larvatus: (rock)


Еврейский анекдот наоборот:
— Мойша, а ты знаешь, что Жора — пидорас?
— Что, он занял денег и не отдаёт?!
— Да нет, в хорошем смысле.

Une histoire juive à rebours :
— Moishe, tu savais que Gégé est un pédé ?
— Quoi, il a emprunté de l’argent et ne le rembourse pas ?
— Non, dans le bon sens.

The contrary of a Jewish joke:
— Moishe, you know that Gerry is a fag?
— What, he borrowed money and refuses to repay?
— No, in a good way.



Tenue de soirée vingt-sept ans après:

larvatus: (rock)
Methinks the homophiles are protesting too much by resolving to ignore the obvious charitable reading of Justice Scalia’s insistence on submitting law to moral scrutiny. Consider that their most compelling current jurisprudence calls for equal protection of homosexuals as distinguished by immutable characteristics of their sexual preferences. Suppose that tomorrow, psychiatrists declare the preferences of coprophagia, apotemnophilia, or kleptomania to be equally immutable. Would it be reasonable to demand that restaurants served excrements on par with conventional nutrients; that surgeons be compelled to amputate healthy limbs on their owners’ demand; or that bankers and shopkeepers surrendered their stock to anyone organically beholden to the advantages of theft over honest toil? Might it not make more sense to submit equal protection to moral judgments? Anyone who thinks this far-fetched is welcome to contemplate the immutability of schizophrenia as grounds for mandating equal treatment for its patients.
larvatus: (Default)
The best reason not to have sex in public is to avoid exposure to well-meaning second-guessers. Thus the late Robert Hughes ably illustrated the stupidity of judicial censure of sexual deviance:
Why so few [sodomy] convictions? Ernest Augustus Slade, who had been superintendent of the convict barracks at Hyde Park in Sydney from 1833 to 1834 (his resignation was forced by sexual scandal, though over a woman), testified that “among [the lower] class of convicts sodomy is as common as any other crime.” It was an ineradicable part of jail culture. But only about one case in thirty could be proven. Molested youths lodged complaints but then prevaricated in court; and other evidence tended to be vague, since “shirtlifters” were rarely caught in the act of buggery. “If you had it proved” Slade told the Molesworth Committee in 1838, “that men were found with their breeches down in secluded spots, and they stated that they had gone there to ease themselves, and upon examination it was found that they had not done so, what could have occurred?” But no jury would convict on such grounds. Out in the bush, the dreaded act became more obscure still, as there was nobody to watch the assigned convicts. Bishop Ullathorne believed that sodomy was less frequent among the shepherds, who tended to live alone, than among stockmen, “a much more dissolute set” who practiced “a great deal of that crime” and even taught it to the formerly innocent Aborigines. And if the Man from Snowy River’s convict forebear was not content with the brusque embraces of Jacky-Jacky, there were always sheep. “As a juryman,” one witness told the committee, ”I have had opportunities of hearing many trials for unnatural offences, with animals particularly. … I think they are much more common than in any other country inhabited by the English.” “That is, among the convicts?” interjected one committee member. “Yes,” said the witness, dispelling the thought of the colonial gentry practicing abominations on their own merinos.
—Robert Hughes, The Fatal Shore: The Epic of Australia’s Founding, Vintage Books, 1988, p. 267
Would that the indicters of WikiLeaking condoms took heed of rapidly dwindling chances of securing a jury conviction of Julian Assange.
larvatus: (Default)
If crimes of sexuality were confined to the human species, we should not have an opportunity to study the biological beginnings of crime as observed in curious instances of criminality in animals, which raises doubts as to whether these inversions of the genesic instinct are with them unnatural phenomena, or rather an outward manifestation of an imperious functional want. Without exposing the details of the analogy upon which is founded the presumption, we are warranted in saying that as many of the lower beings in the zoölogical scale show virtues having analogy to those of man, we must expect to find parallel vices. It is an error to suppose that aberration of the genesic instinct is confined to our species, time, or race. Evidence shows that unnatural crime exists under all latitudes. It extends from the prehistoric time of the troglodytes up to Hippocrates, who stigmatizes it in his oath, and from his time to the present. I have observed common instances of sexual perversion in dogs and turkeys. A short time since, at the Washington races, a celebrated stallion was the favorite on whom the largest bets were made. A friend of mine, having ascertained from the groom the day before the race that the horse had procured an ejaculation by flapping his penis against the abdomen, accordingly risked his pile on another horse, who, by the way, came in ahead. Only a few days ago, to escape a shower, I took refuge in the elephant house in the Washington Zoölogical gardens, where are confined two male elephants, “Dunk” and “Gold Dust.” To my astonishment they entwined their probosces together in a caressing way; each had simultaneous erection of the penis, and the act was finished by one animal opening and allowing the other to tickle the roof of his mouth with his proboscis after the manner of the oscula more Columbino, mentioned, by the way, in some of the old theological writings, and prohibited by the rules of at least one Christian denomination.
—Irving C. Rosse, “Sexual Hypochrondriasis and Perversion of the Genesis Instinct”, Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, whole series volume 19, new series, volume 17, number 11, November 1892, pp. 798-799
larvatus: (Default)
Thus spake the Deep Throat of Queer Studies:
This point may not be popular. It may not win me friends. But I must make it. Harpo, like most men, has a symbolic vagina, somewhere on his person. Harpo, a starry man, has many vaginas. One is his wig. Another is his silence.
Then again, yonder nerdy man of words may just be hankering for Harpo’s touch on his butt crack.

Wayne Koestenbaum
larvatus: (Default)

A young Muslim maid from old Guinea
Sucked frog cock to summon a djinnea:
“I wish for a way
To make the Jew pay!”
Alas, the DA was a ninnea.



Cyrus R. Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney,
on 19 May 2001 after the DSK indictment.
Seth Wenig/Associated Press
larvatus: (Default)
Deshon Marman, 20, a University of New Mexico football player who was in the city to attend the funeral of a close friend, former Lincoln High School standout David Henderson, was being held at San Mateo County Jail on suspicion of trespassing, battery and resisting arrest.
    Marman grew up a block from Henderson in the Bayview neighborhood, and the two were teammates at Lincoln High School and City College of San Francisco before they transferred to separate four-year universities. Henderson was shot May 26 on Kirkwood Avenue and died 11 days later.
    On Wednesday, San Francisco police got a call about 9 a.m. that someone was exposing himself outside a US Airways gate, Sgt. Michael Rodriguez said.
    An airline employee spotted Marman before he boarded Flight 488, bound for Albuquerque, and complained that Marman’s pants “were below his buttocks but above the knees, and that much of his boxer shorts were exposed,” Rodriguez said.
    The employee asked Marman to pull up his pants before he boarded the plane, but he refused, Rodriguez said. Marman allegedly repeated his refusal after taking his seat on the plane.
    “At that point he was asked to leave the plane,” Rodriguez said. "“It took 15 to 20 minutes of talking to get him to leave the plane, and he was arrested for trespassing.” Marman allegedly resisted officers as he was being led away.
—Justin Berton, “Grieving Passenger’s Sagging Pants Lead to Arrest”,
The San Francisco Chronicle, 16 June 2011
Folk etymology
connects saggin’ with backwards niggas.



The fashion actually transitioned from prison culture, said author-youth advocate Judge Greg Mathis of the “Judge Mathis” show.
    “In prison you aren’t allowed to wear belts to prevent self-hanging or the hanging of others,” said Mathis, who at 17 once served eight months in jail. “They take the belt and sometimes your pants hang down. The same with no shoestrings in your shoes. You aren’t allowed to have shoestrings. Many cultures of the prison have overflowed into the community unfortunately.”
    Saggin’ also has sexual connotations in prison.
    “Those who pulled their pants down the lowest and showed their behind a little more raw, that was an invitation,” said Mathis. “[The youth] don’t know this part about it. I always tease and tell them that they better be careful because some man who has been in prison 30 years who comes home and doesn’t know any different may think it’s an open invitation.”
—Margena A. Christian, “The Facts Behind The Saggin’ Pants Craze”,
Jet, Vol. 111, No. 18, 7 May 2007, pp 16-18
Deshon Marman is expected to plead guilty to possession of crack with intent to sell.
larvatus: (Default)
Message-ID: <6010@husc6.harvard.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 91 22:59:27 GMT
I believe in the objective existence of the True, the Good, and the Beautiful.[1] […] I believe that in the realm of politics, there is no place for moral judgements. Morality neither can (in practice), nor should (morally) be legislated. The best that a government can hope for is to guide its laws in accordance with some standard of common Good.
    A corollary of the above: homosexuals, drug users, gun owners, in short everyone who deviates from that, which by any statistical standard may be accepted as the Norm, have absolutely the same rights as everyone else, provided that they, as individuals, do not injure or coerce anybody else. “Setting a bad example” does not count as coersion.
    This is the old “consenting adults cannot do anything legally wrong to each other” thesis. Note that children are automatically excluded, until they reach legal majority.[2]
    Concerning the main issue: death is the price we, as a species, pay for the privilege of having sex. While, as Sade among many others very clearly understood, the degree of erotic excitement increases with any increase in the distance between recreation and procreation, some measure of restraint must be imposed on this distance out of moral considerations. Where to draw the line is subject to many questions. Personally, I believe that many organized religions go to far in their proscription of “spilling the seed on the ground”, birth control, and so on. On the other hand, it is equally clear to me that, until and unless homosexual reproduction has been invented, homosexual intercourse will remain morally wrong. tl:dr )
larvatus: (Default)
[info]mike67:
Исчезновение веры в идеалы — часть общемирового процесса…

[info]larvatus:
В моей стране скорее наблюдается обратный процесс. Почти вся наша повседневная политика основана на непоколебимой вере в право на жизнь, свободу, и поиски счастья. Сухой остаток выражает бесхитростную веру в общественный прогресс.

[info]once_for_all:
Простите, а в какой это стране? Я серьезно спрашиваю.

[info]larvatus:
В США.

[info]mike67:
Я понимаю. Но это немного другие идеалы. То есть проще сказать, что сохранились представления о добре и зле. Но тут же выяснится, что сохранились они и в России, но в другой форме. А вот при попытке описать разницу начнется такая путаница, что лучше туда не лезть.

[info]larvatus:
Непоколебимая вера в право на жизнь, свободу, и поиски счастья, это не просто представление о добре и зле, а ещё вдобавок гражданский идеал. Какие гражданские идеалы сохранились в России?

[info]mike67:
Мне кажется, Вы сейчас распространяете декларируемый гражданский идеал на все общество. Нет, в России с гражданскими идеалами плохо, это известно.

[info]larvatus:
Дело в том, что наши декларируемые гражданские идеалы именно так распространяются в нашем обществе. Я понимаю, что из старого мира это выглядит очень странно, но тем не менее, так оно и есть.

[info]mike67:
Дело в другом. Гражданский идеал есть средство, а не цель. То есть существование гражданских идеалов, которое выгодно отличает США от России (кто б спорил, проблему диалога народа с властью в РФ до сих пор решить невозможно) относится только к гражданской сфере, и мне кажется неправильным распространять его на все прочие сферы, заполняя вакуум, образовавшийся после произошедшего в XX веке краха главной основы гуманистического идеала — веры в неограниченность возможностей человека. Грубо говоря, американская конституция и американский образ жизни, равно как в СССР — советский, считались залогом успехов в науке, спорте и искусстве, но не самоцелью.

[info]larvatus:
Вы будете смеяться, но гражданский идеал воплощённый в нашей Конституции является формальной и содержательной целью нашего общества.

[info]mike67:
Гражданского общества. Но общество не может сводиться к гражданской общине.

[info]larvatus:
Как не может, так и не должно. Но мы ведь обсуждаем предполагаемое Вами исчезновение веры в идеалы, якобы являющееся частью общемирового процесса.

[info]mike67:
Так я и объясняю, что идеалы общества шире идеалов общества гражданского.

[info]larvatus:
Что же именно исчезает в общемировом порядке?

[info]mike67:
Как я уже говорил, идеалы-цели, то есть идеалы, связанные с развитием человека. Исчезают вместе с верой в перспективы его развития. С верой в прогресс.

[info]larvatus:
Вы считаете, что либеральная вера в право на жизнь, свободу, и поиски счастья не является идеалом, связанным с развитием человека?

[info]mike67:
Конечно, не является. Так же как вера в семейные ценности, например. В строительство справедливого общества — уже другое.

[info]larvatus:
Вы считаете, что развитие человека возможно вне зависимости от его права на жизнь, свободу, и поиски счастья?

[info]mike67:
Не считаю (хотя есть люди, которые так считают)! Но именно поэтому я и говорю: средство, а не цель.
    Только вот про поиски счастья я уже третий раз забываю спросить, и теперь спрошу: у них-то какая специфическая связь с западной (или конкретно американской) системой ценностей?

[info]larvatus:
Простите, я совсем запутался. Вы сказали, что исчезновение веры в идеалы является частью общемирового процесса. Теперь Вы согласились, что что право на жизнь, свободу, и поиски счастья необходимо для развития человека. Соответственно, либеральная вера в это право является верой в идеал, никоим образом не исчезающей из американского общества. Не так ли?
    Что касается поисков счастья, это понятие принадлежит Джефферсону, унаследовавшему его от Локка. Локк утверждал право на “life, liberty, and estate” или “lives, liberties, and fortunes”. Его последователи востребовали право на “life, liberty, and property”. Джефферсон же написал “the pursuit of happiness” вместо “property” в декларации о независимости. Следует отметить что понятие собственности в государственных трактатах Локка включает в себя все гражданские средства для поисков счастья, за исключением того, о чём заботится Мишель Уэльбек.

[info]mike67:
Да, я уже догадался, что это из Декларации независимости. Но слово выглядит сейчас таким же случайным и несвязанным со всеми остальными частями формулы, каким оно оказалось в сочиненной Джефферсоном парафразе.
    Что касается основной темы, то схема такова: права человека необходимы для развития человека, следовательно могут рассматриваться не как идеал, а как средство его достижения. В качестве же самостоятельных идеалов в последние века фигурировал комплекс, связанный с совершенствованием человека, с его торжеством над мощью природы, с верой в прогресс, то есть с тот гуманистический комплекс, который породил, в том числе, и понятие прав человека. Вот весь этот проект, составивший специфику нового времени, теперь закрыт.

[info]larvatus:
Вот тут я с Вами мог бы согласиться на основаниях тюремной культуры. Скажем так: тот гуманистический комплекс, который породил, в том числе, и понятие прав человека, начинается с рьяной гомофобии, к примеру в «Государстве» 403a и в «Законах» 636c и 838e. Напротив, либеральное общество рано или поздно приходит к заключению, что каждый гражданин имеет право злоупотреблять распоряжаться своей жопой так, как он хочет, причём это заключение выстрадано путём криминалистических расследований и судебных попыток пресечения. На этом этапе любой здравомыслящий гуманист захотел бы свою собственную жопу поднимать и уёбывать. Но было бы куда. Поскольку на настоящий день гражданский идеал гуманизма согласовывается с гражданскими вольностями жопы. Время от времени эта согласованность приводит к массовым кровопролитиям. К примеру, сторонники санкций против гомосексуализма проиграли вторую мировую войну и продолжают проигрывать многие войны поменьше. С другой стороны, англо-американское общество не испытывает недостатка в добровольцах, фактически защищающих право малых народов распоряжаться своей жопой так, как они хотят. К сему и прилагается тезис о праве на поиски счастья, воплощённый в нашей Конституции в качестве формальной и содержательной цели нашего общества.
    Я всё это к тому, что граждане моей страны неоднократно проявляли, и продолжают проявлять, готовность к самопожертвованию во имя того гуманистического комплекса, который породил понятие прав человека. И это при том, что сами права они рассматривают неоднозначно. К примеру, наша армия не признаёт право военнослужащих на злоупотребление своими жопами.
larvatus: (Default)
     Ray: Then I do know a Belgian joke. What’s Belgium famous for? Chocolates and child abuse. And they only invented the chocolates to get to the kids!
—Martin McDonagh, In Bruges

Roger Vangheluwe, Belgium’s longest serving bishop has stepped down after admitting to sexually abusing a young boy about 25 years ago.


Q: Why do arabs priests fuck their camels little kids?
A: Because they know that the camels the kids don’t like it.
larvatus: (Default)
Злобная гнида, последние десять лет живущая облаиванием одного-единственного человека, выдавая это за сатиру, совершенно неприлично и окончательно обосралась. Желчный ханжа, мудак просто запредельнейший, не уважающий и не любящий совершенно никого, злой, ничтожный маленький человечишко, гнусный жиденок (не нация), карликовый пинчер, давно страдающий бешенством в терминальной стадии и застарелым фимозом головного мозга, показал, наконец, свое истинное лицо. <…>
А от любви до ненависти - сами знаете.


Иначе говоря, Шендерович изменил Багирову с Катей. Оттуда и проистекает егойный говносрач. «Semen retentum venenum est.» Вот и пришлось Багирову просраться.
larvatus: (Default)
Philipp Bakhtin, editor in chief of Russian Esquire, distinguished himself this month mainly by putting up and taking down a nine-story banner featuring the cover of its April issue posing the question: “Why do ballerinas and gays join United Russia?” His magazine interviewed nine professionally creative and sexually venturesome Russians, eliciting their reasons for joining the ranks of Putin’s dominant political party. These reasons included the following:
  • a wish to mimic the makeup of Italian parliament that included a prostitute defending the interests of her class;
  • support for the slogan issued by party leadership: “Parliament is no place for discussions”;
  • belief in the importance of national unity and faith in the only party capable of sustaining it;
  • a yearning for an ideology defining and advancing the national mission of Russia;
  • disenchantment with the principle that some things are not to be bought or sold;
  • lack of alternative political leaders worthy of enthusiastic support;
  • a craving for shelter in the breast of hegemonic officialdom; and
  • enthusiasm for state propaganda of healthy lifestyles.
Bakhtin’s less notable but equally provocative contribution was the following editorial extolling modern Russian man spermatozoa coursing through the cunts of American deer mice as the summit of creation:
Оказывается, шимпанзе не бросают сирот. Немецкие ученые в течение 27 лет пристально наблюдали 36 маленьких, оставшихся без родителей шимпанзе, 18 из которых были взяты под опеку другими взрослыми шимпанзе, и 10 из этих 18—выжили. Приемные родители раскалывали для них орехи, защищали в драках и спасали от леопардов, причем нередко это делали самцы, которые обычно не интересуются воспитанием потомства. То есть в течение месяцев и даже лет волосатые шимпанзе делали что-то, что было либо обременительно, либо опасно для них лично, но полезно для вида в целом.
    Мало того, оказывается, сперматозоиды американских хомячков Peromyscus maniculatus способны объединяться в стайки, чтобы обгонять конкурентов из чужих семенников—примерно так, как это делают во время эстафеты конькобежцы в шорт-треке, подталкивая друг друга в спину. Легкомысленные самки этих Peromyscus maniculatus (оленьих хомячков) спариваются сразу с несколькими партнерами, но сперматозоиды умеют отличать своих от чужих, объединяются с родственниками и вместе несутся к финишу. И тем самым демонстрируют еще один пример альтруистического поведения, поскольку оплодотворить яйцеклетку сможет только один конькобежец.
    Почему шимпанзе и сперматозоиды делают это? Потому что природа таинственным образом научила их жертвовать личными интересами ради интересов своего вида. Но вот что удивительно: сперматозоиды американских хомячков природа наделила этим даром, а (возьмем сегодняшний пример) сотрудников Первого батальона Первого спецполка ГИБДД—нет. 5 марта эти представители тупиковой ветви эволюции среди ночи перекрыли МКАД автомобилями мирно ехавших по своим делам граждан (в том числе беременных), чтобы остановить машину с преступниками (укравшими сумочку), которые успешно протаранили кордон и уехали. И это просто первая попавшаяся на глаза новость—завтра будет еще триста таких же.
    Почему эти монады в ушанках так поступили? Потому что когда-то давно природа таинственным образом наделила их самосознанием, которое, как теперь стало ясно, плохо уживается с альтруистическим поведением. Разглядевший самого себя шимпанзе поумнел, изобрел колесо, компас, паровой двигатель, википедию и съедобные трусы со вкусом малины, но почти начисто утратил чувство ответственности за любых сородичей, кроме ближайшей родни и сокурсников по юрфаку ЛГУ (например). Теперь, чтобы выжить, этот вид животных должен начать экономить свет и воду, отказаться от использования полиэтиленовых пакетов, перестать покупать и выбрасывать лишнюю еду, избавиться от бензиновых двигателей, договориться о квотах на выброс парниковых газов, демонтировать ядерное оружие, остановить вырубку лесов и уничтожение диких животных, потратить миллиарды на технологии безопасной утилизации всего на свете и разобрать по семьям 600 тысяч (только в России) сирот. Но, к сожалению, польза от этого будет общественная, да и то в будущем, а каждому отдельно взятому сегодняшнему человеку окончательно достанутся исключительно хлопоты.
    На всякий случай: общество, способное объединиться и заботиться об интересах всех своих в целом нынешних и будущих членов, называется гражданское общество (если не слышали, поинтересуйтесь в интернетах). Но, согласно последним сведениям ученых, самое гражданское из всех существующих обществ расположено в пизде у американских оленьих хомячков.
—Филипп Бахтин, «Творению-венец», Esquire, April 2010
It turns out that chimps do not abandon orphans. German scientists over the past 27 years have observed 36 young, orphaned chimpanzees, 18 of which were adopted by other adult chimpanzees, and these 18 survived. Adoptive parents cracked nuts for them, defended them in fights, and saved them from leopards, and often all that was done by males, who usually lack interest in raising offspring. That is, for months and even years hairy chimps undertook something that was either burdensome or dangerous for them individually, but useful for the species as a whole.
    Moreover, it turns out that spermatozoa of American rodents Peromyscus maniculatus can associate in flocks, in order to overtake competition from foreign sperm, more or less the way it is done by relay skaters in a short track, pushing each other in the back. Frivolous females of Peromyscus maniculatus (deer mice) mate with several partners, but the spermatozoa are able to distinguish their own kind from others, join forces with their kin, and race as a pack to the finish. And thus they demonstrate yet another example of altruistic behavior, for only one skater can fertilize the egg.
    Why do chimpanzees and spermatozoa do it? Because nature in her mysterious way has taught them to sacrifice personal interests for the interests of their kind. But here is the surprising part: nature has bestowed this gift upon the spermatozoa of American deer mice, but (to take the current example) not upon the members of the First Battalion of the First Special Regiment of the State traffic police. On March 5, these representatives of an evolutionary dead end branch blocked Moscow Ring Road in the dead of the night with the vehicles of citizens peacefully going about their business (including pregnant women), in order to stop the car full of criminals (purse-snatchers), who successfully rammed the cordon and drove away. And this is just the first news item to come along—tomorrow there will be three hundred more of the same.
    Why did these fur-hatted monads do it? Because once upon a time nature mysteriously bestowed upon them self-awareness, which, as is now clear, has a hard time coexisting with altruistic behavior. Having scrutinized himself, the chimp wisened up, invented the wheel, the compass, the steam engine, Wikipedia, and edible raspberry-flavored panties, while almost completely losing its sense of responsibility for his fellow tribesmen, except the nearest kinfolk and classmates from the Law School of Leningrad State University (to take one example). Now, in order to survive, this species must start saving water and power, put an end to plastic bags, stop buying and wasting extra food, get rid of the gasoline engine, agree on quotas for greenhouse gases, dismantle nuclear weapons, stop deforestation and destruction of wildlife, spend billions on technology for safe disposal of everything, and find family homes for 600 thousand orphans (in Russia alone). Unfortunately, the benefits of all that will accrue only to the society at large, and only in the future, yielding nothing but trouble for every single present-day individual.
    Just in case: a society that can unite and promote the interests of all its current and future members, is called a civil society (if you haven’t heard of it, ask the internets). But, according to the latest scientific findings, the most civil of all existing societies is located in the cunts of American deer mice.
—translated by MZ

Peromyscus maniculatus
It is heartening to have glossy Russian media attend to the humble Peromyscus maniculatus, the deer mouse that along with congeneric species counts as the most common native North American mammal, ranging from Alaska to Central America. One of the latest scientific findings in its regard is the account of the cooperative behaviour of spermatozoa given by Heidi S. Fisher and Hopi E. Hoekstra in a letter to Nature 463, 801-803 (11 February 2010), “Competition Drives Cooperation Among Closely Related Sperm of Deer Mice”. Fisher and Hoekstra begin by observing that sperm of Peromyscus polionotus, a monogamous species ipso facto lacking sperm competition, indiscriminately groups with unrelated conspecific sperm. Then they show that by contrast, sperm of the highly promiscuous Peromyscus maniculatus are significantly more likely to aggregate with those obtained from the same male than with sperm from an unrelated conspecific males and even with sperm from siblings. They conclude that sperm from promiscuous deer mice discriminate among relatives and thereby cooperate with the most closely related sperm, as a result of an evolutionary adaptation likely to have been driven by sperm competition.

What does all that have to do with Moscow traffic cops? Not so much. The practice of police commanding assistance from the public, epitomized by Popeye Doyle commandeering a civilian’s 1971 Pontiac LeMans to chase the French Connection, is both legal and widespread in this most civil of all possible societies. The novel twist contributed by the makers of “live barricades” deployed against fleeing criminals on Moscow Ring Road, is compelling civilians to put themselves along with their property in the way of rapidly approaching harm. The Connecticut Supreme Court addressed this issue in State v. Floyd, 217 Conn. 73, 584 A.2d 1157 (1991). The trial judge in Floyd, Jon C. Blue, elaborates upon this case in “High Noon Revisited: Commands of Assistance by Peace Officers in the Age of the Fourth Amendment”, May, 1992, 101 Yale Law Journal 1475, by posing an analogy between the command of assistance and the notorious British practice of impressment, forcible induction of men into military and especially naval service. He argues that subjecting ordinary citizens to summary impressment into hazardous police duty is inconsistent with our basic notions of constitutional liberty, pointing out that the ruling in the Floyd case construed Connecticut’s commanding assistance statute as authorizing such commands “only when such assistance is both demonstrably necessary and reasonable under all the circumstances”. This provision grafted a reasonable appearance upon a practice that by its nature requires split-second decisions involving the safety of the person, where the person commanded will have no ready means of identifying a deficient command. Judge Blue points out that, given a widespread concern that Fourth Amendment law is too confusing to be understood by policemen on the beat, a generalized rule of reasonableness reduces the law to a morass where no one, policeman or citizen, can determine his rights and responsibilities in advance. As Anthony Amsterdam has observed in “Perspectives on the Fourth Amendment”, 58 Minnesota Law Review 49, 394 (1974):
If there are no fairly clear rules telling the policeman what he may and may not do, courts are seldom going to say that what he did was unreasonable. The ultimate conclusion is that “the people would be ‘secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,’ only in the discretion of the police.”
Judge Blue concludes that it would be far better to have some hard and fast rules that citizens of this country could intelligently follow: “Given the realities of modern life, it behooves us to decree that commands of assistance that subject the person commanded to the possibility of personal danger are inconsistent with the Fourth Amendment and the commands of due process.”

It is undisputed that on 5 March 2010 Moscow traffic police commanded and obtained assistance that subjected the persons commanded to the possibility of personal danger. But it is unclear whether or not that assistance was both demonstrably necessary and reasonable under all the circumstances. While the formation of a live barricade may appear to Western legal analysts as an excessive response to an incident of purse-snatching, judging it to be so would sell short the importance of purses to the Russian soul. The unisex leather purse (барсетка) first emerged in the “Roaring Nineties” to become a signifier of mobbed-up New Russians along with crimson sport coats, heavy gauge gold jewelry, the chrome dome, and the “mano cornuta”. Of these traits, only the purse endured into the third millennium as an indispensable accoutrement of business élite. It persists as a potent reminder of the feminine side of Russian toughness, long renowned in the West for being naturally inclined to sodomy and buggery. And the traditional contents of the Slavic purse are as important as its formal aspects. Recall that two months ago, while Kiev mayor’s daughter Kristina Chernovetskaya was stuck in traffic in the northern suburbs of Paris, a man wrenched open the door of her luxury hire car and made off with her handbag containing jewelry with a value of more than $6M. Notably, great personal stockpiles of Russian wealth far exceed piddling clusters of Ukrainian booty. And going by the historical precedent, each must be regarded as a temporary loan held precariously by its current possessors on the sufferance of Russian populace. Hence the lasting adversity between Russian forces of law and order and purse-snatchers (барсеточники). All that adds up to a sound rationale for subjecting ordinary Russian drivers to summary impressment into hazardous police duty of preserving the honor and integrity of Russian bags.

Let us return to our American deer mice. The same rodent sperm that joins in packs with its congeners to outrace competitors issued by another male, will congregate with the former in the formation of another kind of live barricades, copulatory plugs meant for intercepting the latter. Even among us primates, female promiscuity correlates with copulatory plug formation. Which is to say that live barricades will always be with our skanky cunts.
larvatus: (Default)
Christopher Hitchens’ parallel between Turkish Prime Minister’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s threat to cleanse his nation of 100,000 Armenian aliens whom it “tolerates”, and the Turkish “campaign of race extermination” that America’s then-ambassador to Turkey, Henry Morgenthau reported to the U.S. Secretary of State on 16 July 1915, has swiftly elicited the stock Turkish criticism of Morgenthau’s memoir, notwithstanding Hitchens’ lack of reliance thereupon. One Emre Ozaltin writes:
Absolutely schocking [sic.] that Morgenthau’s book is cited as a source, its content would embarass [sic.] all but the most ardent racist.
    Read: “The Armenians, are known for their industry, their intelligence, and their decent and orderly lives. They are so superior to the Turks intellectually and morally” among many other such gems.
The same passage by Morgenthau was quoted by Turkish Times, “the oldest English-language Turkish-American periodical in USA”, in May 2003, and echoed by Bruce Fein, a “resident scholar at the Turkish Coalition of America”, on 4 June 2009. In each instance, the genocide apologist tempestuous Turkophile omitted the point of Morgenthau’s proclamation of Armenian superiority:


This chronic omission begs the question of the reasons behind the passing of much of the Turkish business and industry into Armenian hands. While this development may be as plausibly credited to some unfair business advantage of the Armenian diaspora over their Turkish hosts hampered by their religious strictures against usury and profiteering, as it is to its intellectual and moral superiority thereto, there needs be no malice in a claim of Armenian cultural tendencies towards commerce finding fertile grounds in Muslim lands, even if it is conjoined with speculative comparison of intellect and morality.

Long before T.E. Lawrence enjoyed his buggery by Turkish guards in Deraa, Western physicians observed that the statistics of anal syphilitic chancres in the Turkish capital were “too horrible for belief”. While it may no longer be fashionable to decry “the practise of unnatural vice” or censure the promulgation of unmentionable maladies, it would be hard to conjure intellectually sound grounds for foreclosing inquiry into the extent to which the doctrines of religious deception (taqiyya) and dissimulation (kitmān) that are commonly identified with Iranian culture and Shī‘a Islam, might be habitually practiced by Turkish Sunnis as part of their gainsaying of the Armenian holocaust.

But the most important component of intellectual and moral fitness is the capacity for dispassionate and disinterested contemplation of issues and committed engagement in fair and open discussion on all matters of contention and disagreement. In this regard, every Islamic culture bears the burden of a permanent state of war against its infidel neighbors.
Thus the jihād may be regarded as Islam’s instrument or carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muḥammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief in God. The Prophet Muḥammad is reported to have declared “some of my people will continue to fight victoriously for the sake of the truth until the last one of them will combat the anti-Christ.” [Abū Dā’ūd, Sunan (Cairo, 1935), Vol. III, p. 4.] Until that moment is reached the jihād, in one form or another, will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim community. It follows that the existence of a dār al-ḥarb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order; that the dār al-Islām is permanently under jihād obligation until the dār al-ḥarb is reduced to non-existence; and that any community which prefers to remain non-Islamic—in the status of a tolerated religious community accepting certain disabilities—must submit to Islamic rule and reside in the dār al-Islām or be bound as clients to the Muslim community.
—Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1955, p. 64
This belligerence stands as the main obstacle in the way of integrating Turkey with Western society. And as long as it so remains, the discussion of intellectual and moral superiority of the Armenians over the Turks can disclaim all racist prejudice, finding an adequate rationale in historical records and religious doctrines.
larvatus: (Default)
The trouble with Martha Nussbaum’s analogy between revulsion at “taking the penis of one man and putting it in the rectum of another man and wriggling it around in excrement”, and discarded disgust-based policies, from India’s denigration of its “untouchables” to the Nazi view of Jews, to a legally sanctioned regime of separate swimming pools and water fountains in the Jim Crow South, is that only the first moral sentiment has a sound basis in physiology. Any sort of anal penetration is intrinsically harmful, even when it gets done by a proctologist, just as any sort of radiation exposure is harmful, even when it is administered for therapeutic or diagnostic purposes. The physical effects of anal penetration, precipitated by the concomitant trauma to the connecting tissue, are analogous to injecting raw sewage into the recipient’s bloodstream. Incontinence is another common and well-documented effect of receptive anal intercourse. By contrast, no health liabilities inhere in being a Jew or a Dalit, or mixing different races at a common water supply. If in doubt, consult your doctor.
larvatus: (Default)
     “Molte son le volte che li muscoli componitori de’ labbri della bocca movano li muscoli laterali a sè congiunti, e altrettante son le volte che essi muscoli laterali movano li labbri d’essa bocca, ritornandola donde da sè ritornare non po, perchè l’uffizio del muscolo è di tirare e non di spingere, eccetto li membri genitali e la lingua.”
—Leonardo da Vinci, De vocie, in Edmondo Solmi, “Il trattato di Leonardo da Vinci sul linguaggio «De vocie»”, 1906
“There are many occasions when the muscles that form the lips of the mouth move the lateral muscles that are joined to them, and there are an equal number of occasions when these lateral muscles move the lips of this mouth, replacing it where it cannot return of itself, because the function of muscle is to pull and not to push except in the case of the genitals and the tongue.”
The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, translated by Edward MacCurdy, 1939
     “I tell you that one?…I tell you about the Polack who thinks Peter Pan’s a wash basin in a cathouse?…The difference between erotic and kinky? Erotic you use a feather, kinky you use the whole chicken?”
—Elmore Leonard, Stick, 1983
     I write about what people do to each other. It isn’t pretty.
—Derek Raymond, The Hidden Files, 1992
     HANNAH: Sex and literature. Literature and sex. Your conversation, left to itself, doesn’t have many places to go. Like two marbles rolling around a pudding basin. One of them is always sex.
BERNARD: Ah well, yes. Men all over.
HANNAH: No doubt. Einstein—relativity and sex. Chippendale—sex and furniture. Galileo—‘Did the earth move?’ What the hell is it with you people?
—Tom Stoppard, Arcadia, 1993


At the outset of an eponymous 1832 novel, Honoré de Balzac caused Louis Lambert, his precocious Swedenborgian hero, to air out his doctrines of meaning:
—Souvent, me dit-il, en parlant de ses lectures, j’ai accompli de délicieux voyages, embarqué sur un mot dans les abîmes du passé, comme l’insecte qui flotte au gré d’un fleuve sur quelque brin d’herbe. Parti de la Grèce, j’arrivais à Rome et traversais l’étendue des âges modernes. Quel beau livre ne composerait-on pas en racontant la vie et les aventures d’un mot ? sans doute il a reçu diverses impressions des événements auxquels il a servi ; selon les lieux il a réveillé des idées différentes ; mais n’est-il pas plus grand encore à considérer sous le triple aspect de l’âme, du corps et du mouvement ? À le regarder, abstraction faite de ses fonctions, de ses effets et de ses actes, n’y a-t-il pas de quoi tomber dans un océan de réflexions ? La plupart des mots ne sont-ils pas teints de l’idée qu’ils représentent extérieurement ? à quel génie sont-ils dus ! S’il faut une grande intelligence pour créer un mot, quel âge a donc la parole humaine ? L’assemblage des lettres, leurs formes, la figure qu’elles donnent à un mot, dessinent exactement, suivant le caractère de chaque peuple, des êtres inconnus dont le souvenir est en nous. Qui nous expliquera philosophiquement la transition de la sensation à la pensée, de la pensée au verbe, du verbe à son expression hiéroglyphique, des hiéroglyphes à l’alphabet, de l’alphabet à l’éloquence écrite, dont la beauté réside dans une suite d’images classées par les rhéteurs, et qui sont comme les hiéroglyphes de la pensée ? L’antique peinture des idées humaines configurées par les formes zoologiques n’aurait-elle pas déterminé les premiers signes dont s’est servi l’Orient pour écrire ses langages ? Puis n’aurait-elle pas traditionnellement laissé quelques vestiges dans nos langues modernes, qui toutes se sont partagé les débris du verbe primitif des nations, verbe majestueux et solennel, dont la majesté, dont la solennité décroissent à mesure que vieillissent les sociétés ; dont les retentissements si sonores dans la Bible hébraïque, si beaux encore dans la Grèce, s’affaiblissent à travers les progrès de nos civilisations successives ? Est-ce à cet ancien Esprit que nous devons les mystères enfouis dans toute parole humaine ? N’existe-t-il pas dans le mot VRAI une sorte de rectitude fantastique ? ne se trouve-t-il pas dans le son bref qu’il exige une vague image de la chaste nudité, de la simplicité du vrai en toute chose ? Cette syllabe respire je ne sais quelle fraîcheur. J’ai pris pour exemple la formule d’une idée abstraite, ne voulant pas expliquer le problème par un mot qui le rendît trop facile à comprendre, comme celui de VOL, où tout parle aux sens. N’en est-il pas ainsi de chaque verbe ? tous sont empreints d’un vivant pouvoir qu’ils tiennent de l’âme, et qu’ils lui restituent par les mystères d’une action et d’une réaction merveilleuse entre la parole et la pensée. Ne dirait-on pas d’un amant qui puise sur les lèvres de sa maîtresse autant d’amour qu’il en communique ? Par leur seule physionomie, les mots raniment dans notre cerveau les créatures auxquelles ils servent de vêtement. Semblables à tous les êtres, ils n’ont qu’une place où leurs propriétés puissent pleinement agir et se développer. Mais ce sujet comporte peut-être une science tout entière ! Et il haussait les épaules comme pour me dire : Nous sommes et trop grands et trop petits ! “Often,” he has said to me when speaking of his readings, “often have I made the most delightful voyages, carried along by a word down the abysses of the past, like an insect floating on a blade of grass consigned to the flow of a river. Starting from Greece, I would get to Rome, and traverse the extent of modern ages. What a fine book might be written of the life and adventures of a word! Doubtless it has received various stamps from the events that it has served; it has revealed different ideas in different places; but is it not still grander to consider it under the triple aspects of soul, body, and motion? To regard it in the abstract, apart from its functions, its effects, and its actions, is it not a matter of falling into an ocean of reflections? Are not most words colored by the idea they represent externally? To whose genius are they due? If it takes great intelligence to create a word, how old does it make human speech? The combination of letters, their shapes, and the look they give to the word, are the exact reflection, in accordance with the character of each nation, of the unknown beings whose memory survives in us. Who would philosophically explain to us the transition from the sensation to a thought, from the thought to a word, from the word to its hieroglyphic expression, from the hieroglyphics to an alphabet, from the alphabet to written eloquence, whose beauty resides in a series of images classified by rhetoricians, and forming, as it were, the hieroglyphics of thought? Was it not the ancient mode of representing human ideas as embodied in the forms of animals that determined the shapes of the first signs that the Orient used for writing down its language? Then has it not left its traditional traces within our modern languages, which have all inherited some remnant of the primitive speech of nations, a majestic and solemn tongue whose majesty and solemnity decrease as communities grow old; whose sonorous tones ring in the Hebrew Bible, and still are noble in Greece, but grow weaker under the progress of our successive civilizations? Is it to this time-honored spirit that we owe the mysteries lying buried in every human word? Is there not a certain fantastic rectitude in the word TRUE? Does not the compact brevity of its sound contain a vague image of chaste nudity, of the simplicity of truth in all things? The syllable exudes an ineffable freshness. I chose the formula of an abstract idea on purpose, not wishing to pose the problem with a word that should make it too easy to the apprehension, as the word FLIGHT for instance, which is a direct appeal to the senses. But is it not so with every word? They are all stamped with a living power that comes from the soul, and which they restore thereto through the mysterious and wonderful action and reaction between thought and speech. Might we not speak of it as a lover who draws from the lips of his mistress as much love as he gives? Thus, by their mere physiognomy, words call to life in our brain the beings whom they serve to clothe. In the way of all beings, they have but one place where their properties can fully act and develop. But perhaps the subject comprises a science to itself!” And he would shrug his shoulders, as if to say, “But we are too high and too low!”

Thus Balzac extends etymological naturalism of Cratylus into the realm of Romantic aesthetics. In keeping with his observations, etymological creation continues in our days. Accordingly, in a muchly discussed article published by The New York Times on 5 November 2006, James Gleick testified:
Much of the new vocabulary appears online long before it will make it into books. Take geek. It was not till 2003 that O.E.D.3 caught up with the main modern sense: “a person who is extremely devoted to and knowledgeable about computers or related technology.” Internet chitchat provides the earliest known reference, a posting to a Usenet newsgroup, net.jokes, on Feb. 20, 1984.
In a Usenet message dated 10 January 2004, OED lexicographer Jesse Sheidlower confirmed the policy of “accep[ting] Usenet quotes as archived on (formerly) DejaNews or (now) Google Groups, in certain circumstances.” Hence a specimen of OED draft entry dated March 2003, which reflects such acceptance in language unfit to print in our newspaper of record: Beware of Rodents! )
larvatus: (Default)
It is near future, and our planet is proliferating with humanity. You are a 28 year old man fleeing the roving bands of cannibals. Your only refuge is an uninhabited tropical island copiously supplied by coconuts and circled by schools of fish. Your only remaining concern is to satisfy your raging heterosexual libido in a politically correct fashion. Alas, you have no condoms, and your scruples debar you from orthogenital intercourse on pain of aggravating the global catastrophe. You must choose an unfailingly stimulating companion for the rest of your life. Unfortunately, your choices are limited.

[Poll #1495193]
larvatus: (Default)
Эдуард Лимонов: “Voleur un jour,—voleur toujours”,—гласит французская пословица, т.е. своровавший однажды,—вор навсегда. В данном случае предавший однажды, предаст еще раз.



Эдуaрд Кузнецов: Способов загнать жертву в западню много. Обычно «авторитетный вор», облюбовав «красюка», демонстративно приближает его к себе, пока тот не привыкнет к заискивающей почтительности. Потом втравливает его в карточную игру и оплачивает его долги, но, когда они достигают значительной суммы, вдруг впадает в гнев и требует вернуть все истраченные и проигранные деньги. Но где их взять? Вчера еще в почете, вчера ещё он сам травил, избивал, а то и участвовал в убийстве «неплательщиков», а сегодня… Кругом виноват, всякая шавка, недавние льстецы и лизоблюды теперь язвят и оплёвывают его всенародно. И сроку всего два дня… Затравленный, считая себя сплошь виноватым, он, съёжившись от страха, ждет смерти или чуда. «Не боись, паря,—хрипит ему искуситель.—Никто не узнает. Опять заживём как боги… Не боись: один раз—не пидарас…». И всё, человеку конец.

larvatus: (Default)
In Russian, to mount steam engine style (поставить паровоз) is a form of Catullan congress that simultaneously bookends a passively voiced, feminine gendered subject with an irrumator as a prefix and a fututor or a pedicator as a suffix. What would you call this practice in other languages?

Ставить паровоз—это «pedicabo et irrumabo» или «futuo et irrumabo», только одной особи, одновременно и на пару. Один irrumator, другой fututor или pedicator, а между ними страдательный залог женского рода. Как это сказать на других языках?

Inspired by banter hosted by [info]sguez; crossposted to [info]larvatus, [info]linguaphiles, and [info]ru_translate.
larvatus: (Default)
Игорь Петров [info]labas косвенным образом опровергает «Первое послание к корефанам» Эдуарда Багирова [info]bagirov, утверждающее помимо прочего: “Эдипов комплекс у меня отсутствует начисто, а путь в жизни я себе прокладываю отнюдь не хуем.” В соответствии с убедительным свидетельством Петрова, литературная карьера архетипичного гастарбайтера, заканчивающаяся хищным вываливанием старческого бюста на его кнопочку “Delete”, основана на первичном акте уличного мочеиспускания, предположительно проистекавшего из его детородного органа.
Read more... ) А разгадка проста. Read more... )

March 2014

S M T W T F S
       1
23 4 5 6 78
9 1011 12 13 14 15
16 171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 19th, 2017 11:31 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios