My fever and headache have broken, they did so during film section, which is good. I got most of my stuff done except going to the continuing ed office and handing in my paper outline, which I knew I wouldn't manage. I'm really glad that my head feels better. Badminton sucked mightily with pain and lack of coordination. Whenever one of these headaches breaks I always sweat from my head. It's weird, but when I feel that wetness in my hair I know that I'm about to feel better. I wonder if there's an explanation for that.
Things are getting tight with my work this semester. This is especially the case with a presentation I need to give on monday due to my being sick and not fighting in class today. Ugh, that's going to be ugly. Fortunately I am good at bullshitting. That alone may save me.
I have 2 film classes and 2 discussion sections left before the class is over. To be honest they are both irrelevant at this point because there is no final for the class, only a paper, and I am already guaranteed full marks in the discussion section. It means 10 more hours of being in the presence of LHG before she is gone forever from my field of vision and hopefully soon thereafter my mind. Never talking to her was probably a mistake but frankly I'm just not good at initiating conversation with anyone. It comes from years of social exclusion and rejection, I am essentially reactive in my social interactions and even after someone has initiated contact with me I am unlikely to reciprocate until after a couple more interactions. It's not that I'm anti-social, it's that I just assume nobody really wants to talk to me even though I know I'm smart and witty.
This seems as good a place as any to rehash one of my personal pet peeves with modern American society, which is the disconnect between sex and romance. I have been known, on more than the occasional instance, to look at men's magazines and websites like www.askmen.com . This is partially because the combination of pictures of underdressed hot women and dirty jokes is awesome and partially because they have a sort of trainwreck appeal. One of the main things that these magazines sell is instructions on how to have more and better sex. They are unashamed and explicit about this mission. While they do have relationship advice from time to time it is often of the "how to manipulate your woman" or "how to make up for the fact that you forgot valentine's day" type, which is still superficial. Indeed it seems to me that superficial relationships have been privaleged above deeper relationships in our modern society.
Today in class the guy sitting to the right of me was talking about how he knew a dean in the admissions office who worked his ass off to make sure that lots of pretty girls got into Columbia, presumably so he could have more eye candy and an opportunity to fuck some 18 year olds. The guy on the left of me said that he would rather sleep his way to the top of showbiz than actually work his ass off to get there (this may have been in jest but didn't seem to be.) Me, I'm a romantic. I'm still caught up in that whole crazy idea of actually connecting with another person on a level beyond the physical and allowing the physical develop out of that connection. Call it sentimentalist, call it juvenile, call it what you will. Of course I've pretty much given up on that. Not just because of my weight (which is going down slower than I'd like) but also because I think that the current culture doesn't support that kind of behavior. Relationships are cast as essentially exchanges of money/status and beauty. What a pointless enterprise. If I ever became famous or wealthy I think it would inhibit rather than enhance my chances of finding a mate because I'll be extremely paranoid about engaging in this type of commercial transaction.
The devaluation of sexual intimacy is another thing that bothers me greatly. Maybe devaluation is a strange descriptor to use of something that is sold for tens of billions of dollars every year, but I'm talking about on a personal level not a corporatized one. For many women (and I will reiterate here just for the hell of it that I'm only interested in women because, well, sexually I'm only interested in women. I'm not holding a double standard or a hypocritical position, it's just that if a friend of mine screws everything with a vagina that moves and several chicks in vegetative states, it doesn't really affect me. Okay I wouldn't stand for a friend raping a girl in a vegetative state, but he could totally have consensual sex with a paralyzed woman. Or man for that matter.) it seems that sex has become an entertainment on par with a game of tiddlywinks or cow-tipping in terms of the amount of forethought required and the expected consequences. Granted this is not universal, and I'm not necessarily trying to make a moral judgement on it, since it's not like they're hurting anyone per se, but it does beg the question of what is left once sexual intimacy is of minimal value. Deep relationships lose their main signifier, and it becomes unclear how one expresses true connection. "We've been dating three months and I think we're in love. Now it's time for me to give you the very same sacred gift I once gave some sleazebag during a party because I was inebriated and the music wasn't really great." I've read that when women really like a man they will withhold sex in order to avoid looking cheap. Isn't that inherently dishonest if they are having sex with men they don't really like? It would seem to me that one should avoid BEING easy if that's important to you and not worry about the appearance of being easy if you're unconcerned with how difficult it is for a male to obtain sex from you.
But wait? What about the male double standard that says it's okay for guys to fuck around but inappropriate for women to do the same? In answer to that I'd have to ask why the sorts of men who have this type of double standard are attractive? They are morally and intellectually dishonest and while they might be fine for a screw I'm not sure why one would WANT to pursue a relationship with a guy like that. Okay, I understand why, but I don't approve.
This leads into another perpetual complaint of guys who don't get any, which is that women have a tendancy to give sex to fellows who are, to put it mildly, undeserving. I mean if girls were starfucking Nelson Mandela and having sex with poet laureattes it would be a reasonably agreeable situation. This is not, for the most part, what's going on. During the wild oats sowing phase women are apt to sow said oats with arrogant, reasonably good looking, self serving pricks. This is a big turnoff. No matter how attractive a woman is in the numerous ways a woman can be attractive, it's hard to reconcile having a relationship with her if she's shared her most intimate places with a dozen guys who you wouldn't want to share a cup of coffee or a conversation with. It's true that I used to resent these guys because they would pick on me and generally treat me like shit, but that's died down and at this point they generally treat me as an equal (I come off as smart, funny, and non-conformist. I'm not a suck up and when in a classroom or other public setting I display confidence. Plus most of them that I deal with these days are in their twenties and have grown up and matured at least somewhat.) I still loathe them. I can't stand guys who don't respect other people or ideas and care only about status, sex, and money. I will never be like them no matter what happens, I'd rather die first LITERALLY. I have trouble respecting women who sleep with these pricks, fueling their self agrandizement and justifying their putrid existances. Women are constantly complaining about their ex-boyfriends, the ones they complain about almost always fitting the mold of this type (the guy they dumped because he sent them flowers too much and cried after sex generally not meriting mention), and it's difficult not to blame them for their choices. Part of it is, as the Spin Doctors put it, "how could you want him when you know you could have me" and part of it is "why do I want what he's had? There's no value in it anymore." Both of these are somewhat immature stances, but that doesn't entirely invalidate them, at least not on the surface of it.
So what does all this mean? None of this is original or particularly interesting. It's age old complaints repackaged by a new loser. I'm just contemplating my future. The pool of women who interest me is naturally somewhat limited. I don't have any attraction to young women with appealing figures, symetrical faces, and empty heads. I'm not interested in overly religious women or career obsessed harpies who are like those status obsessed dickwads only with tits and rounder butts. I wouldn't say that my physical standards are overly high, partially because it would be hypocritical and partially because a woman with a washboard chest and a beaked nose but interesting things to say and a twisted sense of humor is infinitely more interesting than one with a pair of zeppelins strapped to her front and no idea why claiming that Megan's law is the water polution standards legislation that came out of the "love canal" site is hilarious. I prefer women who prefer feminine attire, not halter tops and short shorts (are you trying to distract me from what you're saying because it's offensive or just because it's uninteresting?) but skirts and blouses. I also dislike designer clothes, and girls with "Abercrombie and Fitch" printed on the butts of their pants just make me sad for my g-g-generation. In truth it's individuals that are attractive, trying to define a type is just limiting and unecessary. In my experience I tend to find about one in 4 girls physically appealing, 1 in 10 lacking in any glaring flaws, 1 in 25 very attractive, and 1 in 200 or so mind-blowing.
I'm not sure why I felt compelled to write all of that. It doesn't really hang together or cohere in any meanignful way and it lacks a conclusion. I will continue my current policy of being open to whatever comes along but not pursuing anything in particular. I guess a friend of mine has been bitterly complaining about women for the last few days and I wanted to put a bunch of the complaints and beliefs into writing and see if they really held together. They don't. All you need to do is find someone who shares your values and interests and the rest of it doesn't really matter. Her past behavior will probably be consistant with what you think it should have been because of the convergence of values and beliefs.
What a waste of time and space writing all that meaningless shit out. This is the kind of entry I'd just junk if this journal weren't about self discovery and just constant self probing and WRITING. No looking back, no regrets.
I think I have an idea for a short story. Hopefully I'll have time to write it in the near future. It will suck but just the act of writing something will be good.
I am still wracked by self doubt and loathing. I think the life of the Hollywood writer is not for me. The latest episode of The Sopranoes was brutal in its portrayal of that life. At least we got to see Tim Daley get the shit beaten out of him. That was a positive.
There were a couple other things I wanted to say but I don't remember them right now. Maybe I'm still a little disoriented from the head cold. That could explain this incoherent and straight up silly entry. Yeah, that's the ticket!