to leave it in your car." 

"I can't. I Ubered here." 

"Well you can't bring it in." 

"What do you mean? The blade doesn't even lock. What am I going to do? Corkscrew someone to death." I thought this was a rock-solid point, but truthfully, the sarcasm is probably where I lost any chance I might have had for bringing the knife in the stadium.

"No weapons are allowed in the ballpark, sir." 

"Goddammit. It's not a weapon."

 "It can hurt someone, sir. I can't let you in with a weapon." 

"You sell bats in the gift shop. Someone can do a lot more damage with those than you can with my Swiss Army knife."

 "Are we going to continue to have a problem, sir?" 

Reluctantly, I turned the knife over and let my buddies buy me beer to compensate for my loss. But the good news is that I got to buy a new Swiss Army knife. Yay! 

As mentioned above, some of the tools in my Swiss Army Knife are useful and some aren't, so the following is a ranking of the tools, from least to most useful. 

22. Straight Pin: For some unknown reason, this comes with a stainless steel pin. It's hidden in a tiny hole that can only be accessed by pulling up the corkscrew. I didn't even know that I had a straight pin until I accidentally stumbled on to it many months after I got the knife. While I like how cleverly it's hidden, it’s useless unless I want to give myself a stick and poke India ink tattoo.

21. Reamer/Punch/Sewing Eye: All my belts still fit my waist with their their original holes so the ability to poke holes in leather is lost on me. 

       Addressed with sincerity to the generally of beings,

        Pleasantries to the community of sexually attractive thems. We are here today, the entire community of mutually supportive microentities that constitute my deceptively independent corpus, to persuade constituents of all universes with which we currently maintain contact that bipedalism is not only the true history of sentience but also the future.

       We know, dear beings, that this is a controversial claim on both counts. At question is our lowest-common denominator value: efficiency. How could two legs be more efficient than our four? Even if it happened in the past, clearly the great evolutionary conscious guided us away, into our current pristine form. And yet, dear ones, we must protest. We will begin with evidence that past eons of sentient beings were, indeed, bipedal.

       First, shoeboxes. We have well established how shoes were erroneously used to cover obviously superior bare feet, in an era when Homo sapiens feared nature. However, a dismissal of their adherence to capitalism has led some along us to unwisely discount the crucial evidence of their containers - my dear friends, only two shoes could fit per box. To those who claim they sold back and front pairs separately, please see the slide behind me illustrating new decoding of the archaic lettering on the boxes themselves, indicating independent sale.

       Secondly, photographs. Much art before our current age was destroyed in the literal fires of revolution that ushered in our civilization. Until a few years ago, I believed that the remaining pieces depicting bipedalism were fanciful, images of sapiens wishing prepubescence lasted forever, that adulthood and the attendant growth of final appendages could be put off eternally. I no longer believe this. Look at today's radicals, my dears. Suspend, briefly, the hegemonic narrative that their digital reclamation of ancient artistic data is false. Try trusting them - Instagram was real. So was Facebook. And so were all the endearingly naive bipedals you can see throughout the reconstructed "world wide web."

       They were certainly flawed - the scary separation of sentients by reproductive role, the false impression of individual entativity and will, the lack of comprehension of physics, the total inability to communicate with even the close parallel universes - these were real errors. But our local-farm-grown offspring have these flaws, and we consider them beings, do we not? Why is bipedalism dangerous? Why does it scare us to the marrow of our bird-fragile bones? Think about our hospitals, our airborne cities, our complacency. Think about the pain of growing your third and fourth legs, how little you could do during that time, how much you loved and appreciated your surrounders, wanting to be them. We are here, in public, to suggest that quadrupedalism efficiently integrated us but degraded non-aggregate competence. Will you hear us?

       [restive noises from crowd]

       Ultimately last, we are here to tell you we bent the consensus-based guidances of communal conduct. We took a time-shifter into the ages of white noise, specifically 2018. We are sorry to tell you that you have all been deceived - travel then is not only possible, it is arousing and fascinating. By travelling with friendly people - called "carnies" in their own time - we were able to pass undetected and forge truly intimate relationships, with ubiquitous carnal connections but an honest exchange of feelings so shamelessly out of vogue today. One of the carnies we held dear agreed to come back with us, and has been quietly living in nimbus central for nine months. Today, right now, we present to you our perfect partner and the beautiful bipedal product of our personal coitus - the future. Dear ones, meet Argus and Phoebus.

       [gasps]

       [gunshot]

       [screams]

The Kim Kardashian Paper Magazine cover shoot has sparked a lot of debate. The one I want to enter, however, has been posed by The Business Women Media writer Amanda Rose, who recently published an article titled "Thank You Kim Kardashian for Showing Us How We're Doing it Wrong." Rose says, under heavily sarcastic tones, that we must thank Kim K for showing true, educated, motivated, smart, talented young business women how to really get ahead. She writes: 

"To think women across the globe are fighting to be heard, for a right to be educated, for a right to equal pay and equal positions based on merit, and to be respected as the fantastic creature they are. But all along they just needed a naked butt" (Read full article here) 

Rose continues with: 

"Yep. Who needs a degree and career when you can just strip naked for a magazine? I mean… Hello. That would save a lot of grief, time and effort for so many of us! All this time we have been strategic in how we look. Working hard to stay fit and healthy and covering up enough to ensure we receive respect in a business setting. Thank you Kim for letting every aspiring business woman and young girl know that 'naked is the only way to make it.'" 

First of all, Amanda Rose, you wouldn't earn much of anything posing naked on the cover of a magazine. And secondly, why is a publication that is by definition a women's business and media outlet shaming a fellow successful woman in business and media? You should be embarrassed to bring such a snarky attitude to an otherwise professional publication, pitting woman against woman on your very homepage. 

I'm not mad at Kim K, we can start there. If she weren't involved in any other business ventures, I probably wouldn't be able to respect her. But Kim doesn't just pose naked. She didn't just have a sex tape, she didn't just date a famous rapper (and basketball player, and now rapper again).  She and her family launched one of the most successful reality shows of all time, airing for now nine seasons. They've since launched a spin off show, three boutiques and a fashion retail site, a cosmetics line, tanning products, and seven different perfumes. These are no small feats. These are legitimate business ventures that someone who writes for The Business Woman Media would perhaps recognize? 

Kim Kardashian, in all her literal perfect glory, is the Marilyn Monroe of our generation. Marilyn was adored, got around, and wasn't known for her conservative clothing choices. "But Marilyn Monroe was an actress," the haters cry. "That's a true artistic talent." My first response is...have you ever actually seen a Marilyn Monroe movie? A clip even? Do you stand atop any reputable source when you rush to defend the talents of Monroe? Probably not. But you know who she is, what she looks like, and that she was a sex symbol. 

My second response is that being a reality TV show superstar is not not a talent. Imagine all the people in your immediate circle. Now imagine watching their day-to-day life for an hour on Sunday night at 8:00PM. 

Yeah. 

"We're accustomed to our performers having onstage and backstage registers," writes Amanda Fortini, who penned the Paper article. "...but for her [Kim Kardashian] there is no division between the two. This is, indeed, the definition of a reality star."

I should put it out there that I'm new to this pro-Kardashian side of the argument. I myself was brought to near nausea at the thought of watching these indulgently rich girls drenched in make-up wine about their lives. But I've since started watching the show, and at the very least I'm entertained. Which is one of the sole goals and purposes of television. 

The Kardashians have locked onto a undeniable and valid trend of our time: We are into watching each other do really simple shit. In a way, the Kardashians are our Brady Bunch. Only they are not made up. So what's wrong with their show being popular?

It's dangerous place to be when we start shaming women for leveraging success off physical attributes. We are women. We are works of art, and have been since being cast in plaster. The woman's body is her tool. And in a male dominated, hyper-masculine workforce we are working at a disadvantage just by having these wonderful, coveted vaginas, so why not fucking use 'em. 

I am a huge supporter of "use what's in your arsenal." We are operating at a deficit, and if you happen to be able to use your physical appearance as a way to be heard, or noticed, or respected, or brought in as partner, or sky rocket to CEO, then hell baby, throw on that Chanel No. 5, that perfect shade of red, the damn stilettos, and get to work. We are living in an age where teenage girls are told not to wear shorts or tank tops to school so as to not distract the boys from learning. The last thing we need to do is attack a woman for simply showing off her (insanely perfect) body. 

Success isn't just a degree, a business suit, and the corporate ladder climb to a corner office. And a woman's success shouldn't be defined, or criticized, for how far she's strayed from playing what's really designed to be a man's game anyway. Amanda Rose, your article sounded like a long rant from a jealous woman. Kim Kardashian hasn't sent a flood of young girls rushing into the porn industry. And if she has, so the fuck what? 

My first suggestion! Not exactly what I would ask for but suggestions aren't asked for. Let's get a little personal, shall we?

It's incredibly easy to give up, isn't it? Of course the hard road is obviously more difficult. Work. Effort. Time. Why bother? Why try? Are we afraid of failure, or success? Do we want to put the effort in at all? I say we, because I am very, very much part of this group. I am a defeatist at heart, apparently. Part of me knew this, but it was brought to the forefront by a friend, the same friend that suggested this piece. Keep in mind, I have no intention of changing. Nothing so far has led me to change my lifestyle, and a friend pointing it out won't make a difference. I, like most defeatists, or fatalists if you want to go there as well, are most likely waiting for a sign from God himself to change who they are, and nothing less will suffice.

Older people will attribute this to being a "Millennial" which is a tremendous amount of bullshit. How many public figures do you know that have a startup that is now worth billions of dollars? How many people can you list that have designed an app that changes your life? Calling people Millennials is grouping people into an almost bigoted section. Defeatism has nothing to do with being a Millennial. Defeatism is.. learned. There are two different types of defeatists: those that are privileged, and choose the ideal, and those that have forced it on themselves. You can be both, of course, but you still fall into the defeatist category. Let's dissect both. Privilege: the best example I can give you is Elliot Rodger. This boy was born into a life of privilege. Son of a producer of mainstream movies, driving a BMW, simply mad because he had no social skills to get him laid - and he wasn't an unattractive boy, not the best, but I've seen worse get fucked. The point is, even at his age, he was a defeatist, and the worst kind that ended in tragedy. Forced: these are the saddest cases. There are mild people: "Oh my art is so bad." when it's not. "Oh my writing is shit." when it's not. "Oh my music is terrible." when it's not. I fit into this category, specifically the second example. Personal story time, I spent ten years following and reinforcing an artist's ego to no avail, and it led me to heartbreak. I thought we were more than we were, and he did not. Perhaps his defeatism contributed to mine, but in any case, you have to throw your hands up and say "Enough." Part of this type of defeatism is a cry for attention, the other part is basically beating yourself up.

Defeatism is comfortable. It's easy to sit back and shake your head at what you have created, or what you're trying to accomplish. As I said before: the hard road is more difficult. It's simple to try and fail and shrug and give the fuck up. It's easy to turn to your friends and look for affirmation, because you know they'll give it, right or not. It's comfortable, it's soft and loving and easy. Easy. Defeat is easy, when it's brought about by you alone. Well this was god damned depressing, fuck taking requests. Did I defend defeatism or did I cure myself of it? What the fuck.

WOO guns. I personally own two, and haven't seen them in.. about five years. However, let's set ourselves on those that keep one under their pillow and think how they think. Have you ever fired a gun? Held it in your hands and pulled the trigger? Shotguns: the kick of both barrels as pellets soar to your target. Rifles: The precision you feel when you align those crosshairs and that bullet goes exactly where you want it. Handguns: A semi-auto kickfest in your wrist putting round after round in that target. All of these are tremendously satisfying.

Let's start with sports. The Summer Olympics have rifling events, and even going to your local clay pigeon range isn't hurting anyone. There is no harm in these practices. There is no one (or no animal) hurt in the process. But as the guns get smaller, the controversy gets larger. Protection is a part of gun ownership, but not the majority. With any other community, as I've written about before, the squeakiest wheel gets the oil - the loudest is the one that's heard. One does have a right to keep a weapon in their household for their protection, well, depending on their state. Plenty of people feel a lot safer with a firearm close at hand in case there is an intruder in their house, and that's their perogative. Many of the same people inhabit states that abide by the Castle Doctrine. Whether or not they would exercise this right/law is a different story. The Constitution does proclaim a right to bear arms, however it's the ones that proclaim this in protests and parades that are the ones that are heard. You never hear of the man that collects shotguns for the intricate engravings that a local weaponsmith crafts, or the ones that inherit heirlooms of guns that they keep simply because it reminds them of their loved ones.

What you hear are the ones that politicize things. God forbid I go into political side of things, where lobbyists argue for both sides. Each side has its own argument for yes or no, but the absolute is: the Constituion gives a man his right to bear arms. Amendments have been made to clarify this, and even states have refined it further, but there is no denying that - as of now - there is nothing stopping a man from posessing a firearm, and in most cases, using it in his defense. That said, I'm going to go buy an Airsoft gun and poke my friends with it.

As a man, the concept of something growing inside of me is akin to being implanted with an alien. The fact that women can see a foot pushing out from their stomach is tremendously revolting, because it's a GOD DAMNED FOOT INSIDE OF YOU. However, it is the circle of life, and it needs to happen. Now, let's place ourselves in the other shoe and see why it doesn't. Let's get this out of the way first: rape. It happens. Unfortunately, it happens. And the criminals don't always use condoms, so, pregnancy is a factor that comes into it. Now, this is like sitting astride a fence: this fetus, baby, whatever you want to call it is half you. Half yours. But it's also a reminder of what you went through. You cannot fault a woman for wanting an unwanted pregnancy out of her. To be reminded daily of what you went through, and then when the child asks how he or she was conceived? That is a burden no person should bear.

Rape is an extenuating circumstance, one that leans more towards termination rather than going through with it. But what about consensual sex and the pregnancy that results from it? How do you deal with that? Citing statistics here would be unreasonable, because having an abortion comes down to feeling. Do you want the baby? Are you prepared to deal with nine months of hard work? Can you handle it after the baby is born? Would your boyfriend/ex/spouse support you? And on the other hand, if you did have the abortion, could you deal with what could have been? Would you constantly second guess yourself? Having the procedure done is painless - not emotionally, we're not talking about that - but physically. Numbed up, having it done is surprisingly simple. It's literally an outpatient procedure, but it's the emotion, the consequences that haunt women if they're not prepared. But who could be prepared for such a thing? It's a tremendously difficult choice to make. In a crude reference, almost as if you're Caesar with his thumb in the air waving between up and down, but being emotionally invested in the outcome.

Think about what options women had before abortion was discovered. Adoption, forced miscarriage, raising a child you didn't want, or, hell, putting a pillow over their face. It doesn't matter what you think of abortion, it gives women another choice in what they're biologically made to do: whether it's consensual or not. That said, I'm glad I'm not a woman because I live with two of them and if I had PMS like I've observed, I'd seal my vagina up immediately.