Sexbots are going to be big: Invest now

Used to be when I said that I was joking.  Nowadays I’m mostly not.  Mostly.

We are rapidly reaching the point where there’s nothing a woman can do for a man in the bedroom that justifies the risk of what she can do to him in the courtroom later.

Consider the following exchange (the left hand side–ignore the wisecracks on the right side.  Or not.  There’s a bit of dark humor to be found there).

burning_c558d7_5486452

So, a man can meet a woman, have every reason to believe he has her consent, have sex, and then later she can retroactively remove that consent making the act retroactively raped.  Called out explicitly:

nu9rafv

Fortunately, for the moment, this position is not a legal one, but law generally follows culture.  Let this attitude become general to the point where people start electing lawmakers with that view, and the laws will follow.

And a certain segment of the population is trying to make it that way, and suggesting fabricating evidence to make things “work” that way even though the law does not:

letsfakearape

And it only works one way.  Only the man is adjudged guilty, never the woman as in the following:

a-question-two-women-complete-strangers-are-at-a-party-1436696

“Women cannot rape”.  Which explains:

rapeposter1-560x491

Both of them were drunk.  Only one of them was able to be the rapist and only one of them was able to be the victim.

Some people have suggested that limiting ones sexual encounters to within marriage.  Well, that might improve ones odds somewhat but in the end it’s still a gamble.  First off, “marital rape” is a thing:

marital-rape-2-638

And all of the above items including retroactive withdrawal of  consent can be applied.

You might say that your wife (and it’s you husbands this is directed to because…have you read this far?) would never do anything like that.  And you may be right.  But the divorce courts are full of men who never thought their wives would “do something like that”. (And, yes, they’re also full of women who never thought their husbands would do something like that either, but the women generally don’t have to worry that their husbands will add rape charges to the issue.  And women initiate divorces more than men.)

So…sexbots.  they’re going to be big.

Invest now.

Advertisements

Feeding the Active Writer: Low Carb Chili con Carne

Purists insist that Chili should not have beans.  I don’t want to get into that argument but for someone on a low-carb diet beans are anathema.

This is the latest iteration of a slow-cooker Chili recipe I’ve been tinkering with.  It varies as the mood strikes or based on what I have on hand.

Ingredients:

  • 3 lb Ground beef
  • 1 16 oz Jar salsa (pick one you like of the heat level you like–some of the other ingredients will tend to moderate the heat, others add to it)
  • 1 14 oz can Fire Roasted tomatoes
  • 1/2 cup chopped onion.
  • 2 Tbsp dried cilantro
  • 1 tbsp Chipotle chili powder
  • 1 tbsp cumin

In a large mixing bowl combine the ingredients.  Mix well.  Easiest way, without a good stand mixer, is to just get in with your hands and squish the ingredients together.  Plastic gloves can keep things sanitary.

Line the crock of a 4-5 quart slow cooker with a liner bag.  Pour the chili into the bag.

Cook on low 8-9 hours.

Stir well at the end.  Serve topped with cheese.

Enjoy.  It keeps well in the refrigerator for later heat and eat.

Memorial Day Weekend Road Trip: Lincoln Library and Museum (Photo heavy)

The Lincoln Library and Museum in Springfield, IL is just about 3 hours from here.  So we decided to go give it a visit today.

Most of this is going to be pictures.  But first a commentary.  Conventional wisdom is that the result of the US Civil War was an unalloyed good.  It preserved the Union, led to the end of chattel slavery in the US and began the road that led to full civil rights for various minority groups.  And I would agree that those are good things.  One can imagine the disaster had the US and Confederacy remained separate and each of those two nations taken different sides in the World Wars.

However, there is another side.  When the US was founded, we were 13 sovereign states, with a central government both to be our “public face” to the rest of the world and to smooth interaction between the several States.  But, within their own borders, each State being sovereign.  “13 laboratories of Freedom” (34 by the time South Carolina became the first of the Southern States to secede).

The Civil War changed that.  While the process was not instant, the Civil War reduced the States from states–“a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government”–to little more than provinces–“a principal administrative division of certain countries or empires”–in all but name.  Instead of “These United States” it was “The United States.”  With this began an inexorable increase in the size and scope of the Federal government, in its interference in the daily lives of the common citizen, and the increasing restrictions on individual liberty.

One could argue that there was no other way to preserve the union, particularly in hindsight.  As I mention above, a United States and a Confederate States each taking a different side in one of the World Wars could well have been a disaster.  However, I don’t think it was quite so cut and dried.  For one thing, it took a very specific set of circumstances, circumstances that could not last, to make the “slave economy” viable.  It could not last.  And while the Confederate Constitution enshrined slavery, once establishing secession as a viable option for States there would be nothing stopping a Confederate State, once the changing economy renders it impossible to even pretend that slavery is economically viable, from seceding in turn from the Confederacy and rejoining the Union.  I doubt the Confederacy would have lasted long as a separate nation.

But it didn’t happen that way so we’ll never know.

There’s a whole lot more that could be discussed but that’s enough for now.  On to the pictures.

Knights of Aerioch: Of the origin of the Gods and the Beginning of Days

A little extra for people who have been reading my Knights of Aerioch series: the story of the Gods and the creation of the world and its early days.


Many men tell the tale of the Gods and the Origin of Days.  Some tell more.  Some tell less.  Some give the Gods different names.  But all agree that there were first three, and from each of those three came three more.

This is the tale as it was told in Aerioch of old.

The beginning of days

In the beginning there was darkness.  And the darkness was without form.  The darkness could not be everywhere, for there was no everywhere.  There was no place.  There was no time.  There was simply the darkness.  The darkness was all, and all was the darkness.

From the darkness, three lights arose.  And the lights knew themselves as different from the darkness.  And the three lights knew themselves as different from each other.  And the first light beheld the other two and said, “I am a light in the darkness.  There are other lights, in other places, and they are different from me.” And so the first light knew that there was place.  And the other two lights saw the first light and they, too, knew that there was place.

And the first light said, again, “I will go from this place to the places of the other lights.  And I will see if they know themselves as I know myself.  And I will see if they know the darkness as I know the darkness.”

And so, the first light came to the other two lights, and the three lights came together.  And when the three lights came near to one another, the first light said, “I name myself Eranah.  In me is the power of all that will be but is not now.” And as Eranah spoke, proclaiming that there are things that are not, and things that will be, so did she speak of time.  And thus time came into being.  And as time became a thing that was, her power grew less.  And so it would be forever after.  For as more things came to be, less there would be of things that will be and were not.

The second light then spoke, for he had gained in power as Eranah had spoken. “I am Jandak,” said he, “In me is the power of all that is.” And yet, Jandak’s power was slight, for as yet the darkness and the three lights and place and time were all that was.

“I have no name,” said the third light, in a whisper scarce having the strength for mighty Eranah to hear. “My strength is in what was, but is no more, but all that ever was yet remains.  And so my strength is naught.”

And so the three lights remained and were not alone.  And the three lights were the first Gods.  And where the three Gods abode, the darkness was no more.  And The Nameless One grew in strength for the darkness that was not.

The three Gods counseled together.  Though they were three, yet they knew loneliness.  And loneliness was.  And Eranah’s power grew less and Jandak’s more.

And it came to pass that Eranah spoke to the others. “We three are alone in this place.  Near to us, the darkness is no more, but beyond we know of naught but darkness.  But, behold, we three did arise from the darkness.  Let us then, seek through the darkness for other lights, that we may no longer know loneliness.”

Jandak’s voice rose in agreement. “If my sister Eranah so wills, this will I do.  For as more comes to be, so will Eranah’s strength fade and mine increase.”

“Of what good is power when there is loneliness,” Eranah said. “Since time came forth at my words it has weighed heavily with only we three to share it.  Let us, then, bring an end to this loneliness even if it shall be that my power shall be reduced.”

“If the loneliness that is becomes no more, then shall my power increase,” was all that The Nameless One said.

Eranah kept the words of The Nameless One in her heart and was troubled.

And so the three Gods went forth into the darkness.  And many were the things they found. Continue reading “Knights of Aerioch: Of the origin of the Gods and the Beginning of Days”

Big Blue: A new cover and a new snippet.

Lieutenant Steve Pomerantz, US Navy, raced above the waves in his Seahawk helicopter. No dipping sonar this time. Instead, the helicopter carried a full load of Hellfire missiles.

“All secure back there?” Pomerantz called into the intercom. The helicopter bounced lightly in the turbulence.

“We’re good, LT,” Geoffrey Torgersen, the sensor operator, said. “Although the doc’s looking a bit green.” Silence for a moment then. “No. Here.”

Pomerantz winced at a burst of static.

“I’m here,” Dr. Thomas Sanderson said. “Most of me. I think you left my stomach back on the Truman.”

“Good,” Pomerantz said. “Not much use for it out here. You can pick it up again when we get back to the carrier.”

He switched to the radio and glanced down at the commo “cheat sheet” strapped to his left thigh. “Hound Dog Three. This is Gonzo One, over.”

“Gonzo. Hound Dog.” The pilot of the helicopter currently tracking Big Blue responded.

“Hound dog, we’ve got a VIP here wanting another look at Big Blue. A real close look. Status on Big Blue?”

“Gonzo, Hound dog. Big Blue is still deep. Two hours since last breach. Should be coming up soon. Oh, and Gonzo, Truman briefed me on the mission. Better you than me, buddy.”

Pomerantz laughed. “Hound Dog, look at the bright side. I’ll never have to buy another drink so long as I live.”

The other pilot laughed. “Roger that, Gonzo One. Roger that. Hold one.”

Pomerantz glanced circled to port, keeping his speed high.

“Steve, fuel,” Rodriguez said over the intercom.

Pomerantz glanced at the instrument panel. “Roger, Charlie. We’re good for now.”

“Gonzo One, Hound Dog Three. Big Blue is coming up. I say again, Big Blue is heading for the surface.”

“Coordinates, Hound Dog?”

The pilot of Hound Dog Three read off a set of map grid coordinates.

“Charlie?” Pomerantz said over the link to the copilot.

Ensign Charlie Rodriguez tapped on the controls of the nav system, entering the coordinates.

“Hold tight,” Pomerantz said into the general intercom, warning not just Rodriguez, but Torgersen and Sanderson. He pulled into a tight turn, circling about five hundred meters from the spot that indicated Hound Dog Three’s best guess at where Big Blue would surface.

The plates broke the surface. Pomerantz shoved the cyclic stick all the way forward, adjusting the collective to maintain altitude. He veered outside his previous circle in preparation for veering back toward Big Blue.

The head came up. Pomerantz brought the helicopter around, barreling headlong at the giant creature. “Hit him, Charlie, right in the snout.”

At Pomerantz’ left, Rodriguez fired one of the Hellfire missiles. The missile flashed across the distance to explode just below Big Blue’s left eye socket.

Big Blue opened his mouth and roared, a strangely high-pitched sound from so large a creature. Pomerantz pulled to the right, keeping his speed high. As he turned, Big Blue dropped behind where he could see from the pilot’s seat.

“It’s staying on the surface,” Torgersen said. “If I had to guess, I’d say it’s treading water.”

“Shooting that goo yet?” Pomerantz asked.

“Nothing yet. I think it’s looking for what bit it.”

“Something that size,” Sanderson broke in. “It would take time for nerve impulses to travel, for its brain to process them. It may very well be confused.”

“Then let’s confuse it some more,” Pomerantz said. “Charlie. Can you put one down its throat?”

“I can sure try,” Rodriquez responded.

“Then here we go.” Pomerantz pulled the helicopter around again, coming in low, nearly skimming the tops of the swells. Big Blue roared again and two Hellfire missiles lanced out from the Seahawk. One missed entirely but the other flew straight into Big Blue’s mouth.

Yet again, Big Blue roared, but this time a luminous stream shot out of his mouth. The stream swept toward them. Pomerantz hauled up on the collective and back on the cyclic. The helicopter raced for the sky and the stream passed under them. At the apex of their climb, Pomerantz kicked the right pedal. The helicopter pivoted, turning nose down and back the way they had come. Pomerantz leveled out and again trimmed for high speed run.

“Coming back this way!” Torgersen called. “High.”

Pomerantz shoved the collective down. The helicopter dropped, avoiding the return sweep of the luminous stream.

“Fuck! It’s following us.”

At Torgersen’s warning, Pomerantz once again pointed the nose skyward, this time he kept going. For an instant he could see the sea through the spinning rotor. His hands moved of their own accord. The world spun about them and, an instant later, the helicopter flew upright once more.

“He’s going under!” Torgersen called. “We did it.”

“Did he tag us?” Pomerantz asked.

“Instruments still good,” Rodriguez responded. “Engine and transmission smooth as glass. We made it.”

Pomerantz cut their speed and glanced at the fuel gauge. Still good but… He dropped the helicopter into ground effect to conserve fuel. He turned in a slow circle until he spotted Big Blue’s dorsal plates from the right side window.

He scowled. Something did not seem right. The plates were cutting through the water, not… “Oh, shit!” Before he could more than begin to climb away, Big Blue’s head burst out of the water. A luminous stream shot in their direction.

Pomerantz frantic climb evaded direct contact with the stream but the helicopter went silent except for the chirrop of the still turning rotors. “Fuck!” Pomerantz shouted. “Geoff! Raft! We’re going down.” With practiced hands he put the helicopter into auto rotation. In the distance he saw Big Blue sink beneath the waves.

Pomerantz swore as the helicopter descended toward the water. “That’s two helicopters you owe me, motherfucker.”


$4.99 in Kindle Store

When an accidentally detonated nuke from a stolen submarine releases something never before seen, Sea Hawk pilot Lieutenant Steve Pomerantz is sent to investigate. He finds a blue-green monster ten times the size of the largest Tyrannosaurus Rex and seemingly impervious to every weapon in mankind’s arsenal.

Earthquakes in the South Pacific, at a location dubbed as the most remote spot on Earth, raise tsunamis all along the West Coast. Air Force Captain Jamal White, pilot of a C-130 Hercules is pulled off of search and rescue duties to ferry two scientists to investigate. What they find is a new continent arisen from the deep. And on that continent something stirs, bringing terror and madness in its wake.

Two monsters, one from the frozen North Atlantic, one from the remote South Pacific, on a collision course with the survival of mankind hanging in the balance.

The arrow is plugging the wound.

In other places I’ve made it pretty clear that I lean sharply libertarian and that the role of government should be sharply limited. “To preserve these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”  That’s it.  Going beyond what’s necessary to “secure these rights” is to go beyond “just powers.”

As I point out in earlier blog posts, a certain level of government actually helps to secure the basic rights of Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)

Obviously, we are far, far beyond that point.  To get there we need to cut government back, way back.

Here’s where I part company with many Libertarians.  They want to do it in one fell swoop.  Every part of government that is not part of the minimum necessary “to secure these rights” (which some consider to be “all of it”) must go.  Now.

That, however, may not be a good idea.  Oh, the end goal of getting rid of most of what government does may be a laudable one but the question is how.

Consider this analogy.  A man has been shot with a number of arrows and is lying there like a meat pincushion.  The wounds, if properly treated, are such that he can survive and heal.  If left as his he’ll bleed to death.

Some folk have the instinct to jerk out all the arrows since they’re what caused his wounding.

Very foolish that.  Those arrows are also plugging the holes so he doesn’t quickly bleed out.

This is where we are with government.  It’s bleeding free society to death, slow or fast depending on your perspective but it’s also “plugging the holes”.

Consider what President Dwight Eisenhower said about Social Security and other programs: “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group of course that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”

Eisenhower was not endorsing Social Security and those other programs.  No, he was pointing out the reality that so many people had grown dependent on them that people would rise in such outrage that the “offending” party would be voted out of every office they hold, from President all the way down to dog catcher, and never be heard from again.

And the plain fact is that many more people are dependent on many more government programs than ever before.  Cut the program and people will suffer, in the short term at least.  Maybe, probably, they would if given time adjust to the new situation and the economic growth that comes from the increased freedom and less tying up of the economy caused by the government passing money back and forth from hand to hand with no new products and services to show for it would improve their lot.  But there’s the problem “given time”.  Most people will only see their immediate hardship.  As the line says from the movie Annie (the 1982 version; I haven’t seen the 2014 version and don’t intend to) “People don’t eat in the long run.”

Thus, while reducing the size of government is a good thing–indeed, it’s something that must happen if we’re to remain anything resembling a free and prosperous country–great care must be taken in how its done.  We must be prepared to deal with the “bleeding” that will come from removing each “arrow” lest instead of a healthy, prosperous nation we end up with a exanguinated corpse.

Recognizing this, of course, makes me a horrible “statist” who doesn’t care about freedom.  Or so I’ve been told.

A day that will live in…love and kindness?

Another ramble because this is a somewhat emotional outburst.

The date, December 8, 1941.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is with great sadness that I announce the entirely understandable attack yesterday on the Pearl Harbor Imperial Aggression Base, by rightfully outraged Japanese freedom fighters.  As we look at the results of this courageous effort by the Japanese we have to ask ourselves what provoked it?  Was it Japanophobia?  What it the American Presence in the Philippines and other areas Japan claimed as part of the Greater East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere?  Or was it our refusal to sell to Japan the oil needed for their efforts to liberate Manchuria and China from their Manchurian and Chinese overlords?

We will probably never know the true cause for this random act of workplace violence.  All we know is that hate can never end hate.  We must answer this Japanese action with love and kindness.  We must have empathy for them.  Clearly the problem is a lack of jobs and a poor economy driving them to violence.  Only if we share our own wealth and industrial might–but do so in a way that makes no changes to their culture which changes would be Cultural Imperialism and give the more reason to attack us–can we have peace.

Therefore, I am asking Congress to draft an unconditional surrender as of this date.


Sound ridiculous?  To most of you, I’m sure it does.  Of course, there are a few people who actually agree with all of the excoriation of America in the above paragraphs.

However as ridiculous as the above sounds, by just changing a few details it could be a good summary of what many in the media and the “intelligentsia” say whenever there is an Islamist attack on the West.  What did we do to deserve it?  How did we provoke it?  Empathize with the attackers.  Love them.  “Share” our wealth with them (but not in any way that might influence their culture).  And, above all, be very, very careful to avoid “Islamophobia”.

First off, before I go any farther, let me just say that my heart goes out to the victims of the Manchester bombing.  May Frigga guard and keep them.

But please, don’t just offer prayers.  There are charities set up to help:  https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/TogetherWithManchester

The Manchester bombing is not the first time terrorists have targeted children.  But to be blunt, most of the cases happen in war torn areas where violence is so common that even horrible atrocities get “lost in the noise”.  Humans are tribal.  It’s no coincidence that so many cultures’ names for themselves was some variation of “the people” making all others “not people”.  Even the word “barbarian” was originally an onomatopoeia from “bar bar” the sound a sheep makes:  people not speaking Greek (at that time and place) not being fully human.

Thus, the simple truth is that the vast majority of people will feel less affected by people far away with whom they have little connection.  The poison and acid attacks on schoolgirls in Afghanistan?  A statistic to most people. (It takes a particular individual given an individual story to draw people’s attention–thus Malala Yousafzai’s becoming a cause celebre).  Boko Haram’s many attacks and kidnappings.  A hashtag campaign?  Really?  Taliban slaughter in a school in Pakistan?  War is horrid but it’s far away.  Beslan?  The same.

This tribal nature is not an admirable trait, perhaps, but it is there.  The great wonder of Western civilization is not how tribal we remain, but how much we’ve ovecome that tendency.  Imperfectly to be sure, yet still the gold standard for the rest of the world.

But it is still there.  So when it’s some of “ours” that are the victims of attack, particularly those we feel a deep and instinctive need to protect–our children–the reaction is deep and visceral.  You might say we should feel as deeply for the others and I might agree, But what were we supposed to do about it?  I may have decried the hashtag campaign above, but what were we supposed to do?  Mount a military operation and invade Nigeria in an effort to recover the kidnapped girls?  Without local resources, good local intelligence, or any of the things that might actually make such an operation a success?

Some folk say we should never interfere with other countries’ internal matters so long as they don’t directly threaten us.  And a strong case can be made for that.  Others say that we can’t just sit by and let atrocities go without limit and not do something.  And a case can be made for that, too.  As the old expression goes, “Reasonable men may disagree.”  But even in the latter case, we can’t interfere in everything.  We have to pick and choose.  And often pragmatic considerations have to control.  However, I submit that an operation that cannot succeed is not only a failure from practical grounds but from moral ones.  Throwing away lives and resources for nothing is evil in itself.

So, in most of these cases, there’s really nothing we can do about them, so to protect themselves and get on with their lives most people “tune it out” to a certain extent.  If a person felt the full weight of every death anywhere the same as if it were that of a close friend or loved one, they’d be crushed by it, completely unable to function.  So they don’t.  They can’t.

So when something happens closer, we feel it more.  Here in the US we share a lot of common history and culture with Great Britain.  Our differences may sometimes loom large, but we remain brothers, or perhaps as one person put it, “The US and Great Britain are a couple that broke up but still love each other.”

So this Manchester attack hits harder than others because these were, in a sense “our people”.  Admirable?  Perhaps not.  But all too human.

And yet after the attack we get calls that we need to avoid Islamophobia.  Don’t blame Islam.  It’s just a minority of Muslims.  This isn’t real Islam.

On the other hand it wasn’t all Japanese either.  The imperialists in Japan were a very small minority.  Most people just wanted to get along with their daily lives.  It wasn’t all Germans either.  Most people weren’t Nazis, at least not ideological Nazis (as opposed to folk who joined the party for pragmatic believers without being true believers).

Well, you know what?  If these guys really are a tiny minority then the Islamic world should act like it.  These radicals should be on the run and in hiding, or reduced to holding pathetic marches where counter-protesters outnumber them usually by an order of magnitude.  The radicals should be terrified of being found out by other Muslims because they’d be turned in, convicted, and face the full penalty of the law.

In short, Muslims need to treat their radicals the same way Christians in the Western World (and I’m not a Christian–understand that right here) treat theirs.