Happy New Years!

Just wanted to wish everyone a happy new years, hopefully the next will be just as good (or if you're a cynic like me - better.)
#1 Tip for new years:

Don't get drunk and die.

If you're going to die, do it sober, and if you're doing to get drunk, don't die doing it.

Simple. Easy. Effective. (sounds like a condom commercial.)

IAU and nude pictures

Okay so I'm a little late to the Isanyoneup.com debate, although not late in viewing it. If anyone is curious they can go ahead and check it out, although it's definitely NSFW.

I'm more concerned with the legality of the issue. At this point it seems pretty clear that it's not illegal to post these images on a website. There is however an issue of whether or not the person who takes the pictures of themselves (self-shots) actually owns the rights to the photography, in which case they may request them taken down for copyright reasoning.

Should it be illegal? Do we have the personal right to ownership in any photograph we are in? I personally think so. To me privacy is much more important than anything else. We should own any photograph we are in and have a choice as to what happens to it. In saying this, I don't actually feel sorry for the people who are on this website. I mean if you're stupid enough to take nude pictures of yourself, you will end up facing consequences (some of them will never be the same.) Relationships don't last forever, so if you actually care about not being seen naked then you shouldn't take pictures to begin with.

I do think, though, that having naked pictures of yourself floating around shouldn't tarnish your reputation. It's along the exact same lines as tattoo's. Tattoos are by and large looked down upon in professional work environments. My question is why? They're ink on your skin. They may or may not say something about you, but it's just as irrelevant as what you choose to wear clothing-wise outside of work or school. These naked pictures are along the same lines; does it really matter that you've been seen naked? The two aren't analogous but they're both choices that have been deemed bad for arbitrary reasons. These expectations are from yesteryear, like elvis dancing was inappropriate, yesteryear.

Both of these concerns just seem so f*cking trivial at this point that I don't understand where the issue resides. If only social expectations didn't shape our futures then maybe we would stand a reasonable chance to be who we are around others without fearing who they think we are, should be, or could be.


It's after christmas but screw it; Bah Humbug.

I'm back: Christmas & Nonsense

Alright, out of the exam and winter abyss I’m back. I don’t really have anything prepared, so I thought I’d just share how my Christmas went. Christmas was great, although it hasn’t always been in years past. Everyone has their own dynamic with Christmas or any holiday for that matter in this time of season. I myself am an Atheist, but Christmas is Pagan anyways so who are we kidding?

The best thing about Christmas is spending time with family. The worst part is spending time with family. They’re not mutually exclusive. Everyone has at least usually one person in their family they relate to and enjoy spending time with (if you don’t, don’t QQ to me in the comments) for me it’s my brother and sister. However being all warm and heartfelt isn’t me, so instead I’ll talk about the weird moments of Christmas, or just all around crazy ones. Remember that time when your sister brought over a drunk obnoxious friend who lit fireworks inside a closed porch and it bounced off three walls and still missed four people? I do, and if I didn’t it would be because I’m dead. Or when a rogue firework goes off in the wrong direction and you realized that had it gone off in the same direction as you then you’d be suffering third degree burns? I’m noticing a trend with fireworks.

What about weird uncles? I’ve got one, but he doesn’t show up. You know the really racist uncle that thinks people who drive vans go together in herds? (I will say there’s some truth to that.) How about cousins with self-entitlement because their daddies make good money?

Anyways, I’ll start posting regularly again soon here, tell me your wacky Christmas stories in the comments.

Update

Just an update- I'm pretty busy with exams right now, so posts will be fewer than usual.

Nice Guys

(links NSFW)
Recently I was involved in a gigantic discussion about "nice" guys. The post was an image that looked something like this. Or at least that’s all it reminded me of. Yes, it is true that there is a thing known as the “friend zone” and I’m sure many of my fellow males have fallen victim to it at least once in their lives. So-called “nice” guys tend to fall in it more often. However does this really have anything to do with being Nice, or does it have something to do with being awesome. If you’re going to cry about why girls always fall for the “assh*les” then you’re likely not attempting to pick up the right kind of woman; an intelligent one.

Perhaps intelligence and maturity should share responsibility in this post, when I say one, I really mean either of them. Females between the ages of 16-24 are much more concerned with social standing than they are with finding the “perfect” boy, and males between the ages of 16-24 are much more concerned with getting laid. This means that if you have social standing, or at least seem like you do, it’s much easier to get laid. This attraction is created by not giving a f*ck. Any alpha will tell you that if you’re preoccupied or worried about what the girl is thinking, you’re doing it wrong. That means creating a perception that you are above her in social standing, which means that she will want you more. You cannot do this by being a “nice” (pansy) guy.

Before any females make a comment talking about how you’re nothing like the above, that’s because it’s working. You don’t think about hooking up with the alpha because he’s presenting as a higher social standing, you just do it because confidence is sexy.

There will be women who see through the alpha bullshit however. If you’re presenting as confident, but you’re still a blundering idiot the intelligent ones will figure it out, and move on. These are the intelligent ones I mentioned earlier. However, confidence is never “unsexy” so take it as a life lesson, if you’re a “nice” guy; you’re really just not forward enough. You don’t take charge of situations, you present as rather clumsy or aloof. You may not be aware of social situations, you’re too sensitive, and you’re too caring. All of these qualities can be good in small amounts, just not when it becomes too much. You’ll know it becomes too much when you think you’re being nice. If you’ve been called a nice guy and you think of doing something nice for a girl, don’t do it. It’s probably too nice. That sounds rather ridiculous, but at this age it’s true. Women tend to put anything under a magnifying glass. If something meets your “nice standards” then it’ll blow hers out of the water. Also, if something meets your “mean standards” (otherwise known as being an ass) then it’ll blow hers out of the water.
               

I’m no player, I don’t pretend like I even use alpha tactics. In fact, usually I don’t. I don’t go out of my way to appear confident, or not give a shit. Then again, I’m not overly concerned with getting laid. If you’re one of those guys who are dependent on sex and women however, and you’re being called a “nice” guy. Don’t whine. You’re just re-affirming the fact that you aren’t confident and you aren’t sexy. Also don’t complain to prospect girls about other girls. Don’t complain about anything. You’re in control, you’ve got life by the balls, and in return they’ll want yours.

Oh, and if you’re really inept, there is a great YouTube channel called SimplePickup. It’s great for the lulz, and they go over the stuff I just stated, and then some.

The Double Standard

Is anyone else sick of hearing social groups having a problem with just about anything that happens these days? I mean seriously, you can’t do anything without being mobbed by groups of pseudo-intellectual hipsters or illogical zombies void of coherent and valid thoughts, although these two groups aren’t mutually exclusive. Just about any one group at any time is offended by something brought into society. No doubt this blog entry would offend any number of people. My response: F*ck you. I'm offended, I'm offended that you find offensive people offensive, because I am offensive, therefore I'm offended. Be a little more understanding please, this isn't 2011 okay? We don't live in an era where things can be taken as humour instead of politically charged discrimination.

                 

The thing that brought this post on was a recent discussion about the “objectification of women” when an attractive female is placed on the front of a magazine with hardly any clothes. Please remind me, how is she being objectified, unless you are thinking of her as an object anyways? The magazine cannot objectify her; the person perceiving her must do the objectification. It’s the audience’s perception of things that has qualities, not just a picture of a beautiful woman with hardly any clothes. Attractive people are placed in advertisements and at the front of magazines because we like to look at them. Would you want to see a fat, balding man on the front of Cosmo? No. Why would you? Why does not wanting to see out of shape unattractive people make you an “objectifier” of people? I get to see those people every day at my local super market, at my work, and at my school. How do you expect anything to catch your attention if they blended in with the same things you see all day?

 Put an attractive provocative woman on a magazine; Sexism.
Put an unattractive provocative woman on a magazine; O, the Oprah Magazine.

                 

The problem with this blog post is that the response will be I’m a “privilege denier” I clearly don’t understand my privilege in life. I've been in discussions with countless feminists and more often than not I'm called a misogynist before I can even clarify my positions or take a stand. It's become politically incorrect to stand up for men when it comes to gender equality. I’ve sat in one of my classes and was told by my professor that men are the root of all evil. If a male professor had said the same about women he would have been blasted in the media at the least and at the worst; potentially lost his job.
                 

I also find it amusing that you won't find any gay men who are involved in masculism, but you sure find quite a few lesbians who are involved in feminism. It's also sort of hypocritical isn't it? I mean being a lesbian feminist is like being a doctor and a pharmacist. How can I expect an unbiased response from any lesbian feminist if she has no concern over the status and treatment of men, just of women? Heterosexual women are concerned about the treatment of women, but inherently must also be concerned about the treatment of men. They will after all at one point or another fall in love with one (to clarify I'm not saying I don't hope LGBT find someone they love). Also I’m not saying it’s impossible for a lesbian to care about the status of men, she very well could, but it’s not necessary or needed for her to be congruent with her inherent moral framework (this is completely philosophical, so bare with me here.) For example; it’s a contradiction for a man to hate men, because he’s a man. It’s also a contradiction for a heterosexual man to hate women, because he’ll almost certainly procreate, or love one of them at one time or another. It’s not a contradiction however, for a lesbian woman to hate a man, because she has no vested interest.

I also want to take a moment to make a point in saying that I do not feel this way for all feminists. I do think however, that a large majority have made the social movement irrelevant and turned it into a group of misandrists. For example; republicans in America are by and large idiots. That's a strong statement, but I think if you look at the idiots they have over and over again in their primaries, whom they actually take seriously, you’ll come to the same conclusion all the people in the world who aren’t republicans did; they’re idiots. In saying that however, I don't dismiss that there will be intelligent republicans, Ron Paul for example (at least in his foreign and economic policy.) However when you think of the Republican Party, immediately what triggers? Bush, Palin, Romney, Cheney, and countless other idiots. What else triggers? The base of the party; the majority of the people that make up that party and construe what the message was supposed to be about. The right wing nuts, the Bible belt Americans, the pro-war, anti-choice blundering fools. Unfortunately, they make up the majority.

As harsh as that comparison to feminism is, it's true in my experience. At least in university it is. Women who want to make a difference (but don't know how) drag down the rest of the feminists who may be about equal objectives, and instead turn it into man-hating. Forgive me if I hold a stereotype, however it proves to be true more often than not, that's why it's a generalization I hold and many men who have tried to have a discussion with a feminist only to be told off for being a misogynist because their opinion differs.

As with all past victims of inequality, tenderness still remains. It's difficult to have discussions about black Americans, Japanese Canadians, First Nations, and Chinese Canadians etc. including women, without sounding harsh. This harshness though, does not lie in the intentions of the person bringing the subject about; these intentions are automatically generalized to anyone who wants an honest discussion because of past actions of similar people.

 I'm white, middle class, male, and come from a Christian background (ex-Christian now) that literally makes me the image of all hate. I am the epitome of the people who did atrocious and awful acts. Yet I didn't do those things. However, I still can't have an honest discussion without being reminded of things I didn't do, because I look like the people that did do them. This in itself is a form of sexism, and racism, it's discriminatory in embodiment. I hate to remind you all, but you’re no longer a majority if you’re cut in half by your gender, and every other group hates you. All of these thoughts will be ignored, because who cares about the plights of the “majority”.

I am the double standard.

Escalators, Doors, and Hallways

The University I attend is rather small. There’s only about 10, 000 students, its equivalent to a state college, we don’t have any highly reputable universities in my city. That being said, going to the smaller of the two ones we do have; it’s not a big campus. It consists of one main building that has four floors, and then there are a couple buildings in the surrounding area. What this means though, is that everyone is located in one building. You see the same people every day, it’s like some sort of weird adult high school where everyone is already done puberty, and you don’t know anyone’s name.

This rant is about something much, much more important. This rant is about how to properly utilize escalators, stairs, hallways, doors and the act of walking. I will teach you how to properly walk, and no, I don’t know how to get that pretty boy swag. The introduction paragraph wasn’t completely useless; the reason why I mention it is because the main building has a set of escalators that take you to each floor. Everyone uses them, everyone. Everyone. Every. One. Now, these are single file escalators so don’t expect to walk past anyone. There’s a set of stairs between the escalator going up and the one going down. These are also narrow, but why take the stairs when we have magical machines that move up for you? That being said, when there is nobody in front of you and someone behind you on the escalator; WALK UP IT. You aren’t Stephen Hawking; you can do more than one thing at a time. It’s amazing isn’t it? Once you start walking it combines the speed of the escalator with your stepping ability, it’s almost too fast to handle you might say. Well, that is a good point, at what speed does going up stairs become too fast? If you’re too lazy or out of shape to be walking up an escalator, take the stairs. Not because it’s easier but because that way you won’t be in my way, and it will be beneficial for your health.  I’m just looking out for your health here... really.

On to the next one; doors. I can’t teach you how to use a door; you have probably seen them and used them before. If you’re still not sure whether to push or pull, as a general rule try pulling first because if you push first you might run into the door out of excitement (#simpletips.)  However, does anyone else really hate those awkward moments when you aren’t sure whether or not to hold the door for the next person or keep going? There’s no definitive line, there’s this massive grey area where you question yourself. It’s awful, it’s like you’re at a club in Miami and can’t figure out if the person you’re making out with is a man or a woman.  It also entirely depends on the person behind you, if you’re an alpha male and she’s attractive you’ll probably just let go of the door. If you’re any sort of white knight you’ll hold the door. It’s amazing how much holding a door is indicative of who you are as a person. Unfortunately I can’t give you an objective measurement, but generally looking back offers enough sentiment. All I can say is; don’t worry about it. Unless they’re obviously right behind you, you shouldn’t care. IN RETURN when someone is ahead of you, you shouldn’t care either. Together we can make the world a better place, one door at a time. No more death glares people.

Hallways or perhaps this point is better summarized; walking etiquette. DON’T WALK TOGETHER IN HORIZONTAL GROUPS. If I have to be stuck behind you because all of you want to walk parallel to each other, I may get Wayne Brady to choke a bitch. Yes, it tends to be women, and this is not terms for sexual discrimination. Is that really surprising though? The only time you see a group of guys walking next to each other is the start of an epic pre-game moment in a football movie. Either that or some sort of synchronized gang, in which case you should run, run very fast. Also, if I’m stuck behind you I’ll have nothing to do but listen to your conversation, and I will join in. Perhaps it will open up a hole big enough for me to fit through (There’s something the Blue Bombers were missing on Sunday.)

All of that being said, I'm usually the guy with the obnoxiously large gym bag swinging behind me and hitting you in the face on the bus.

Evaluation of Professors

It's that time of the term, at least for my university anyways. I'm not sure how evaluation is done in other universities, or if at all, but at my university it's a simple process. We receive a form paper in which we fill the course information, are given a small comment section, and then are left with two options; satisfactory, and unsatisfactory.

Does anyone else see the problem with this? The only way this could be worse is if it was a "rate your teacher on the following categories on a scale of 1 - 5" type of deal, which I'm sure any slew of unscientific personality testers would love. I mean honestly, the form looks like it could have been given at the end of a car wash. Not only is it completely irrelevant, the form doesn't direct criticism. This leads to situations in which students call their professors c*nts or a variety of colourful words we've all come to love (this actually happens; I had a recent conversation with a professor about them.)

 I have a stats professor who is relatively new at teaching; she just got her PhD last year. Now the mean on the last stats exam was 51. This is stats. Yes, some people may not have an aptitude for mathematics, and yes it is psych stats. But (English majors of the formality variety don't murder me for using "but" to start a sentence) really? I mean when you're in a psych stats class you aren't going to expect a lot of bright people, but 51? The requirements for statistics is junior high math, the hardest part of the course is identifying which formula to apply, because the formulas themselves require no interpretation. It goes without saying that the teacher must be doing an awful job if the average is that low, unless something was in the baby vaccinations around 1992. Now, my critiques would be related to her language barrier (there is more time for that rant later), her presentation has no transition, and she doesn't initiate the class. She also assumes that the class remembers everything they're taught from the past few classes.

University students, Psych students in particular, do NOT keep up to date with their classes. I spend all of my time in catch-up mode with the amount of work I have outside of class, and I manage to make it to the test date up-to-date. However, there's certainly no classes that I actually go into informed. Even the students who don't work go in uninformed. There's little incentive to do so, as professors don't generally mark class participation or insight within class. If you teach assuming they are informed, you're not going to have good results. Also, it's worth repeating, this is psychology.

I could go on forever about this, but it would drag away from my point. All of these points are valid and need to be said. They CANNOT be expressed in the proper context by a small comment section and a little bubble that says "Unsatisfactory." All the bubble represents is how well the student performed in comparison with how well they expected to perform, not what they thought of the actual teaching. Also, with well over 100 performance reviews coming in, there is no way all of them are actually read by a review committee. Instead of being read by a review committee they are read by the teacher. What happens when you read 100 negative reviews one after the other? Do you take it as constructive criticism and improve? No way. Unless you have the patience of a catholic school girl (the ones from my father’s "good ole days", the ones now lost whatever patience they had, I can assure you of that) you're going to read the first couple and either stop reading, or catch teenage angst quicker than Herpes from a frat party. I could be wrong; maybe you'll be a good sport "like mike" and laugh.

What are the point of these if not to be constructive? To serve as a tool to further break ties between students and professors in universities? Evaluating professors should not rest alone on the students shoulders, nor should the blame of a lost job be put on their shoulders. Why reinforce the classic “me vs. the teacher” situation, when you could make the process more objective?

Ah, if only things could be done logically. Anyways, let me know what you thought of this rant below on a scale of 1-5. I'll let you define the scale, it's more fun that way.

The SOPA Bill

So there's been a lot of talk about the SOPA Bill or (Stop Online Piracy Act.) For those of you who are unaware as to what this exactly is; "The bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Depending on who requests the court orders, the actions could include barring online advertising networks and payment facilitators such as PayPal from doing business with the infringing website; barring search engines from linking to such sites and requiring Internet service providers to block access to such sites. The bill would make unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content a felony. The bill also gives immunity to Internet services that voluntarily take action against websites dedicated to infringement, while making liable for damages any copyright holder who knowingly misrepresents that a website is dedicated to infringement.^[4]"

Now to put this into other terms; if this goes through, say goodbye to the internet. Yes, yes, I know what you’ll say; “This only ascertains to the U.S.” Although this may be true, it’s not a valid argument when you consider that in terms of Piracy laws, the US seems to be the trend setter. Although we Canadians have been lucky so far as to be protected by sharing intellectual property as long as it’s not sold, this will soon change. This is especially true with the now Harper majority, who seems to do anything to appease the Americans.

Perhaps the better question then is; will this go through? In response to that, I’d like to list who exactly is backing each side, as we all know the Western world is a plutocracy, not a democracy, so let us follow the money trail to the special interest groups. Now although usually the bills that serve to strip us of rights and freedoms are backed by all the interest groups, this one is different in that the Anti-SOPA bill side is actually headed by some of the largest companies in the world. To name a few; Google, Facebook, Twitter, Zynga, eBay, Mozilla, Yahoo, AOL, and LinkedIn. No, these aren’t small fishes from a big ocean; these companies are the great white sharks from your back yard swimming pool.

That being said, on top of the fact that the public largely disagrees with this bill, the companies that are against it far outweigh those for it. To just put this into terms; Facebook is pulling in well over 1 billion each year, and was valued over 50 last year. Google on the other hand made 29 billion in 2010. If money is the root of change in our society, then you can all be assured that SOPA will never pass through.

Should it? Will it? Let me hear from you.

The Social Critique; First post

The purpose of this blog will be to critique the social constructs of today's society from a student's perspective. I will also weigh in on several issues related to science, psychology, and business/economic innvoation.

I look forward to hopefully gaining a member base, and having discussion with any of those who want to participate in one.

Cheers.