corvus

Good thing you didn't get killed by a stampede -- some worker in a New York walmart died that sort of death. And story hopping is a good thing... I did that for a year with my fanfiction. Probably indicative of commitment issues.

Well, another argument against corporal punishment, then....

To be honest, I think the reason your friend needs to be on an emotional high to have sex with her fiance is that she's not sexually crazy about him. If she were, she'd -- like you -- hop into the sack with no questions. I think you presuppose that your boyfriend would be someone you'd be sexually crazy about. (This isn't a judgment call -- just my random hypotheses. ) Personally, I can see both sides -- the male and female side, as you put it -- and I think my response would depend greatly on the dynamics of the relationship.

Happy birthday, Duncan! Thanks for the excellent stories, and for being a cool fellow writer.

Happy birthday, Tim!

I don't think being more judgmental makes you a *worse* person. It means you're more realistic and less rosy-eyed, which also translates to being more insightful and less naive. So really you're becoming a better person.

F#! Mozart only had the Queen of the Night go up to an F!

Dunno if this has been mentioned already, but the movie Milk has just come out. It's a "biopic" about the first openly gay politician in the US -- a San Franciscan named Harvey Milk. It's played by Sean Penn and has 'OSCARWORTHY' stamped all over it. Reminds me a bit of Capote in terms of seriousness and angle. Haven't seen it yet, but it may be of interest...

Hey Kevin. I completely agree with you on 'affectionate sexual lust' -- that's why anonymous hookups are so unsatisfying: there's sometimes none of that ASL. However, from personal experience, I'm going to have to disagree with you on the impossibility of close friends developing into lovers. That's what happened to me, and that was when I got the best sex of my life. I also agree with you that the ideal interpersonal relationship should include romantic, platonic, and sexual elements. I'm also not sure which one of those three one should "start" with. I don't think it really matters -- at least, in an ideal world. If the possibilities of the three exist, it shouldn't matter where you start. In physics terms, "true love" is a state function and therefore isn't path dependent. I do want to add, though, that you have a very good point about maintaining non-sexuality in platonic friendships with other gays. It makes life so much less complicated...

Awww... Even if you don't make it in November, you're still a lot better off than my idiot friends, who gave up after the second day. And you've still got December to finish your novel, which really deserves to be finished.

I hit 50k! w00t! Still have to finish the story, but at least I got the wordcount...

...that I read on NY Times. The trailer's . Apparently, it's about some guy who gets the ability to make other people gay. Seems amusing. It's supposed to be good. And the lead is -- ah -- pretty cute. Also, it's based on Shakespeare, so it's automatically *that* much more interesting. (Here's an with more cuteness...) PS OMG... the lead -- Tanner Cohen -- is on facebook... (!!?)

If Bush had come along at a time of relative global simplicity, I think history's evaluation of his presidency would be far different. Precisely because he was, as you say, an "unapologetic plain vanilla pro American moderate republican who didn't like partisan bickering and put his foot in his mouth at the worst possible moment," he was sorely unequipped to deal with the realities of complex global reality. Negotiating with the rogue states, emerging superpowers -- that's to say, states and head-of-states with suddenly big egos -- requires much more than a "likable" man who also happened to be a rigid ideologue. I find your defense of Bush's fibs regarding the WMD particularly troubling. In doing so, you're making excuses for Bush and holding him to a lenient standard -- which is what you're asking us not to do for Obama. I am actually less inclined to condemn the fact that the Bush administration lied than the fact that it lied to mire us in a war that was a waged for the sake of Bush's ideology, which you seem to support, but which I'm not nearly as inclined to. The US is no longer quite the T. Rex it used to be; the rest of the world is filling up the vacuum left by the USSR. A lot of sound and fury will get us less far than crafty, manipulative, subtle, intelligent diplomacy. I'm hoping Obama can supply some of that. It seems counterintuitive to practice diplomacy with terrorists, but terrorists are also individuals capable of speech and choice and logic -- albeit very, very warped logic. Sometimes softness -- yin -- is preferrable to hardness -- yang. Judging Bush is different from judging the Bush administration. To Bush's credit, I think he went into office with nothing but the best intentions. But good intentions pave the road to hell. Katrina, the miring of the Iraq war, and the economic crisis are what history books are going to write about the Bush administration, and that's going to haunt Bush's personal legacy. The poor guy tried his best, yes, but he in the wrong place at the wrong time.

w00t for AP chemistry! It's helping me feed the world. And my German too. My English vocab runs out disappointingly early...

If I'd somehow experienced the Boston winters *before* choosing my college, I think I'd be getting my degree in a much different and much sunnier place (i.e. freaking Palo Alto). Anyhow, I'm sure the warmth and joy of a family reunion will banish the frost, no?

Hey hey hey -- happy birthday!

Happy birthday!

Oh, so now you're questioning my ability to use wordcount?

I changed it when you weren't looking, and quickly changed it back. Not my fault that I can't get "personal picture" and "avatar" straight after having fried my brains writing 25,000 words...

Did I already reply to this? I don't remember. I probably did. But. Well. I'm bored right now. My avatar is Maria Callas playing Medea in Cherubini's opera of the same name. She's probably at the stage where she's about to cut her two children's pale, tender throats. It's a very exciting opera, that one. The particular picture is from Dallas, 1958.

I'm pretty sure you can define men and women based on the genitals they're born with... You might get cases like Klinefelter's syndrome with XXY genotype, but that's completely different from castration or infertility. On the other hand, it might be easier to argue in favor of homosexual union for infertile people. Like, if you can't have kids, you might as well find someone of the same sex to be your partner....

The state should ban remarriage as well... No double dipping for those widows and widowers.

DeLillo and McCarthy are supposed to be the current "greats" of American literature. I couldn't stand the DeLillo I tried reading -- maybe his other, more famous works are better -- so I'm hoping McCarthy doesn't disappoint. I unfortunately spoiled The Road for myself, but I'm picking up All the Pretty Horses, and it's much better than not bad so far.

This stats are comforting, but do people hold those views as they get older? I'm afraid some of my friends, after leaving the nice, liberal environment of college, will turn into conservative nuts. The African American antipathy to gays (well... philia for prop 8, to be more precise) is kind of ironic... I'd wager more gays voted for Obama, percentage wise, than vice versa. Of course, that sort of comparison isn't fair, etc, but it's true.

I'm sorry. Welcome back to the fold.