Heroes and Villains, Faith and Sex

( – promoted by buhdydharma )

I expected a little lash-back when I wrote of Assange’s ironic protest of a leak about him. I like the debate, I enjoy hearing what other people think when they comment.

But this by Melvin gobsmacked me a bit.

Joan Baez, Winds of the Old Days:


A savior’s a nuisance to live with at home.

Never put your faith in human beings. That is most of what is wrong with out politics.

Boy, do I ever get Baez’ words. There is nothing as tiresome as someone who always knows better than you trying to “save” you or “fix” you. (but I am guilty of that too – more later on that)

The second line, however, left me speechless. There is no world for me without faith in other human beings. Not that my faith doesn’t get seriously tested, or sometimes shattered, but it has to be tempered by the fact all humanity is frail, and even Ghandi had his blind spots. The dude had serious sexual hang-ups.

It got me thinking about the human tendency toward hero/villain framing, my own tendency toward the same, and how faith really drives either view. It got me thinking about sex (I know, I know, I’m always thinking about sex anyway) in this case about how sex is often the deal breaker for these judgments in political figures.

I guess when it comes down to it, I do have a saviour complex. I do tend to try and get people to be kinder to one another, have more faith and trust. I do try and get them to be more open to love. I do try and get them to actually communicate on a heart-felt level.

Life is my project, improving myself is my project, bonding with others is my project, people themselves are projects in some way to me. That sounds clinical, but it is not. Its all about making empathy and love, selflessness and honesty the path I walk.

I want people to have faith in me, and I want to be able to have faith in them.

That does not predispose that there is no room for error in my world. We are messy beings filled with baggage. While I hope and pray that we strive for our higher angels, I understand that many cannot, will not, choose to do so. Or will sometimes, and not others.

Lets see, JFK and Edwards were philanderers. Kucinich caved on Health Care. Obama was always a douche with no plan whatsoever to do any of the things he promised. Assange hates leaks about him.

Does that mean we either defend them irrationally as heroes, or damn them as villains?

I cannot and do not go there.

I say, they are wonderful about “this” and wrong about “that.”

Of course, I’m not dating any of them, in which case in order to stop the heartbreak I would run the other way…. after a carving up of their balls. Heh. But since when did we as a society start taking personal transgressions between to people as personal to us?

I think this is one of the mass-media flaws of our age. We feed on shock and outrage like vultures. We care more for gossip than substance.

I try and judge on the substance. I would vote for Edwards over Obama any day. Edwards made transgressions against his wife, no one else, and if he stuck to his populist platform, I would care only about his vote. Obama made transgressions against the public, against me and you, while keeping his personal stuff lily pure.

Which matters more to people?

Why does it always come back to sex for people? I believe from the evidence that Assange, while sleeping with two women did not rape either of them. If the evidence showed he had, which it does not, then he should go to jail. I would still say what he did for Wikileaks was a great public service, and that it was too bad he was sick fuck in the end.

None of this makes me ready to lose faith in people.

I mean, what else is there? It is only people, real people that can create the acts that improve the world. I have to have the faith, that despite our flawed nature we can rise together and choose a better future.

I do have a tendency to put people on pedestals, and be crushed when they fail, but then my inner adult kicks in and remembers, once again, that humans are imperfect.

There are no pure Heroes or Villains (except maybe darth cheney) and what is life without faith and sex?

Objectivity, thats what we need more of. And sentences that end in prepositions, evidently.

On an unrelated side note?

Sex, sex, sex…. Women in general are just as nasty-minded as men, I have found. The waitresses at my job are forever and constantly joking/talking/making innuendos amongst themselves that would make a sailor blush. Imagine my surprise when all these sex-obsessed women, when the subject came up said they absolutely REFUSED to give head. Only one other woman and I said they did… and with that random sampling, it was less than 10% of the staff there.  I had NO idea it was such a rarity.

So here’s an anonymous sampling, be honest, its a point of scientific curiosity for me.

I evidently lack the squeamish, don’t talk about sex, its ikky gene. Whatever.


Is the Pony/Pie/Hide rating system too cutsie?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...


Skip to comment form

    • Diane G on December 20, 2010 at 4:35 pm

    when we said we swallowed, too.


    Doesn’t everyone?

    • Edger on December 20, 2010 at 5:02 pm

    that Assange “hates” leaks about him? It is obvious that he’s laughing at them and is using the police files leak to the Guardian as a club to beat them with publicly. They shot themselves in the foot by leaking it.

    Now he demands they investigate this leak, and if they refuse they admit that they have to by their own standards drop the investigation of Mannings leak to WikiLeaks.

    They shoot themselves in the other foot no matter how they respond now. It’s hilarious.  

  1. I suspect Diane is under a lot of pressure right now.

  2. A person who wants to make a living controlling others is a….what do they call them…a “top”.  That means to “normal” people these sociopathic control dweebs would suck but you have this fucking electronic din of commercial propaganda designed to embed the 14 characteristics of fascism subliminally into the very minds of simpletons.

    Can you tell I’m in a nasty mood?

  3. Photobucket

  4. the US gov’ts favorite way of demonizing dissidents is by trying to levy some trumped up sex charges against them.  The US found a golden opportunity to smear Assange due to the, what were at the time dead, sex-related charges against him in Sweden.

    The fact that Assange’s web-site has been releasing documents that shower the US gov’t in an unfavorable light means that the US had to bring up the sex-related charges against him.  I am only surprised that they didn’t get Sweden to trump up the charges to “aggravated rape of an infant while simultaneously being sodomized by a bull”.  Just to hit the entire spectrum of sexual deviancy.

Comments have been disabled.