« October 2006 |
Main
| December 2006 »
Mass. Politics - Republican values of God, guns, gays, and ghoulishly-handsome governors aren’t cutting it in Massachusetts. Kerry Healey’s impression of Dead Candidate Walking didn’t help. No one likes a one-party system, but is it asking too much for a candidate who can do a decent Frank Sargent impersonation, and doesn’t pander to right-wing radio knuckle draggers?
Advice - Spike Sez offers no-nonsense, practical advice for the lovelorn, lost, and stupid. If you feel you fit into one of these categories and have a related question, submit it to spike@onlineoffbeat.com, and if he feels like it Spike may respond.
Spike is NOT a licensed therapist and has NO training whatsoever in psychology or human behavior, but as he frequently says, “the fucking President has no qualifications for his job either, and look how well he’s doing.”
Dear Spike Sez — I’m a single, 30-something gay man. Occasionally I browse the gay personal ads for amusement (seriously, I’ve never even tried to contact anyone through them). It seems like every other ad is from a married guy looking to cheat on his wife or a straight guy looking to cheat on his girlfriend with another guy. Do you think that more straight guys are doing this kind of thing now because the internet makes it so much easier and there’s less risk of being caught than cruising a public place like a rest area?
— Just Curious in Cambridge
Dear Curious — I have no doubt whatsoever that the incidence of this sort of behavior has skyrocketed as a result of the internet...just as I have no doubt that if gay marriage is allowed across the country tens of thousands of men who might otherwise NEVER have thought of it will suddenly up and marry other men.
By the way, that was sarcasm, Curious, in case you couldn’t tell.
On the surface your question seems quite straight-forward, so to speak, but the way it’s phrased is a little tricky, so Spike wants to be precise with his answer. Are more “straight” men hooking up with other men now that they have the internet available as a tool? Yes, probably. Spike isn’t much for studying statistics, but it would make sense that if access is increased more men are taking advantage of it who might not otherwise have had the opportunity to meet other guys. An apt analogy would be that more people are also shopping at IKEA now, because they have access to the store online. In both cases, though, it needs to be stressed that the “shoppers” already had the desire to “shop.” The internet just facilitates the process; it’s not the cause of the desire.
So why is Spike making that distinction? Because he doesn’t want to provide any ammunition to Christian conservatives who might interpret his response to conclude that the internet is turning straight guys gay. While that may seem like a far-fetched concern, this kind of logic is standard operating procedure for the Christian right. Rather than focusing on things like personal choice and responsibility, they try to “fix” all the world’s “problems” by limiting access to temptation: Ban pornography and people will no longer have dirty thoughts; Get rid of contraception and kids won’t have sex; Take gay teachers out of the schools and kids won’t grow up gay. What this sort of reasoning ignores is the fact that the desires that lead to the behaviors they find so reprehensible are innate. It’s not like some straight guy is going to see a gay personal ad and suddenly think, “Gee, maybe I’d like to have a cock in my ass. Funny, I never thought of that before.”
Let’s look at it historically: Did the level of alcoholism rise after the repeal of Prohibition? How the hell should Spike know? He’s not a historian. But he’s pretty sure that the percentage of people predisposed to alcoholism didn’t change one iota. Did the incidence of teen sex increase after contraception was made more readily available? Yes...but so did teen pregnancies, so Spike isn’t sure there’s a very clear correlation on that one. The point is that removing barriers doesn’t create desires: they already exist. In fact, in Spike’s opinion, the conservatives actually have the whole desire/access equation backwards. The more repression there is, the stronger the desires grow. From his personal experience, Spike found the idea of pornography a lot more exciting when he was a wee 13-year-old with limited access to it than he does now that he can—and does—access it at any hour of the day or night.
So yes, there probably has been a rise in the number of guys getting a little dick on the side because the potential pool (particularly for men living in isolated, rural areas) has increased exponentially. At the same time, the connect rate has probably decreased sharply. When only 5 guys showed up at the rest area, 4 of them hooked up because the options were so limited. Now that there are 10,000 guys at the rest stop only a handful of them actually hook-up on a given night. But the rest areas, whether actual or virtual, exist only because there are already men who want to have sex with other men, not the other way around.
One final note to all the “straight” guys looking to get it on with other guys. By definition, if you’re playing hide the sausage with other guys YOU ARE NOT STRAIGHT. You may be masculine, you may really dig chicks, but as soon as you find yourself thinking about fondling another fella’s goodies you are no longer straight. If it helps you sleep at night, we’ll allow you to call yourself “straight-ish.” How’s that, Mary? Feel better now?
Love and kisses to all,
Spike
DISCLAIMER: Spike and Online OffBeat take no responsibility whatsoever for advice given in Spike Sez. Submit questions at your own risk to spike@onlineoffbeat.com. If no questions are submitted, Spike will make them up.
Advice - Spike Sez offers no-nonsense, practical advice for the lovelorn, lost, and stupid. If you feel you fit into one of these categories and have a related question, submit it to spike@onlineoffbeat.com, and if he feels like it Spike may respond.
Spike is NOT a licensed therapist and has NO training whatsoever in psychology or human behavior, but as he frequently says, “the fucking President has no qualifications for his job either, and look how well he’s doing.”
Dear Spike — At the risk of being politically incorrect, I have an observation to make and I’d like your comment on it. I’ve been going to gay clubs and bars for over 20 years, and it seems to me that 75% of the arguments and 95% of the physical confrontations I’ve witnessed during that time have been between lesbians, usually it seems between ex-girlfriends. Do you think I’m wrong? And if I’m right, why do you suppose that is? I thought women were supposed to be the “gentler sex.”
—Malcolm in Providence
Dear Malcolm — You know the old saying: “Alcohol and testosterone therapy just don’t mix” (You didn’t think all those mustaches were natural did you? Only on the Greek and Armenian women.).
Ha Ha! Spike jests, of course...most of those women just have hair on their backs.
Anyway, to the question of whether your observation is correct, the answer is a resounding “YES!” In fact, in all of Spike’s countless hours spent in bars and clubs, he can recall witnessing (or participating in) only two incidents of physical confrontation between gay men. Hang out with a group of drunk dykes for more than an hour or two, on the other hand, and someone’s going to lose an eye or a clump of hair.
Why is this? First of all, Spike thinks your comment that women are supposed to be the “gentler sex” is naive and sexist. While studies may show that women are more nurturing than men, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re more gentle. That’s just an act they’ve perfected over centuries. The fact is that in nature, females are often the more aggressive of the species. Think of lionesses protecting their cubs while the males nap, or female praying mantises biting the heads off their mates once they’re done using them for sex. The outward gentleness in women is learned behavior from living in male-dominated cultures. When push comes to shove, they are far more fierce and tenacious than we are.
So why does Spike think that lesbians are more prone to verbal and physical altercations in bars? After exhaustive research into the subject, I’ve come up with several theories:
1) They just can’t hold ther liquor
Let’s face it, liquor is more than a social lubricant. It’s also a lubricant for all sorts of bad behavior because it frees us of our inhibitions (like say, our inhibitions against clubbing our ex-girlfriend who left us for her high school gym teacher, or revealing that we’re sexist anti-Semites when we get pulled over on the Pacific Coast Highway).
2) They’re already on edge because they know they’re going to have to leave a tip
Everyone knows how tight dykes are when it comes to money. Imagine the seething resentment that must build up inside of them as they order round after round of malt liquor, knowing that not only will they have to go through the ordeal of itemizing the bill at the end of the night to make sure that everyone pays only for what she drank, but that they’ll also have to part with an additional 3–5% for the server! Throw in an ex-flame with a new hottie on her arm and you have a situation just waiting to explode.
3) Women don’t like other women
Now Spike knows that some will be offended by this idea, but sometimes the truth just hurts, so get over it. Lately Spike has had the misfortune of spending time around a group of preteen girls as he waits for his ballet classes on Thursday night. Aside from the catty comments they make about girls in the other classes as they watch them through the windows, there seems to be no end to the subtle (and sometimes overt) ways that these little princesses work to belittle one another. At a very early age they’ve developed a desire and the ability to find and exploit the weakness in other girls in order to deal with their own insecurities. Spike would actually admire their creativity if it weren’t so evil and subversive. (By the way, the movie “Mean Girls” does a great job of examining the intracies of this kind of “girl-on-girl crime,” as well as being very funny).
As little girls grow into women, the belittling and gameswomanship seem to evolve into general distrust and an inclination to anticipate the worst of strange females who enter their territory. All it takes is for an insecure dyke with a few drinks under her belt to think she’s caught the scent of a little flirtation or attraction between a stranger and her mate and she’s ready to throw down.
4) When women love they take it much more personally than we do
Let’s face it, we gay men are all just whores. We flit from from one romance to another without looking back (unless it's for a hook-up with an ex behind the back of our current). But from what Spike can tell, women (gay, straight or otherwise) actually take this relationship stuff seriously, and have a hard time letting go of failed ones. Once they’ve given over their hearts to—or joined hearts with—someone else, they always feel a sense of connection. This undying connectedness can be a beautiful thing, but it can also turn toxic when the other person decides she no longer wants to be connected, or connects with someone new. It makes sense that if you love harder and deeper, it’s going to be much harder to disconnect when it’s over. This inability to let go, coupled with the sense of helplessness that always comes with getting dumped, can fester. Hurt at the loss turns to burning embers of anger and bitterness toward the other person. Add alcohol and you have combustion.
5) Women just have an easier time expressing their emotions
When gay men see their exes out on the town with new beaus, the protocol is to give a frozen smile to show the world it doesn’t bother us, buy another cocktail, and tell anyone within earshot that we broke up with the guy because he had a tiny penis. Internally it may eat away at our self-esteem and cause us to plot revenge fantasies, but outwardly we try to put on a brave face. Essentially we’re doing the gay version of being a man: keeping our emotions bottled up and not letting anyone know it bothers us.
Women, on the other hand, are traditionally allowed, even expected, to express their emotions. They can cry openly at sad movies, or express joy when someone does something unexpectedly nice for them. And because they use them more often, they have more immediate access their emotions...or perhaps their emotions have more immediate access to them. Whichever, instead of censoring themselves like we might, they just let their feelings fly. It’s actually a very healthy thing in theory, but when alcohol is amplifying the feelings it can get a little messy.
So those are Spike’s theories about what’s going on, Malcolm. I hope that was helpful, even though Spike suspects you were just being a bitchy little queen by drawing attention to the phenomenon. And now, since Spike has a tremendous tolerance for alcohol, is extremely generous, loves other men, opens his heart to no one, and keeps his emotions safely bottled up inside where they belong, he thinks he’ll go have a cocktail.
Ciao for now,
Spike
DISCLAIMER: Spike and Online OffBeat take no responsibility whatsoever for advice given in Spike Sez. Submit questions at your own risk to spike@onlineoffbeat.com. If no questions are submitted, Spike will make them up.
Humor - A recent AP story by Anne D'innocenzio reports that Wal-Mart, the company only Ebenezer Scrooge (before visits by Christmas Past, Present, and Future) could love, is changing its tardiness policy. All employees must now call an 800 number -- instead of calling their supervisor -- when notifying the company they will be late for work.
The story quotes Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley as saying: “We are formalizing and enforcing the policy to ensure greater consistency and to minimize subjectivity.”
Minimize subjectivity? Since when has an excuse for being late supposed to be subjective? The art of a good excuse is being able to sound like you are waiting for AAA to fix your flat tire -- while lying in bed nursing a hangover.
But that is beside the point. I can only imagine what choices the company will offer its overdue associates.
Level one:
Thank you for calling the Wal-Mart Automated Tardiness System.
Press one if you speak English
For everyone else, press two.
Level two:
Why aren't you at work?
Press one if you are goofing off at an emergency hospital room while doctors attempt desperately to revive a loved one. (Select)
Press two if you have chosen to let our company and your associates down by driving your elderly mother to a local food pantry.
Press three if you are hiding from INS agents.
Level three:
Why are you wasting time hanging around an emergency room when you could be at work stacking toilet paper?
Press one if a priest is administering last rights to a loved one. (Select)
Press two if you are waiting to hear about an organ transplant donor.
Press three if you fainted after finding out that Wal-Mart’s health plan won’t cover even the price of a bed pan.
Level four:
After the priest has finished, when can we expect to see you at work?
Press one if you plan to waste more time consoling family members.
Press two if you plan to drop family members off at our Wal-Mart Grieving Kiosk (located in Aisle 3) before finishing your shift.
Press three if you can make it to work within an hour, thus qualifying for a five percent discount on a Wal-Mart casket (discontinued models only).
Television - I know it’s not quite Thanksgiving yet, but before you know it it’ll be time to start your holiday shopping and you’ll be faced with the dilemma of what to get for everyone on your list. My pick for anyone over the age of 10 (and worthy of shelling out over a hundred bucks) is the “Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Collector’s Set,” a monumental 40-disc collection that includes every episode from the show’s seven seasons, plus extras like commentary by creator Joss Whedon and a cast round table discussion.
Now before you scoff and wonder why anyone would want to watch a silly show about a teenage girl who slays vampires, let me tell you it was so much more than that. I can’t think of another series that was so consistently well-written, thought-provoking, and fun. Period. On top of that it managed to throw in some good life lessons amidst the drama and demon killing.
I’ll admit that I was skeptical at first, myself. I liked the “Buffy” movie because it was a funny premise executed with great campy fun, but I questioned how they could sustain that one joke and the feel for a whole series. The answer is that they didn’t. The only connection between the movie and the series is the central character. The series is a much richer, human-based drama that was able to sustain its central theme throughout its entire run. Though I hadn’t planned to watch the show, I was flipping through the channels one night and happened on the pilot, not knowing what it was. Within five minutes I was hooked and I stayed hooked for seven years (though season 4 was a challenge).
So why do I think Buffy is so great?
The Acting — Though she seems to be relegated to cheesy horror movie hell now (The Grudge, The Grudge II, Scooby Doo, Scooby Doo II, The Return), Sarah Michelle Gellar was an emmy winner on “All My Children.” The kid can act. She can pull off the demon butt-kicking with conviction and flair. She can handle the witty banter comfortably and often hilariously. And she can gut-punch you with the intensity of her emotional scenes (and believe me, there were plenty).
The rest of the core cast is equally great. Most of them were unknowns when they started, but all of them ably pulled off the delicate balance between humor and pathos that was the series’ hallmark. Nearly all of them have gone on to find success in new series since (Alyson Hannigan on “How I Met Your Mother”; Charisma Carpenter on “Angel” and “Veronica Mars”; David Boreanaz on “Angel” and “Bones”; “Anthony Stewart Head on several British series). Supporting players like James Marsters (Spike), Juliette Landau (Drusilla), Julie Benz (Darla), Eliza Dushku (Faith), Kristine Sutherland (Joyce, Buffy’s mom), and Michelle Trachtenbrrg (Dawn) were also flawless.
In addition, there were dozens of one-off appearances by future stars like Wentworth Miller (“Prison Break”) and Clea Duvall (“Carnivale”). The show’s casting directors just had a knack for finding great talent.
Memorable Characters — What made the characters so great was that they weren’t one-dimensional. Even the most cowardly character displayed courage in a crunch. Even the bravest had doubts. The villains were nuanced and textured, as well. You were constantly surprised to find new facets to each character, yet the new facets never felt false. There was an evolution for each.
The Writing — While shows like “The Gilmore Girls” and “The O.C.” are rightfully lauded for their witty, pop-culture-referencing dialogue, “Buffy” did it first and did it more naturally. While the dialogue between the teen characters on “The O.C.” often sounds forced and unnatural, on “Buffy” it was always spot on. The often witty banter felt like true expressions of the characters. The writers also had a gift for moving from humor to sorrow in an instant. They never lost sight of the fact that at any moment evil could strike with dire consequences.
The Plots — The series can basically be broken down into two kinds of episodes: monster-of-the-week or ongoing “big bad” for the season. Each season had a central villain, and over the course of the season there were many episodes devoted to that ongoing story line. Scattered throughout, there were some episodes that dealt with a particular demon or phenomenon that had to be vanquished.
Some of the monster-of-the-week episodes were admittedly not so great, though the monsters were usually metaphors for issues that people face in real life. The “big bad” episodes, on the other hand, were almost always great. The writers were able to sustain and build on these plotlines, culminating in some truly epic final episodes.
There was also an overarching storyline for the whole series, which was Buffy’s journey from a callow school girl who suddenly gets saddled with the responsibility to protect the world from demons (not just vampires), to a young woman grappling with what those responsibilities mean in terms of her own ability to find happiness. This wasn’t kids’ stuff. They’re the issues that all of us have to face as we move into adulthood: Who are we? What’s our place in the world? Are the sacrifices we’re asked to make worth it?
Inclusiveness — One of the things I loved about “Buffy” (and its spin-off, “Angel”) was the diversity of the characters and the matter-of-fact way it was handled. Though all of the main characters on “Buffy” were white, many of the important secondary characters were not. The first slayer was a black woman, as were several others we met along the way. In the final season when we’re introduced to the Potential Slayers (the rule is that there can only be one slayer at a time and when one dies another is called from the Potentials), they encompass every imagineable ethnicity. Unlike other shows that might make an issue out it, however, “Buffy” never did. Characters were just characters. Black characters slept with white characters. Humans slept with demons. It was all good.
There was also sexual diversity on the show. Willow, one of the four main characters, eventually discovered she was a lesbian. Again unlike on most mainstream shows, she was allowed to have relationships with other women and have a sex life that we actually saw. There was also ambiguously gay Andrew, one of the “big bads” from season 6 whose feelings for one of his male cohorts seemed to be a bit more than friendly. Again, no fuss was made of any of it. The show was just effortlessly inclusive.
So that’s my spiel for the greatness of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and why it’s the perfect gift (and something you should own, as well). If you don’t want to shell out for the full box set, I’ve put together a list of the seasons with my ratings, comments, and some of the key episodes you might want to check out.
Season I (Rating: B) — There were only 12 episodes in the first season and the creators were clearly still trying to get their bearings. There are a few too many monster-of-the-week episodes, but the season finishes strong.
Key episodes:
Episode 1: Welcome to the Hellmouth
Episode 2: The Harvest
Episode 7: Angel
Episode 12: Prophesy Girl
Season 2 (Rating: A+) — This is when the show hit its stride and the writers really began developing the idea of a central theme for each season. Buffy falls in love with Angel, Angel turns bad, Buffy has to decide what she’s willing to sacrifice for her “job.” As the season progressed it was truly lyrical, and the finale still chokes me up every time I see it.
Key episodes:
Episode 1: When She Was Bad
Episode 3: School Hard (the introduction of Spike)
Episode 6: Halloween (it’s a monster-of-the-week, but very funny)
Episode 11: Ted (with a great performance by John Ritter)
Episode: 13: Surprise (the season really kicks into gear)
Episode 14: Innocence (things get very dark)
Episode 17: Passion
Epsiode 19: I Only Have Eyes for You
Episodes 21 & 22: Becoming (maybe the best 2 hours on television EVER!!!!)
Season 3 (Rating: B+) — A bit of a let down after the previous season, and definitely a slow starter, but by mid-season things got good. Eliza Dushku’s Faith was a great addition to the show.
Key episodes:
Episode 1: Anne (not a great episode, but you have to see it to find out what happend after season 2)
Episode 3: Faith, Hope & Trick (the introduction of Faith and the great villain Mr. Trick)
Episode 6: Band Candy (very funny)
Epsiode 9: The Wish (we meet Anya and see a world without Buffy)
Episode 14: Bad Girls
Episode 15: Consequences (Faith starts to turn bad)
Episode 20: The Prom (just a so-so episode until the end; a great example of how the show could move from fun adventure to deep emotional resonance)
Episodes 21 & 22: Graduation Day (the demon is kind of hokey, but the rest kicks ass)
Season 4 (Rating: C) — The gang leaves high school and things get kind of dreary. A not-great “big bad” and a very dull boyfriend for Buffy drag this season down. Still a few good moments. I have to admit that I don’t own this season so I’m not sure of the episode numbers.
Key episodes:
Hush (criminally, the only Buffy episode ever nominated for an Emmy, but what a killer episode)
Restless (a strong finale that brings the gang back together)
Season 5 (Rating: A) — A great “big bad,” a shocking loss, and an amazing climax make this a great season. The sudden appearance of Buffy’s younger sister, Dawn, is kind of a “huh?”, but it’ll all get satisfyingly explained and Michelle Trachtenberg is great as Dawn.
Key episodes:
Episode 5: No Place Like Home
Episode 7: Fool for Love
Episode 8: Shadow
Episode 10: Into the Woods
Episode 11: Triangle (a fun episode with a key element crucial to the finale)
Episode 13: Blood Ties
Episode 14: Crush
Episode 16: The Body (very moving)
Episodes 18–22: (if you miss any of them the great finale might not make complete sense)
Season 6 (Rating: B+): The darkest season as it progresses.
Key Episodes:
Episodes 1&2: Bargaining
Episode 3: After Life
Episode 6: All the Way
Episode 7: Once More With Feeling (a musical episode that uncovers the hidden emotional truths that have been festering)
Episode 8: Tabula Rasa (some priceless funny moments)
Episode 10: Wrecked (the darkness begins)
Episode 16: Hell’s Bells
Episode 17: Normal Again (very thought-provoking)
Episode 19: Seeing Red (Willow’s dark powers are unleashed)
Episode 21: Two to Go
Episode 22: Grave (a great finale that gives Nicholas Brendon (Xander) an opportunity to shine)
Season 7 (Rating: A) — The ultimate “big bad,” the return of many favorite characters, and an awesome finale.
Key episodes:
Episode 1: Lessons
Episode 3: Same Time, Same Place (the creepiest demon in the history of the show)
Episode 7: Conversations With Dead People
Episode 8: Sleeper
Episode 10: Bring On the Night (the seasonal plot begins to take shape)
Episode 13–20 (unlike previous seasons, there are no monster-of-the-week episodes in the last part of the season, so if you miss an episode you might not follow what’s happening completely
Episode 21: End of Days (the lead up to the final conflict and the return of Angel)
Episode 22: Chosen (a satisfying, and at times moving, end to the series)
Advice - Spike Sez offers no-nonsense, practical advice for the lovelorn, lost, and stupid. If you feel you fit into one of these categories and have a related question, submit it to spike@onlineoffbeat.com, and if he feels like it Spike may respond.
Spike is NOT a licensed therapist and has NO training whatsoever in psychology or human behavior, but as he frequently says, “the fucking President has no qualifications for his job either, and look how well he’s doing.”
Dear Mr. Spike — I’m a 19-year-old guy who’s just coming out. I haven’t actually been with a guy yet, but I’m pretty sure I want to at least try it. Here’s my problem. I’ve been spending a lot of time reading personal ads to see if maybe there’s a guy I could experiment with a little, and I keep coming across all these terms and abbreviations I don’t understand. I’m afraid to respond to the ads that seem interesting because I’m not sure what I’m responding to and I don’t want to look stupid.
Can you help me out? Here’s the list of things I don’t understand: LTR, HWP, CBT, FF, FB, FWB, TT, PNP, 420, BB, felching, bukkake, snowballing, skiing. Thanks a lot.
— Kyle, Somerville.
Dear Kyle — You haven’t actually been with a guy but you’re “pretty sure [you] want to at least try it"?” Who’s kidding whom, Kyle? That’s like saying, “I’m pretty sure I get excited when I see pictures of naked men but I won’t know until I look in my undies.” You either want to or you don’t, and it sounds to Spike like you want to or you wouldn’t be spending all your free time trying to decipher the mysteries of the personal ads.
Anyway, to address your questions, Spike must admit that the first time he perused personal ads back in the early '80s (for research purposes only, of course) he didn’t understand a lot of the abbreviations either...and now sex has gotten so much more complicated...so don’t be embarrassed by your ignorance.
Let me see if I can help without thoroughly revolting our more conservative readers.
• LTR = Long Term Relationship (which generally translates to about 2 weeks in gay male lingo)
• HWP = Height-Weight Proportional; in other words, no tubbies...though 6’ 2” and 130# is usually fine, for some reason. Go figure.
• CBT = How do I put this delicately? Let’s just say that if you respond to one of these ads you should be prepared to apply some ice to the family jewels afterward. (Hint: The T stands for torture).
• FF = Just avoid these ads for now, Kyle. Definitely not for beginners and you probably don’t want to start wearing Depends at your age or have to visit the emergency room to have someone’s Rolex removed from your rectum.
• FB = F#!*%k Buddy; basically just regularly scheduled sexual encounters without strings attached...usually while the other person’s significant other is at work.
• FWB = Friends With Benefits; similar to the above, but you may actually talk for a few minutes or get a beer together occasionally.
• TT = Similar to CBT, but think nipple clamps.
• PNP = Party ‘n’ Play; unless you enjoy smoking crystal meth and spending hours unsuccessfully trying to get it up, don’t go here.
• 420 = Smoking pot. For some odd reason, 4:20 pm is the internationally recognized time to toke up. Weirdo potheads. At least we lushes start at the top of the hour.
• BB = Bare-Backing...as in, no condoms...as in, “please, sir, may I have some more HIV?”
• Felching = Again, just avoid these ads for now...and don’t EVER ask your moher what this means...because if she knows you’ll never look at her or your father the same way again..
• Bukkake = Kind of like going to Elizabeth Grady for a facial, only the cream being used is more “organic.”
• Snowballing = Imagine you have a piece of gum in your mouth and you keep passing it back and forth with another guy using your tongues. Okay, now imagine that the gum was secreted out of one of your bodies. Get the picture?
• Skiing = Doing cocaine; pretty much any reference to winter sports or snow (except in the previous listing) is code for cocaine.
I hope that helps you with your immediate decoding problem, Kyle. Now let’s get to the bigger issue.
With the advent of personal ads on the Internet, finding sex has become as easy as ordering take-out. Just browse the menu for what you want, fire off an email (or twelve), and wait for your order to arrive. The problem for you, as I see it, is that you don’t really know what you want yet in terms of sexual specifics and you’re looking at the personal ads as a way to try on some different shoes without necessarily buying them (Spike is a metaphor machine this morning).
There are a few flaws in your approach:
First of all, with personal ads you never really know what you’re getting until it shows up at your door. People lie. And with your inexperience, how are you going to handle it if the guy who shows up isn’t what you were expecting? Will you feel comfortable telling him that you’ve changed your mind?
Secondly, there’s good sex and there’s bad sex. Spike’s first sexual encounter with a man was not good. Though he’d known the man for a while first, and liked him well enough as a person, Spike didn’t really feel any physical attraction to the guy. Spike had sex with him because he wanted to see what the fuss was all about. What Spike discovered was that without attraction, sex pretty much sucks. But that didn’t mean that Spike decided he must have been wrong about digging on dudes, and you shouldn’t base your “decision” about what you like sexually on a single (or a few) random encounter either.
The biggest issue Spike sees, however, is that you’re approaching sex like it’s just...well, sex. But that’s not really the case. At its best, sex can be an expression of love and affection. That’s something you’re not going to experience with a hook-up, and often times our first sexual encounters set the precedent for all that follow. If you want to experiment, great, but why not find someone you actually like first and then do some experimenting with him?
Spike isn’t condemning random sexual encounters. They can be fine. They can even be mind-blowing and thrilling and spice up a hum-drum sex life. But you don’t have a hum-drum sex life, Kyle. In fact, it doesn’t sound like you have any sex life at all. Spike doesn’t think that random sex is the right way to go for you to go at this point.
I know that sounds like a pretty old-fashioned idea in these days of instant gratification, but Spike thinks that ultimately you’ll find it a lot more gratifying. Then later, once you’ve become jaded and bitter, you can have all the random, meaningless hook-ups you want.
Best of luck, Kyle. TTFN (that’s "Ta Ta For Now" in e-speak).
Spike
DISCLAIMER: Spike and Online OffBeat take no responsibility whatsoever for advice given in Spike Sez. Submit questions at your own risk to spike@onlineoffbeat.com. If no questions are submitted, Spike will make them up.
Television - Who can explain this thing called love for “All Creatures Great and Small?”
I analyze my newfound fascination with this British TV series and I can stump myself – until I consider how much my own life has changed. When “Creatures” was on the air from 1979 to '90, I didn't care much about creatures, big or small. I rarely sought meaning in innocence. Now, I seek escape in these rough Yorkshire moors, knowing every farmer by the pigs he keeps, bouncing over rutty roads in an old Bentley with no brakes, and saving the world one pregnant cow at a time.
Through Netflix, me and my household has dived into “All Creatures.” We started with the first episode, when a newly-minted Scottish veterinarian, James Herriott, goes over the English border and arrives in the village of Darrowby seeking employment with Siegfried Farnon, the bachelor dandy in a shire teeming with livestock. Farnon takes in James and gives him the dirtiest of dirty work, which usually involves chasing a pig in muck.
Farnon is a memorable character, more vibrant than James. Likewise his brother Tristan is a gadabout scene-stealer. The Farnon brothers provide the sparks for the show while James and his faithful wife -- the long-suffering, tea-serving Helen -- are the dutiful drudges. “Creatures” causes us to love the colorful rascals but also to admire the hard-working, do-gooders.
Based on the best-selling books by James Herriott, the series follows the adventures of these vets as they work in a country on the brink of World War II. There is no drama greater than lockjaw in a baby donkey and testicular cancer in a beloved West Highland terrier. Invariably, these cases come to sanguine conclusions.
This a TV show we watch together – the dog, me and my honey. We usually eat our dinner with “Creatures,” hiding our eyes only when the going gets gross as when a naked-to-the-waist vet helps with a difficult calving by putting an arm way up a cow’s butt. This is earthy stuff.
Are there laughs? Not many. Are there moments of high anxiety? A few, but these are more deeply felt rumbles of truth. “All Creatures Great and Small” hews to its name. The series never overwhelms you with great tragedy or small superficiality.
These vets in “All Creatures” are on the cusp of modern veterinary science, using medicines to heal instead of herbal poultices. They contend with rustic folk who still believe in black magic to cure animals. Many illnesses present mysteries, as when a herd of cows suffers copper deficiency. More often than not, conditions do not stump these chumps. They figure out the cure for the innocents in their care and rejoice with glasses of whisky at the local roadhouse. Their work is hard, but uncomplicated, as they cope with the emotional viscera of life and death.
“All Creatures” turns out to be bag balm for the spirit, a TV show that achieves the rarest of feats. It transports you, elevates you, and reminds you of elemental truths. In this era of war, presidential duplicity, and fear, I escape into “All Creatures Great and Small” because the series really does provide something unique – a genuine window into goodness, without any "Real Simple" pretension.
Humor / Television - No television show is a better example of why the networks are becoming irrelevant than ABC’s “Lost.” Sure, it’s doing pretty well ratings-wise, and I admit I’ve watched it only briefly while channel surfing.
But here’s where “Lost” loses me: I can buy into all the quirky plot lines (at least the ones I’ve read about online). Heck, I used to think MASH was a documentary. Just tell me how that big fat character, Hugo Reyes can spend three seasons on a deserted tropical island -- an island without even a hot dog stand -- and not lose any weight?
Put any fat guy on a deserted island and within an hour he’ll be screaming for his desert. It is hard to believe these characters truly have been stranded for months when one of them looks like he just finished off a couple of Denny's Grand Slam breakfasts. If the producers really want to make this show seem realistic, how about a plot line where the other survivors discover Hugo’s stash of Snickers bars?
ben.alper@onlineoffbeat.com
|
