Here there be monsters (socratic) wrote,
Here there be monsters

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Random Ness

Gag Gift:


A gift intended to generate humor through implied mockery of the recipient.


An 1,100 page book about American democracy for someone working 17 hour days so brutal the last thing he managed to read was the back of a single serving Cocoa Puffs box, which he did not finish.


Is it just me or does it seem like New Years follows too close on the heels of Christmas. I mean Christmas takes its time developing. The Santas and Frosties come out around the same time as the first leaves are turning, and the music starts up in the malls just after Thanksgiving, and by the time you're actually having a holly jolly Christmas you're more excited about the fact that you get away from the damned thing for the next 7 months or so than by any gifts or religious implications.

New Years, on the other hand, always seems to sneak up like a thief in the night. One day you're in a frenzy because there's not enough tinsel on your sacrificial pine, and the next you've got a mere five days to collect sufficient alcohol for New Years Eve. It's so little time that even in America the greeting card industry hasn't managed to capitalize on the holiday. That's a truly tragic state of affairs.

It'd be one thing if there was a reason to have New Years on January 1st, but there isn't. December 31 is usually a short, cold, day where there may be snow. January 1st is exactly the same. Nothing's changed. No Solstice, no Equinox, just another day. If we're going to assign New Years day an arbitrary date then why don't we make it one that gives us some distance between Christmas and it. Say February 2nd, or March 18th? That'd give time for our holiday industry to ramp up and drown us in advertisements for shit that we don't really need but are expected to buy anyway because, hey, it's New Years.

For too long have the Holiday profiteers suffered from the cramming together of Christmas, Channukah, and New Years. I say it's time for a change.


This link talks about the growing popularity of anti-aging creams among the 20-something set. While I am glad that our society has finally recognized how grotesque it is for even young people to look their age, I think we can do better. What about kids in high school? Middle school? Kindergarteners? We're letting them off the hook? Why look 5 when with the right application of chemicals to your skin you could appear 3 and a half? No reason.

No it's time for this nation's cosmetic companies to produce an anti-aging cream for the big-wheels set. Call it baby's first attempt to stave off the ravages of age before he's as old and used up as a naturally aged 25 year old woman. And why stop there? We shouldn't. How about anti-aging baby formula, for the little snapper who wants to be mistaken for 3 months even when he's 4 months old? Heck, while we're at it why should we let fetuses off the hook? Just because we start counting age from birth doesn't mean that background radiation can't make its way into the womb. Skin starts dying as soon as it's formed. Don't you want to preserve the youthful look of a zygote for as long as possible? I think you do.

I predict that only good things can come of this.

P.S. I'm sure some sarcastic joker is going to say something about anti-aging cream for sperm and eggs. Come on, that's ridiculous. That doesn't make any sense. Let's try to be serious here people, looking your age is a terrible thing.
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.