Handguns, AKA the NRA's Magic Penis Pill

What, do you carry a gun to feel safe? Are you so scared of life that you have to carry a weapon everywhere??

➢ Seriously. How often does this question have to be asked?

Okay, fine. I'll answer.

You know how house robbers scout before picking their mark? They look for certain clues, certain visuals that indicate to them a good victim. Why? Because criminals are lazy. They'd rather pick an easy mark than prepare for a difficult mark. That's why house robbers prefer people who are on vacation, for example.

It's also why criminals are vastly in favor of increased gun regulation. They also tend to lean heavily democrat, but that's a story for another time. Side note: want to knock down the chances of a break-in by nearly 100%?  Put a pro-NRA sign on your lawn, and a fake security system sticker in your window.

...but we were talking about me carrying a gun on my daily routine, not about me being smart in protecting my home.

In general, a person carrying a gun for self defense purposes will carry that gun for... well.. self defense. But just for fun, let's talk about one of the street crimes that will more commonly come to mind: getting mugged.

Muggers are criminals. And like all criminals, muggers are also lazy, and fond of success. So like all successful criminals, successful muggers target people who have the highest potential to be easy victims, and they use strategies that are the most effective on these easy targets.

"Duh," you may say. "Tell me something I don't know."

Sure. I'll tell you how muggers pick their marks.

Muggers pick people with bad body language who appear unaware of their surroundings.

Muggers us the tools of fear and intimidation to get what they want.

Read that again, and let it sink in. And if that describes you, you should probably work on that.

This is a fairly simple and straightforward formula, but you see... people are incredibly stupid - which is why they wander around all day with their face in their iPhone and hunched shoulders.

The body language is important because people who have poor body language tend to be people who are lower on the social ladder - which means that they are more easily cowed and controlled (sorry to say it. It's true. If you're offended, you're the problem, and should immediately invest in growing a spine.). Lack of situational awareness means that you are easily thrown off guard, and when threatened, will most likely freeze in fear rather than actually defend yourself.

By the way, this is a good time to address a common myth: there is no such thing as a fight-or-flight response. There is, however, a fight-or-flight-or-freeze response. And it's that last response that muggers count on when they pick their target.

This is why I carry a gun, and train with it. This is also why I work on my posture and body language, and try to be aware of my surroundings. Here comes the counter-intuitive part...

I do this not necessarily because I want to be able to shoot any potential muggers dead in their tracks, but because my training makes it far less likely that I will need to do so. By improving my body language and situational awareness and carrying a gun (in my case, I currently open carry), I immediately put myself in the "do not fuck with" category of any mugger I happen to pass. Why?

Because muggers are lazy. And hey, if I happen to come across someone else being mugged, I now have the bonus of being able to stop it, because (surprise) guns trump knives.

In short, I don't carry a gun because I'm scared... I carry a gun because I'm not. I just happen to recognize a good tool when I see it.

To Touch Her Flesh

➢This is perfect. And awesome. Copied from here. I had to put this on the blog, not only to share, but as a reminder for myself.

FOR THE MEN: on what your touch does for women's bodies 

Women don't know what their bodies feel like until you touch them. All of them. Their hair, their feet, the back of the knees, that little spot on the back of the neck, behind the ears, between the toes, that nook where her thigh bones meet her pelvis, in between her butt cheeks.... EVERYWHERE. Some places are so well hidden we've never felt ourselves there. 

We often don't know we have bodies until we are touched all over the place and touched A LOT. 

This is why some women LOVE to be touched and will lean in like a pretty kitty, and others will be shy about being touched or not want it at all. Not everyone is ready for the body experience, not everyone is ready to let go of pain and shame. 

What women really NEED to relax into their sensual bodies is a space where they are not expected to give back or feel threatened by a fear of loss or abandonment. They need TIME. They need to move through all their own trust and surrender thresholds. This can challenge you if you feel inadequate of have a lot of sexual shame yourself, and that's good, because all her trust thresholds will help you dissolve your own discomforts and fears. 

Great sex, great intimacy, great pleasure requires time. No rushing. No pushing. She needs time to sink into her body and relax into you and the experience. 

Being touched and touching is an art form in and of itself. Giving and receiving energy. Your hands communicate SO much from the pressure you exert, the speed at which you move, the attention you put into it. She can feel in an instant how confident you are about your body and hers, if you are afraid to hurt her too much so you're holding back your sexuality, if you're not really giving to her unconditionally but you just want something, if you are trying to manipulate....

She can feel it in SECONDS whether she's aware of it or not. And her body will respond or recoil. SECONDS. 

Your hands communicate everything. More than your words. She can feel how present or not present you are just by how you touch her. 

No you can't save a woman or activate her inner goddess for the sake of your own spiritualized ego. If you're doing that then get a grip and take care of your own shit before you go around trying to open women to prove to yourself how much of a masculine man you are. Seriously, it's gross and manipulative so stop it and forgive yourself if that's what you've been doing. 

No you can't love a woman more than she loves herself. Well, I guess you can, but you'll be frustrated every-time. This is not a thing where you can touch her enough for her to realize how amazing she is.

This is what intention is. Precision. Purpose. And you can practice honing your attention in your own touch of your woman. 

If you're into creating harmony and peace in partnerships, then this is a key role you will play in her life. It's not your job, but it's a gift you give in service because when you see the exponential results of your investment here, you'll understand what I'm talking about.

Hey Babe, You Hungry?

➢ This line is so common it's a bad joke.

What's bizarre, is how little men STILL understand what the woman is saying.

Let me clue you in: the answer will almost ALWAYS be "I don't know."

"I don't know" is translation for, "Listen honey, I know you want to take care of me and you're doing it by prioritizing my needs, and I appreciate it. But this is food... it's not a need, it's a desire - and you're not even stating what you want, which means you're not just prioritizing me, you're discounting your own desires entirely in favor of my own. That's really unattractive. I want a man who is decisive and who leads, and who gets me. You don't get me, which is why you have to ask me. If I really had a preference for food, I'd have hinted and you'd have picked up the hint. But clearly I haven't hinted or you're not paying attention to me, and I'm not too happy about it. In either case, the way you redeem yourself is by growing some balls and LEADING me somewhere. Babe, it's not about the food, it's about spending time with you - most restaurants have enough menu items that I can always find something I want. So for Pete's sake be a man and pick something.... I don't know, what do you want?"

PS, fellas... if you were a real man, you'd make life an adventure, and live adventurously. If you make being with you fun and exciting and challenging for her, she will follow you everywhere, even to restaurants she hates. Would you rather she be in love with a guy who makes her feel happy, excited, and on her toes? Or would you rather her be bored, with your balls in a little plastic box she carries in her purse while she eats food that she kinda likes but is ultimately irrelevant because flavors fade?

It's not about the flavors. It's about the experience.

Defeat Gender Roles with this One Easy Trick

➢Some feminists claim that there aren't any innate differences between men and women, but that gender roles are purely societal constructs. Let's take this down logic road shall we?

If men and women are inherently the same, then the patriarchy is is either a social construct, or a mass conspiracy by all men.

BUT: many feminists also claim that masculine oppression of the feminine is a worldwide phenomenon that stretches through history.  It'd have to be a hell of a coincidence for two completely equal sexes to have such singularly one-sided oppression occur over every single society, so it's clearly not a social construct.

Thus, the only reasonable conclusion for the consistent oppression of one gender by a gender with no innate character difference is conspiracy....

Across continents, centuries, different cultures, and language barriers, with no real proof of global collusion ever surfacing. Which is completely idiotic. This leads to one conclusion:

The patriarchy is the matrix.

And you are a battery.

➢Side note: if feminists want to claim that men and women are intrinsically the same, AND that men have systematically oppressed women, this has real world implications.

The first is this: if men and women are equal, and women outnumber men in many societies (for example, America), then we HAVE to conclude that women are co-conspirators in their own oppression on the whole.

The second, more menacing, is this: if men and women are the same, and men have systematically oppressed women, this suggests that feminists believe women have the same instinct to oppress - they just happen to be worse at it than men, historically. Which brings us back to the feminist movement as it is happening today... are they really rooting for equality?

Probably not.

Nazi Germany and the Christian Conundrum

A long time ago when I was back in high school, I had a fondness for debating theology online. One of the most annoying discussions I ever had at the age of 17 centered around moral absolutism - what is the length that we will go not to sin?

I don't remember the exact question posed to me nearly a decade ago, other than it being something about a man and a gun and being given an ultimatum to renounce my faith or someone dies.

But this past year the question surfaced again, with a new face upon it.

I was visiting two friends in Ohio, and found (to my utter astonishment) a church that I actually enjoyed attending! To most people this might be a minor joy, but to a man with an undiagnosed condition that causes him to pass out in the middle of lecture series-type events, this was nothing short of a miracle.

Until the pastor defended selling out the Jews to Nazis.

Of course, that's a bit hyperbolic. The sermon was about lying, and the importance of not making excuses for lying. One thing that I was astonished by was the fact that the pastor explicitly invited people to stay around after the sermon for a question-and-answer session. Never in my 25 years have I seen that happen at a church, and being the natural asshole that I am, I had to stay. Cue up the IRL version of Godwin's law.

And dammit, someone beat me to the punch.

What about those Christians hiding Jews during WWII in Nazi Germany? It wasn't uncommon for the secret police to go around looking for Jews that were still hiding inside the country. If you were hiding Jews, and the SS came to your door and asked, would you lie, or would you tell the truth?

I mean, hey, let's not beat around the bush, right? What might be described as the most polite, Christianly-loving all-out debating war broke out between the asker, the pastor, and myself. He thought that in such a scenario, it's impossible to justify lying simply because we think killing is worse. Myself, I was in the camp of, "I'm gonna lie my ass off to the Nazi bastards." Then again, I never was the best at public debates. We parted cordially, and I got an email address from the pastor. Again, I was really, really impressed. If I didn't live several hundred miles away from the church, I'd gladly attend there regularly.

This is the email I wrote, edited because I'm probably incredibly vain:

Hey Zach,  

Jonathan here. I visited the church with [my two friends] and had a few zealous questions that got interrupted by [friend]. I wanted to complete my thoughts and get your response, but before I proceed I just wanted to make it clear that I completely respect your opinions, lest my eagerness to contradict you in the questioning session implied otherwise. :)  Anyways, onto the topic: 

My contention that the truthfulness should be considered a vocal absolute comes from multiple directions, but let me continue for a moment from where we left off. We discussed the example of Nazi Germany, and the idea of moral absolutism.
To be upfront, I agree with moral absolutism. I don't think there are some sins that are "more [spiritually] acceptable" than others. However, I don't think that the question of lying to a Nazi is a question of 'which moral is more important.' 

I brought up the idea of honor in the ANE, and the concept of being responsible for others, and one's honor being tied (in part) to one's ability to care for those who are under oneself. If I take someone under my protection, there is a contract between myself and that person - I have promised to care for them. In the case of hiding Jews in Nazi Germany, I have promised to hide them from the Nazis and protect their very lives against what is plausibly one of the more visible forms of evil that have existed in this world.  

So it is the case, that if I promise to hide someone and take them under my care, and a group of Nazi SS come to my door asking if I am hiding Jews, I am faced with a conundrum. The conundrum is NOT one of killing vs lying (aka, it is not a question of moral absolutism). Rather, the question is one of truth vs truth: do I tell a lie and say that I am hiding no one, or do I turn my commitment to protection into a lie?
I would far rather *risk* sacrificing my reputation with a faceless Nazi SS officer, than to choose to sacrifice my integrity and my honor as a man who can be trusted to protect those who come to him for help. This is the point that I wished to make previously, but perhaps wasn't as eloquent in saying: when it comes to those extreme examples, my honor and integrity to God comes first, and I think it absolutely inarguable to state that it is more honoring to God to deceive a Nazi SS officer (whether by misinformation, omission, distraction, what have you), than to give up a person to whom I have righteously promised my protection.  

This of course is not to detract from the rest of your sermon, the large part of which I found myself agreeing with to a large part. I don't say that lightly, either. I rarely find sermons to be applicable (let alone accessible on a personal level), and you are the only pastor I've seen who intentionally takes questions at the end of a sermon. I cannot tell you the level of appreciation I have for both of these traits I have observed. If I lived locally in Ohio instead of visiting all the way from [my state], I would certainly be coming back next week. :)
Sincerely,
Jonathan

The pastor responded in a much less verbose manner; I've included the relevant portions:

Jonathan, 

In the scenario that you paint, one of pitting a "promise" against a "promise" I don't disagree with your conclusion. 

My concern, however, is that we run to that scenario - one which is very limited and very specific - and create a template for saying, "So, there might be other cases where this kind of thing is okay" and find ourselves never really dealing with our own deceit and deception.  

Thanks for coming and for sending this email.  Have a great week. 

There you have it... sort of permission to baldly lie to the face of a Nazi.

Should you ever end up in 1940's Nazi Germany that is.

Don't forget your Nazi uniform. And maybe leave the Stars and Stripes underwear at home.