Thursday, December 15, 2011


by Dick of All Dicks & Poli Tico

I always write here I consider gays as sisters & I've never been into incest. I only socialize mostly with straight people though I have gay friends who should only be sexual A-listers. I can only stomach sex with heterosexuals- men before, girls now. I was never into half measures, I was never into knockoffs. There is no equality in sex- either you have it or you don't. To the last one belong the ugly ones, the hicks, the bad breath, the old ones & the B-lister gays

Sex & music are feasts of the senses so the sexual orientation of the singer matters. The singer must radiate the right stimuli. If your skin hairs stand up when a B-lister fag touches you, your skin will stand up when he croons into your earphone. As if you gave him access to "violate" you while you're relaxing in your private sanctuary. The rest can have their politics, no need to pretend one is avant-garde, liberal or intellectual when celebrating a musical sensual feast. The sensations should be real, true & of the right kind for you to enjoy the experience. No need to challenge your stomach if all you wanted was a sensual feast.

We have a special post on contemporary music today. Funny, a big portion of the emails are "queries" about my music. Well, it's obvious, music is as important to me as sex, & naturally, my taste on music reflects my taste on sex. Pure gold. No fake Rolex, no fake Louis Vuitton. I turn off as soon as I get the first whiff of substandard testosterone or estrogen, the hairs on my skin automatically just stand up. The first singer I deleted from my collection wasn't even proven, just a suspicion. One of my favorites when I was a teenager was a group called Matchbox 20 but a time came when the singer was rumored among my friends as heavily into swinging both ways on the road. I was really hot on rock then & to me, rock should be full-strength testosterone. Well, one day, I just felt while listening to the singer, Rob Thomas, that as if I was listening to my gay Muscle Mary hairdresser & I was letting the latter to croon to me in my own room. Suddenly when that thought popped up in my mind, I actually tasted the bile rose up my throat. I've thrown away already all my records of the band even long before the gossips appeared later on claiming him making out with Adam Levine & Tom Cruise. But I don't necessarily believe the rumors per se. It ultimately depends on the vibes that you get from the singer. I've been into revival recently & I can say I'm a converted fan of the 60's. The Doors have been getting a lot of airplay in my music player lately, I just love the sound of Jim Morrison, the lead singer. There were stories he's bisexual & I actually read 3 of the biographies about him (from where the claim originated) just to check it out but I came out of that unconvinced (I'll discuss this on a coming separate article). Of course, if they come out later with a more convincing proof, there's no telling how I would react. He's a Rimbaudian character, there's a lot of that in the now-I-can-say "ironically ignorant" 60's. Meanwhile, I've deleted all those of REM, even my early favorite "Losing My Religion" now makes my skin crawl. I threw away records I inherited from my father of Rolling Stones (because of Mick Jagger), Peter Townshend, etc. No, I don't miss them, I have a 273 GB music collection in 8 languages & I buy at least 10 digital albums a week so my music appreciation is on a perpetual headlong rush, I leave the trash behind. I buy by albums- if I love a song, I buy the whole album. If I love a singer, I buy the whole discography. I listen to a singer I like days on end. There are so many good songs & singers anyway. My rule is simple: look at the gay advocacy of a singer (or actor, if in the movies). The gay market is miniscule, so if a singer risks alienating the straight-loving crowd which include a lot of wealthy gays who actually buy, he inevitably gives off this "closet" vibe- more likely, his determination comes from actually fighting for himself. Shock tactics don't work for me, mere flashes in the pan. No need to swallow vomits if you just want to enjoy one of life's real sensual feasts- music. The singer shouldn't be the sour note.

Ultimately, it would depend if the singer projected the right note of good taste. I used to like Lady Gaga but when I saw her with this bunch of dancing Muscle Mary's in one of her videos , my mental image of her now is virtually that of a Muscle Mary herself who assaults my not too strong stomach too & I have since ignored her. There's just something cheap with blatant gay tones every time & it's the cheapness which principally turns off. Physically manifested gays should be behind the scenes (except perhaps in comedy, they are natural comedians by default). The fact that decades of gay superstars & intensive propaganda in Britain turned off eventually the population that only 1% of the population now are willing to self-identify as gay just proves the futility of making them attractive. As I wrote before: It had all the big name queers, from the early gender-benders (but who now proclaim unconvincingly their heterosexuality, one even lost in the courts) to the still-active old fag reliables like Elton John, George Michael, Boy George, etc. If this stellar cast didn't convince the Brits & instead just made the 9% to burrow deeper, what more promotions could possibly be done after how many decades of trying? Come to think of it,how could you really promote something which has been a flop for centuries? The promotional noise generated might have made the wishful thinkers conclude their wishes were coming true, but in reality the same noise actually just turned off most everyone else. In the end, star power is no match to classy libido. Compassion is a pretentious excuse to degrade a product meant primarily to stimulate sensual good feelings.

Same with ugly heterosexuals. I won't bother listening too to somebody who looks or sounds cheap even though he may be a hetero. When I first hang out with Ewan in London, he was hot about this certain band (though I never liked them). But later on my return visit, I was surprised he suddenly dumped them & he said they were just "bloody cheap rent boys". Ewan likes only straight boys but he doesn't stoop to hiring professional rent boys who could be had by anyone "cheaply" (like eating left-overs, he said). The sin of the band? According to him, "they were too cheap (besides being suspicious sexually too)" for disrobing publicly first in front of gays in a gay bar. Ewan explained it thus: Gays who love straight guys (& are willing to pay big money for them) don't really prefer demonstrably gay-friendly ones because that dampens their manly appeal (it only invites suspicion on their real sexuality too). Do you have to do it cheaply to do shock tactics? Or being cheap the shock? There is only 1% gay in Britain so new markets couldn't be the reason so what was the "real" reason especially to a band which is already famous? The band later made up by appearing naked everywhere, this time to women too, but their first slip might have revealed something of their true colors & Ewan has never forgotten his initial disgust so he just moved on (I remember the time when my Aussie friends heckled me for featuring an Aussie athlete model who bared in a gay magazine saying only a "closet" case would do so & he didn't deserve to be in a straight guy blog). Ignorance is bliss, as long as you don't know the real score, the singer is safe but he'll be deleted as soon as you discover the truth. And you'll hate him then for duping you. You remember the times you wasted time swooning & you can't help but puke. Nausea will be your constant Pavlovian reaction the next time you encounter that singer. The relatively less famous acts give greater comfort. One of my favorite albums for the year is Beirut's Riptide but I refrain from reading anything about them. I just enjoy listening to their sound. If by chance they suddenly had the idea to cheapen everything by announcing they're gay, I will simply delete them.

My favorite album for the year is UK's Charlie Simpson's Young Pilgrim. All great songs. My top American act is- surprise- The Doors from 1967. For two months now, I've been on a revival Jim Morrison diet so they better not come out with definitive proof he's less than what I think he is or I'll vomit big-time.

Below are my favorites as the year is about to end. As you can see, a mix of old & new. I haven't reached the tail-end of my fascination with Spanish rock-flamenco. I became a fan of Spanish sounds because of my frequent trips to Spain with my girl friend & my close Spanish friend whom I call Coño (vagina slang in Spanish though he looks more like a clitoris). American & British acts dominate, & surprisingly, my taste is evolving. I'm past the trance music fascination, my rock music is giving way to a more eclectic, mellower mix.

My Favorite Albums for 2011:

1. Charlie Simpson, UK- Young Pilgrim

2. The Doors, US- The Doors, Morrison Hotel, LA Woman

3. Beirut, US- The Rip Tide

4. Kings of Leon, US- Only By The Night

5. Matt Kearney, US- City of Black & Blue, Nothing Left To Lose

6. Kasabian, UK- Velociraptor

7. Deftones, US- Diamond Eyes

8. Dani Martin, Spain- Pequeno

9. Arcade Fire, Canada- The Suburb

10. Ryan Adams, US- Ashes & Rain

11. Adele, UK- 21 (my girlfriend's favorite)

Favorite Songs

I turned 30 this year; I myself was surprised I was suddenly into mellower sounds this year. Getting old? Nope, my having fallen in love with my very straight girlfriend has more to do with it. All these emotions suddenly became more intense. Generally, I play by albums but I created a playlist, the first time (& only one), composed of the songs below.

1.Touch Me- The Doors (US)

2. El cielo de los perros- Dani Martin (Spain)

3. The Rip Tide- Beirut (US)

4. If I Lose It- Charlie Simpson (UK)

5. No Me Arrepiento- Tete (Argentina)

6. Riverbanks- Charlie Simpson (UK)

7. A Man of Simple Pleasures- Kasabian (UK)

8. Nothing Left To Lose- Matt Kearney (US)

Touch Me- The Doors (US)

No Me Arrepiento- Tete (Argentina)

If I Lose It- Charlie Simpson (UK)

December 16, 2011
Pity, Delilah couldn't find a video for If I Lose It showing the face of Charlie, he happens to be the best-looking singer in the world today so here he is again with Down Down Down

Wednesday, December 7, 2011


by Dick of All Dicks & Poli Tico


This is almost a manifesto, if you have to read anything in this blog, start with this one

In the end, the crux of the matter is not homosexuality. It's cheapness. Will you be contented drinking diluted wine when you craved for vintage all along? Men who are into men are expected to be more discriminating because they will be the ones who will do the actual consumption, not the demagogues & grand-standers who only seek self-serving sustainance on the issue. If they wanted only genuine leather for a mere belt, why should they not respond only to a genuine man? What if they actually puke just imagining sex with a mere gay man, how could they even think of marrying one? Should they be subjected to political blackmails just because they are not stupid enough to lower their taste & swallow their own vomit for somebody else's delusion? Wishing that the next generation will settle for a weaker taste is not only foolhardy but very arrogant. I grew up with elder gay generations wishing my generation will be the one with the poor taste but unfortunately, I, nor my friends, simply don't have the stomach for their delusions. It's unfair to expect, much less wish, the young to wallow in bad taste. Have you noticed that while everybody is wishfully dreaming everybody else to lower their taste, the Western standard of living is at the same time declining? If they get any lower, everybody will be at the bottom.

The lower the taste, the poorer the people? In various ways. I totally changed my mind on gay activism when I started writing this blog because I was exposed (I never expected it) to the extent of the hypocrisy of people in pretending they know better what to do with your sexual life in the guise of compassion, for them, their way. Compassion has become a double-edged sword, a poison, now it could be blackmail, an oppression tool. I never had problems with my sexuality, my bedroom is my own business anyway. But some had the caprice to flaunt it & the world better accept it their way or they will have major tantrums. The world must change for them, even if that means destroying the standards that made it excel & beautiful, the world should degrade itself for them, a mere 1% of the population. Now, you have to get horny with them too, they should be beautiful too, because by virtue of their logic, they have been opppressed by fate, it's only just that everybody shares the oppression, equality of misery for everyone. 99% of the people must readapt their lives & tastes because reality is not what it is, reality is what the 1% say, so nobody has a right to puke because the world should lower its taste & standard even more... more & more... even as basic a physiological reaction like puking is forbidden now, natural laws should be tailor-adapted for the gays' contentment. Do I have to be cursed for saying I am not attracted to a gay man? Is it even hard to see why? Since when anybody had the right to even abuse somebody for his sexual taste, isn't that what they're fighting for? They want everybody to function their way, for their sake. Classic oppression now by the oppressed, & who do you think would be too stupid to stoop to that kind of cheap game? To think I didn't even seek sexual conversion, I just accompanied my friend Juan, joined the therapy by chance & I got sexually converted, & they would rather toy with the world with their newfound "powers" than seek real change. Well, their "powers" have not made my urge to vomit with their antics disappear. Their "powers" can never make them the standards of beauty even if they organise to eternity. The fact is they will only be happy if they are no longer gay. And if they proved malignant & incurable, they should learn to be mature & not degrade the world to their unfortunate fate. Equality doesn't mean a degraded world.

Does anybody even believe claiming William Shakespeare or Clint Eastwood is gay will ever redeem gays? In the end, Shakespeare & Eastwood, both not self-identifying as homosexual, will become laughing-stocks instead. All this wishful thinking will not validate gays in the end but it will only cheapen everyone & everything, past or present. Pure gold is simply too valuable, too attractive. No use pandering to outdated delusions, it's obvious by now there is/will be no equality- there are cheap people who could stuff anything into their iron-clad stomachs & there are those with refined ones. Sorry, folks, I don't have a strong stomach & I won't swallow anyone's delusion if it makes me puke!

Needless to say, I don't take gay politics seriously. With the current bleak world situation, the limits of democracy are becoming clearer & clearer except to those prone to wishful thinking. Everything in democracy, even democracy itself, is reversible. It appears the current political system isn't the end-stage form, it is still evolving, it will continue to evolve & humans haven't exactly escaped from a world ominously described by George Orwell & Aldous Huxley. I'm afraid, instead of expanding, there will be a retreat in the entitlement dramas in no time. Endless carping about rights finally caught up with reality, I can see in the short term that the eternal battle between duty & rights will tip towards the former as the latter will eventually be the ultimate casualty of the current troubles. Democracies can't forever subsist on debt & saliva just to pander to abstract demagoguery, it would rather just self-destruct. That's why civilizations have come & gone. That's the proverbial brickwall facing political delusions, including the gay one, and the latter has gotten used to facing brickwalls throughout history anyway since the time of Sodom, Greece, Rome, etc. After my successful sexual conversion, the more I saw gay politics as nothing but exercises in delusion. If any of these activists were so concerned about the welfare of gays, they should have been running sexual conversion camps to help those who could still be saved instead of forcing the issue to the gagging throats of everybody else. At least, just doing the motions of ferreting out & saving the benigns if they couldn't find the honesty to do the real thing. Treating everybody as malignants expecting them to have the same options & expectations like the end-stage cases is not only a great injustice, it's cruel stupidity. But no, they just wanted to use them for their own political ends. They wanted to grand-stand because they couldn't face their own mediocre lives so they scrape barrels for conjured special civil rights just so they could amplify their narrow theories (their only hold to presumed greatness) & in the process feed their puny self-importance. At the expense of the simple-minded gay who will grasp at any imagined salvation unaware he had other options aside from being gay, that he didn't have to swallow his vomit & that he should not be reduced instead into a mere poster child for another political sound bite which would soon be muffled anyway by an inevitable wall of revulsion. Luckless existence, especially now when big money has realized there's really only a miniscule gay market to speak of, it turned out the far bigger part didn't march to the same music as the tiny noisy pariah bunch all along. Unfortunately, current events are certainly knocking some sense into delusional aspirations. It's never wise to exert a strong effort even if you're merely shouting "I want my phantom special Civil Rights" while you're standing over a quicksand. I'm sure, the quicksand will also assert its right & quite rightly you'll be swallowed up.

Cheap tactics, cheap tastes?

One wrote the Malignant B-lister gays should be supported in order to fight the Creationists. Why should you even choose between the two? Why should fringes dictate your options? The delusional 1% of gay politics is as much a fringe as the Ultra-Rightist. Why not just ignore all the fringes (though Greg prefers even an Ultra-Right thug if he's cute, he'll even buy him a condo; I actually had a fetish for religious straight guys before when I was still active so B-lister gays will be the last option in every way)? There is a pervasive presumption among the pretentious that a penchant for weepy melodramas is enough credential to be a liberal, avant-garde or intellectual. I had my fill of brushes with that liberal stereotype who escaped from a farm who, upon reaching the city, try to posture as "gay-friendly" even to the most gawdy Muscle Mary thinking that that is her ticket to "being in" despite her bad makeup & low IQ. No, that's just the proof she's got a strong stomach, that she came from a farm & she is as clueless as her cheap eyeliner. Revulsion or compassion? What is the best way to seek compasssion from someone trying to control his puke? Pray he's a sucker & remind him it's being liberal & intellectual to swallow his puke? Chasing a Theory, a phantom special civil right dream, when all you wanted was to puke is the perfect metaphor for what infected the formerly progressive Western civilization. I don't think that's being a liberal democrat, that's called scraping-the-barrel cheap.

Sadly, in the end, it's much ado about nothing. You can't bargain on the purity of the wine. Despite the wishful dreaming & the dishonest grand-standing, a weak diluted wine simply won't do & things will eventually fall into their proper places like in a perfect blocking of a perpetual plot line. History has always made sure that's inevitable & the current historical narrative in the currently reeling West can't be mistaken, the usual redemptive mechanisms are finally kicking in. A dying bull will still make a final effort to kick just to bluster it is alive & strong but it is fatally doomed. Like it has always been. Like Sodom. Like Greece. Like Rome...

Frankly, it's time to ignore the noise of the malignant B-lister gays. The world has been a better place. I never had problems with my sexuality because I never made myself a nuisance. Everybody should be honest with his self-worth & not pretend he's rated 10 when he's a mere 0.0000000000001.

The Democrats shouldn't rely too much from scraping the barrel for support, they may just scrape shit. If they want to be taken seriously, they shouldn't condone the B-lister gay activists in contaminating the conversation with their tasteless propaganda: no, it's not being modern, it's being cheap. Revulsion will always win over forced compassion in the end. It's not wise presuming all Democrats have strong stomachs, they might just puke & pass out due to dehydration before they could even vote. They voted before because of a bad economy, now the economy is still bad & let's see if they like now the idea to be protected suddenly by a gay soldier at a time when there may be a strong enemy, they didn't vote for that. That's the danger of pandering to the fringes, for scraping the barrel, the desperate last resort of a hanging-by-the-tips-of-his-fingers liberal democrat. The Republicans certainly couldn't stomach them either. Let them form their own party- may I suggest they name it The Cheapest Loser Party. Cheapness can only be sophisticated to losers.

My British friend Pete referred me to a news account on Obama making gay rights as criterion for allocation of US aid. Lol, the top recipients include Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq & Egypt. Who is he kidding anyway? How much could the US afford nowadays, btw? To think China invested $10 billion in Obama's ancestral home Kenya & it's keeping its mouth shut humbly. China spent in Kenya alone what the US almost spent in the top ten recipients of its aid & Obama has the gall to gloat as if his kind of money still shocks & awes! It is these kinds of cheap bluster that could destroy US image in no time. For what? To pander for a paltry electoral contribution from some Muscle Mary's from California? It's good it was mentioned in the same article that Mitt Romney won't make the same stupid linking of aid funds, at least not all Americans would appear cheap. My Singaporean friend already laughed his head off when the French Foreign Minister threatened to withhold funds that it doesn't have to any country that doesn't respect human rights, now comes Obama blustering cheaply like a growling cat. Just gets more hilarious. Better call a pirouetting Muscle Mary for maximum punchline.

Obama is caught scraping the barrel there first hand. Fits our title.

Friday, December 2, 2011

A CELEBRATION OF GOOD TASTE, A NEW DAWN : Beautiful Russia (красивая России)

Andrei Arshavin, Russia

by Dick of All Dicks & Poli Tico

Oscar Wilde: "Show the art but conceal the artist"
The Who: "Trust the art but not the artist".

Most men who are into men grew up without all the drama found in malignant B-lister gay propaganda. That "malignant B-lister gay" qualification is relevant because that refers to the part gripped by delusional politics- in Britain, it could only be 1% of the population (very likely, lesser in more relatively conservative areas like the US & Australia). They don't speak for the other 9% who do actually enjoy their lives & prosper in their own way, like they have always done through the centuries. But they do find the 1% tend to use & abuse them with their delusions. Fortunately, after putting up with the sickening delusional noise comes a ray of sunlight. Almost cathartic, as if a disgusting load struggling to escape from their intestines have finally been evacuated. Bliss, finally.

Greg, my neighbor who is still active with all-male sex, is preparing for a manhunt in Russia. The news that St. Petersburg has an anti-gay propaganda legislation in the offing is making him really excited. Ironically, the news is wonderful because that would mean there won't be too much pedestrian gay color to destroy the ambiance (like it destroyed WeHo) so he'll have the feast of his life with real straight Russian men galore. He says that's a very wise move on the part of the Russians, it will discourage small-time gay tour groups which are only looking for bargain men & fun anyway. That will also mean tacky Russian fags would not be loitering in the streets. Imagine all the cheapness & the whiney noise which plague Castro & WeHo, just not worth it. The sexy straight Russian men deserve a far more sophisticated fan club. Greg is not "homophobic chic" for nothing.

Class & luxury are built on authenticity. If you love men, the more authentic the men the better, & all the authentic men gathered in one place is heaven. St. Petersburg will be a full-strength testosterone heaven in no time.

Needless to say, I fully support the Russian move, gay tones only annihilate the sexual mood anyway. You can't legislate against gays themselves, that's not the aim, but you can prevent them from physically degrading the landscape. Most men who are into men actually prefer to ogle real pure men anyway, just like gold prospectors preferring real pure gold. It's really heartening the Russians have learned from the pretentious nonsense that degraded the West (including, unfortunately, California) in the recent past. Allowing one pretentious nonsense just invite more delusional nonsense & that could infect in many ways- it eventually undermines the system- so don't wonder why the West is reeling nowadays (& California near bankruptcy ). If they did that last year, I would've postponed my sexual conversion just so I could have celebrated in St. Petersburg, lol. It should be adopted in America. There is a right to protection from nausea. You never lose on the side of good taste.

The Russians are definitely showing fine taste & wisdom in preserving the delicious resources of their country. Malignant B-lister gays already lost the luck of the draw when they were born, why make their lot more atrocious by allowing the view around them to be sullied by letting themselves trample all over it. They themselves will suffer from the nauseous ambiance they caused in the end. Oscar Wilde wrote "Show the art but conceal the artist". The Who sung "Trust the art but not the artist". Gays create beautiful art from the angst of their misfortune but they should have the humility to physically step out of the picture so their art could shine with all its purity unsullied by their fetid origins. The St. Petersburg resolution just aims to preserve that greatest Russian work of art- the sexy straight Russian men at their most genuine. True art at its sexiest.

If they can't stay in a closet, Russian malignant B-lister gays should just stay in the shadows. Nobody wins if a cross-eyed lady insists on joining a beauty contest though she has all the right to insist. Just like nobody wins if a malignant B-lister gay insists in sashaying in front of a bunch of really sexy straight dudes... really, no need to mar the view, sisters! Humility will serve everybody in the end. Their selfless sacrifice will mean a more beautiful world. Anyway, they are just so lucky they will get to behold a daily parade of real men. At least, life would be worth living & not wasted swallowing when they should be vomiting.

Ah, Greg is swooning already, full-strength testosterone reigns in Russia.

If ever I would have a relapse, I have a feeling it will be in St. Petersburg...

I can see this Russian move as a harbinger of things to come. A new golden dawn. It came earlier than I expected, good taste is much-needed in these times of underachievement & over-delusion. All my friends just can't wait. Greg is perennially excited. Ewan & his partners may just visit Russia finally. The others are all smiles with sexy expectations. If you felt a celebratory undercurrent to the post, you're not dreaming. I'm actually humming a Russian pop song by the sexy Russian group Korni while writing this...

Russia now, Spain restored any day now, California soon. And that's good. Sanity, it's called. Western civilization might yet be saved...

SEXY SOUTH AFRICA: Pierre Spies of Springboks & Vodacom Bulls, Super 14

Thursday, November 24, 2011

RIGHT TO PROTECTION FROM NAUSEA: The Politics of Strong Stomachs

Ben Foden & Una Healy

by Dick of All Dicks & Poli Tico

I said it's all a delusion. It really puzzles me how supposed-to-be serious intelligent men kept a straight face during the drama. The FAIR Education Act of California was supposed to change the world view of the young kids, make them aware of the achievements of past homosexuals (who didn't publicly identify as homosexuals btw, just from accounts of some ancient authors & activists who were most likely gays themselves), so that, as the wishful thinking goes, all gays will be seen in a new light & pronto all prejudice will be gone forever. Ah, and Hollywood will try to help along their fellow gays- let the world know Alexander is bisexual so the world will learn not only heterosexuals are strong. But what's this? The film ALEXANDER bombed! Ah, the gay wishful thinkers resolved, let's try again, let's hint Captain America is gay so gays could be superheroes & voila- oh, but what's this again? The film didn't recoup its big budget despite the gargantuan advertisement outlay & Brandon Routh, on the verge of superstardom, disappeared as a result into the gloom. But hey, there are still many superheroes who certainly could turn gay any minute now... wishful thinking forever...

Really now! Did you hear what happened in a California classroom when a lispy Muscle Mary sashayed in? Ah, little Greg was curious, was Alexander the Great a Muscle Mary too? Little Greg, as expected in a child with an overly active mind, tried to check if lispy Muscle Mary was capable of building an empire like the Great Macedonian. But what's this, why did Muscle Mary cry when he taunted him to show his war-like prowess? Then, horrors, why did all these old Muscle Mary's descend on the campus to harass imaginative Little Greg? Alas, Little Greg grew up to be a good-looking dude. Yes, William Shakespeare might have been gay but what did it matter when the muscular high-school jock, William Grant, was always eyeing his dick in the shower, that really made Little Greg want to puke. Michaelangelo might have been gay but William Grant made a pass at adolescent Little Greg so the latter punched him though Leonardo da Vinci might have been gay too. Abraham Lincoln might have been gay but the delicate headmaster was caught peeping at a boy student in a toilet stall. Yes, Captain America might have been gay & Teacher Lily just looked on at what was happening in her school with a deadpan, but she feared she couldn't contain her laughter anymore. Clint Eastwood might be gay but it's no wonder California is nearing bankruptcy, the low quality of imagination & expectations going around really boggles the mind. Really, I just hope the feeble minds of wishful thinking won't infect the national scene or the US is really history.

Really now, how can you even expect it's possible to manipulate history to elevate a "looked-down" group whose clear & present (& perpetual) reality is just reinforcing the usual prejudice? Alexander may be bi, Hoover may be gay or Greta Garbo may be a lesbian but will an atrociously funny view before your eyes ever stop being a comedy? Ban comedy just to be politically correct? Or will history be degraded into a hilarious tragedy instead?

Woe to the supposed-to-be serious intelligent people. It surprises you how many among those who like to pretend to be of a "higher level" turned out to be mere suckers after all. In the end, plain affectations mostly to distract themselves from accepting their own mediocrity. Once, they dreamed there would be economic equality, they even killed millions for it- there'll be no rich or poor, ha!-, but not only is poverty as ubiquitous as ever, but is in danger now of engulfing everybody else. Ah, never mind the poor, how about sexuality. If we could no longer pretend as modern economically, we can always pretend we are "modern" sexually- that won't be too hard, is it? So they now have the gall to expect everybody should swallow their vomits because it's of being on a "higher level" to do so. It's politically correct to swallow your vomits, folks! But what do you really expect would happen? Not everybody could pretend like they do after all. They may have strong stomachs, but unfortunately, most people don't. I certainly don't, I have a low vomit level so excuse me...

It's easy to whistle in the dark & pretend the wishful thinking goes on as it has always been, but the story cracked sometime in the 1980's yet, when most developed economies started deficit spending to lull their citizens with the feeling of prosperity & fed them illusions about unlimited rights which would undo them eventually. The debts only accumulated & eventually settled accounts with reality, while the political demands went beyond practical & incrementally compromised the capacity of the system to respond adequately. The usual grandstanders come forth with their usual "wise" analysis pointing to this, pointing to that, but you wonder if they were any bigger than mere paycheck pushers or just blind archers in the air trying to impress certain delusional cliques while the more sensible majority finally got bored & just tuned out. I have a feeling events on the ground have long ago left behind the self-styled experts who were innocently trapped juggling outdated theories in their ideological cages. Impractical theories which caught up with reality but unfortunately only after they have undermined already the developed world in the last half century. The other side of the world is still skyrocketing to economic surplus despite the world malaise while the deadbeats in France are still debating if Socialist spittle might be better off than the conservative piss of Sarkozy. Even in America, some nitwits still bother chanting Down with Capitalism as if the Left-Right dichotomy could still provide answers after the havoc produced by the ideological wars in the last half century. Has it occurred to anybody it may not even matter? The truth is the world has already turned a new page but Western politics was caught self-importantly napping, so the conversation got stuck in wishful whistling in the darkness of outdated ideological nonsense.

Does it matter really if some believed in Creation when you feel like puking just thinking you have to have sex with a Muscle Mary? Does it matter really if you're a conservative Wasp or a liberal Jew when the ground is imploding beneath both of your feet? Does it matter really if some believed in their God when you feel like running to puke in the toilet when you see a muscular sissy gyrating naked on a stage instead of a delicious straight boy?

Simply, some don't have the right to make you puke when all you wanted was a good view or just to have a good time. Even Civilization thinks so. Throughout history it balked, so whenever malignant gays got too visible, there was civilization change just so they return to their burrows again. Visible malignant gays have been the constant markers of civilization change throughout history. Just like in Sodom. Just like in Thebes. Just like in Sparta. (Just like in London? My British friend Ewan claims the British Empire imploded with its many homosexual aristocrats, LOL), Just like in Rome, etc.

If the delusion continues... Just like now...

Tuesday, November 15, 2011


I went to Paris a couple of weeks ago, then to London, where I met my British friends Ewan & his business partners (all straight boy lovers but all self-identify as heteros) in a private club where out of the blue, our conversation veered from ancient Greeks towards British actors. Suddenly Oliver said nobody seems to be real man enough to interest him anymore. Richard joked most actors in Britain have always been closets so he'd rather watch art movies from Iran where the Ayatollahs would at least make sure all the men were genuine (Lol). Richard has always been bitchy. But you see, we don't listen to gay singers, we don't watch gay leading men in films. We love to say we are all not into fake Rolex nor fake Louis Vuitton, we certainly won't spend two hours watching a not genuine leading man pretending to be straight on the screen. Ignorance would've been bliss, but the problem is it's a small art world in London, they always know someone who swears he knows certain escapades. But it would be unfair to categorize all British actors as gay. They challenged me to write my take on them for a change. I'm up for the challenge (Don't you notice my Brit friends have too much influence on this blog?). Not athletes but actors today.

by Dick of All Dicks & Poli Tico

The hope is they could recreate the relative success of the upper class predilections of the ancient Greeks. By they, I mean some prominent homosexuals who have been sidelined by the dominant masculine heterosexual culture. I say upper class Greeks because the practice only thrived in sectors where prominent pederasts could insinuate themselves into a position of influence, where, by virtue of education or wealth, they could execute their ever sneaky modus operandi of imparting knowledge to the youth in exchange for sex (supposed to be part & parcel of the passion of transmittng knowledge). The receiver or the eromenos in a pederast relationship were actually ridiculed by the common people. Even long before Christianity came, the pederast culture had to fight for its existence. In Plutarch's works, he produced a nice dielectical discussion of the advantages of conjugal love over pederast love & he pointedly put to task the predilection of the pederasts to stay long hours among the naked youths in the gymnasia with the pretext of educating them. It's obvious who instigated the custom that Greek youths had to always be naked when inside the gymnasia. It is a reflection of the current flood of homoerotic images as gays in the modern times try to replicate the tricks of the ancient Greek gays in other myriad ways (See? Who said it's modern?). There was relative success then because most of the ancient Greeks were simple, uneducated & busy with mundane survival, especially if they didn't have the looks, leisure time nor money to be coopted into the pederastic orbit. That sealed the fate of the ancient gays: the common people went on relying on their natural heterosexual desires which perpetuated the heterosexual worldview down to the centuries. The pederasts even then were overwhelmingly outnumbered & they could only corrupt the children of the upper classes (& the goodlooking among the poor) who had the misfortune to be entrusted to them for education. The problem of the pederasts was they lost influence whenever the ruling classses were overthrown by another. Once in Thebes, they managed to form an army all full of lovers (called the Sacred Band) but they were all annihilated after only 40 years, a joke in those times when empires lasted centuries. They have to start corrupting new ones each time, time & again.

Like now. Of course, the modus operandi now includes the magic words "rights" & "equality". The problem is that people aren't mostly peasants now, there's high-technology that could unravel quickly the ruses &, worse, the political & economic landscape is disintegrating that they are more likely to be forced to be on the run again.

You say even the Greek gods were gay? You could almost be sure those salvaged data were the works of ancient gays. It's like a thousand years from now & it happens that the salvaged gay porn might give the impression all-male sex is the prevailing culture today if all the other data were lost. There were just a few hundred documents & few vases saved from ancient Greece. But the surviving ancient gay data were enough to give future homosexuals the blueprints to implement in their new footholds. They naturally gravitated toward the arts & education which they used to entice the upper classes of Europe, just like in ancient Greece. They met a new complication though with the spread of Christianity which forcibly separated passion & sex from learning, disrupting the integrity of a desired erotic Greek education.

But even that drawback eventually became a breakthrough. In Britain, from Oscar Wilde to playwright Tom Stoppard, the tandem of learning and passion has been a persistent theme. The mode of entry of the ancient Greek pederast script into Britain was to try to reinsert into the debate the renaissance of passion in unity with learning. British academia preferred to emphasize the more Enlightenment-based primacy of knowledge over the drive-based pretensions. The poets, playwrights and philosophers (which were called "great" for whatever propaganda value) of ancient Greece were frequently invoked for their celebration of intellect hand in hand with love and passion, and of course, not to forget sex. Then & now, art & education have been convenient foraging grounds. This was more clearly shown when a play entitled HISTORY BOYS was staged some years back. It was about a teacher who fondled his students because, as he said it, "the transmission of knowedge is an erotic act by itself ". Greek erotic education was alive again & it has reared its head in Britain.

The following interview with the two actors who played the protagonists of HISTORY BOYS were instructive on the self-rationalization done by some British on the issue (not as widespread as some would like to make it believed because only 1% of the population actually are potential instigators). Notice they used the word "mature","being on a higher level", "that they have more something to gain" by being fondled by a teacher who is receiving a salary to educate them. DC is Dominic Cooper & SB is Samuel Barnett, both British actors.

DC: It's one of those things that started to happen. It's ridiculous. The boys have something much more bigger to gain. The point of their lives is very, very important. It's one of those I think they deal with it in a very mature way because they're a mature bunch of guys.
SB: They're not damaged by it. They're not screwed up by it. It's inappropriate and completely wrong. It's not illegal. They're all over 16. It's inappropriate because it's teacher-student. It's not pedophilia because they're all over 13. It's abusive and it's wrong but they kind of see it as a rite of passage. .. It's wrong, but that's what it is. And you know we talked about it extensively in rehearsals and we came to the conclusion that these boys are kind of on a higher level as it were and they see it as a right of passage rather than something that will screw them up.
DC: And it happens.
SB: It does happen.
DC: That happened to so many people certainly with people who were at school at that time and they all say the same thing, Yeah, yeah, Mr. so-and-so, he used to get us âround his house and just have his hand on our knee all the time. Yeah, he did. And they realized but they dealt with it. In terms of writing, I think it's genius because you kind of fall in love with this guy and he's wonderful...
SB: Actually, you still end up loving him.
DC: You still end up loving him and, as he says in the film, what does he say? Education is in itself an erotic act.
SB: The passing on of it. Yeah.
Q: It sure makes it very clear that the boys deal with it.
DC: They deal with it very well. It doesn't affect them. You don't see any of them trembling in the corner worried about how to deal with it or what it means to them. They don't care about it.
DC: He (the teacher) does breach trust but it's the way the boys react to it that's important

Meaning, I repeat, the boy would be mature, at a "high level" & he's got more to gain if he lets himself be fondled on his way to his goal & he'll still love the fondler. Very sweet. The ancient Greek erotic education at work again in Britain & it's obvious it has indoctrinated well the two actors above. I wonder if part of the decline of the former British Empire could be attributed to this masochistic shortchanging of one's self-worth which is conveniently rationalized as a higher level of being. What I am certain, from that kind of self-rationalization, one can extract the seed for the persistence of homosexuality among British actors even today. A milieu where homosexual artists bent on copying the methods of ancient Greeks would certainly welcome such "high level" attitudes of the willing boys who will pass through "mature" rites of passage on their way to stardom. It's understandable fondling would be too tame for what would then be conveniently passed of as "experimentations" done to establish credentials. Wasn't buggery called an English disease?

A true heterosexual actor may have a lesser chance to break through in such a system. If you still need to experiment, then you're not really heterosexual (I know it's hard to lose the label, but if they still have to experiment, it only means they themselves weren't convinced, there was no fulfillment, so they just had to have orgasm with another boy). As I've written before in our private study on the guys we had sex with, a true heterosexual guy felt "indignity" even if you paid him $5000 just for simple oral sex lasting ten minutes & tend to delete it as soon as possible from his consciousness. Those who loved it will "metamorphose" & were seen active in all-male sex later on on their own, all the while proclaiming themselves "heterosexual" & displaying girlfriends (some have the gall to be cocky with their self-denial when cornered: "It's only sex!" As if everybody was born yesterday. Labels are important to the unwitting prospective victim. And to those with refined taste). You can determine those who metamorphosed not only by their actions but by their mindset, & therefore, their words. The two actors above weren't goodlooking enough for the taste of the group so nobody bothered to confirm their sexual preferences & histories. But with such mindsets to guide them by, we have a clue. A simple check on the works of British actors could provide snapshots of their passage. With such accepting opinions about rites of passage, an actor could go full naked onstage just after drama school in a play of mostly homosexual theme, cast & crew. Not an issue in itself in the Theater where the word "artistic" could acquire the "high level" pretensions of an ancient Greek education.

The real problems arise when they aim bigger & they have to start marketing themselves to gain acceptance, this time not from small time educators & artists who just wanted to score free despite the elaborate high-fallutin' pretensions, but to an intelligent & of more refined taste audience whose patronage could turn them into millionaires. Would simply self-identifying as heterosexual be enough to hoodwink everyone just like in the low-tech times of John Gielgud & Lawrence Olivier? In a modern culture that demands authenticity from all the labels that is sold in the grocery, are fantasies exempted? If you love straights, would you be thrilled to fantasize on gays? In Argentina, a TV program outed wealthy actor Ricardo Fort who was paying actresses to beard for him. The reason given: he's not respecting the people by blatantly fooling them with his duplicity.

Simply, there should be honesty in the marketplace. That's how the West has come to rule the world. And Art, if it wants to earn money, should not be exempted. Basic justice, simple respect.

The ancient Greek erotic educational system which favors not quite heterosexual actors is viable only in a setting with an ignorant, low-tech population and an entertainment establishment that doesn't respect its market. And in a society where only 1% of the population self-identify as gay, respect has been replaced by pretentious I'm-of-higher-level-than-you wishful thinking. Does anyone even realized the new realities of the more high-tech times? In the Information age where every info is at the click of a mouse, it isn't easy for an aspiring screen idol to go Greek & just keep on pretending as if he was Gielgud or Olivier with double lives. More a charlatan selling snake oil.

In 2002, a British stage actor innocently outed himself & his declaration was preserved online forever:
I knew that even though my part was a straight character, everybody knew me as a gay man and, in my life in London, I never tried to hide it. I knew I was going to have to do interviews with gay magazines, so I thought, ‘Well, I’m going to have to be open’. It’s who I am. And if people don’t like it, then I don’t want their jobs. I’ve never been a very good liar

During the first half of the 2000's, caught up in the ardor of a radicalized gay movement, many British actors publicly outed themselves. The big leading men types promptly disappeared while an unknown stage actor surfaced later on, now poised as a new action star in Hollywood. But surprise, he's now identified as heterosexual complete with a girl friend. I sympathize with him because he was naive enough to be fooled by that useless propaganda of coming out just to validate the fantasies of those who will never be validated anyway. He is now the subject of many attacks from the gay press for turning his back. But I won't join them, I won't name him for the simplest reason I don't care to join the chorus of nailing him by those very people who fooled his simple mind with their propaganda in the first place. I know it doesn't pay to be a sucker to delusions.

Still, this actor may be guilty of false advertising. He could be the British version of Ricardo Fort. I wish him luck but I won't waste my time watching an action movie with him in the lead. Comedy, maybe, but even that I'm not so sure.

As an intelligent consumer, one must be conscious of high quality everytime. You make sure the ingredients of the corned beef are as real as indicated in the label for your physical health. You should be concerned of the quality of your fantasies for your psychic & sexual health.

Whoever would believe for long it is of a "higher level" to swallow one's vomit in the first place?

NEXT PROJECT: We'll have our take on Henry Cavill, Tom Hardy, James McAvoy & the Irish actor Jonathan Rhys-Meyer. Surprisingly only two of them passed our heterosexual criteria & you'll be surprised who didn't quite make the grade. James is definitely a hetero, who is the other one?

DELICIOUS BRITAIN: Ashley Gibson & Matthew Goodwin

Thursday, November 10, 2011

SPENT FORCES: Just Let The Children Play (with our sincerest apologies to Hollywood director Brett Ratner)

Adil Rami, FC Valencia, La Liga

by Dick of All Dicks & Poli Tico

When I read the news, the words of a noted American liberal figure came to mind: dictatorship of political correctness (see it here). Big Brother is here. When former Oscar producer/movie director Brett Ratner allegedly used the word "Faggot" without obvious intention of frontally hurting anybody in particular, he had all the right to express himself. I don't find the word offensive, I still regularly use it instead of "dude" in addressing Greg, my straight boy-loving neighbor. Just the thought of somebody overhearing your casual remarks & creating an artificial scandal actually bothered me more- what, the "politically correct" position now is to live under the glare of CCTV & other recording instruments so the Gestapo squeals can run your life? The cool position now is to act like a child holding your tounge so Mother won't slap you if you muttered something in the corner? Everybody has a right to think low of anybody he thinks is below his standards & he has a right to mutter his opinion as long as he doesn't blurt it at the face of anybody with the frank intention of hurting him. Freedom of expression is greater than the pretension or fantasies of anybody.

What do you think happened why the West skidded recently? Curious, but has it not surprised anybody that the descent came at a time when all the posturing of "political correctness" became vogue in Western political & social circles? If everybody is being considerate of everybody now by arbitrarily censuring the political correctness of each other, why isn't life improving? Why is the West declining instead? Is it part & parcel of being politically correct to have a bleaker future? Or could this misplaced hypersensitivity have "compromised" unnecessarily the priorities & agility of the system itself?

Could the bogus plea of leeway just for reasons of being a minority or other politically hurt party so degraded the underlying mechanism that it couldn't apply anymore its usual stringent standard operating procedures because it had to accommodate many unrealistic, even delusional, political caprices? If it is so affected & compromised, would the system still be as robustly viable in a world slowly but surely slipping from its control?

Writing for this blog unexpectedly gave me more independent insights. You really won't expect the mainstream media to explore beyond a particular ideological line or they won't get their checks. They really can't get away from the now increasingly tired principles & are forced to hew their thinking or they would be pariah to their not as imaginative but equally just as confined cliques. I am increasingly finding myself thinking outside the usual drivel. For a person who can speak 8 languages & read 9, I have access to a whole lot more interpretations of what's going on in the world. Besides, I'm a very international person, I have close friends, mostly belonging to the ruling classes, around the world.

One thing I found out, you can't run the world by presuming everybody should have strong stomachs. How do things appear elsewhere? I asked Poli to distill the views of my friend Donald, a Singaporean-Chinese who was educated in Oxford, England, a classmate of my British friend Ewan. He is an ex-gay, he dabbled in England, but is now married happily with a woman in Singapore, the most productive country in the world despite being a semi-democracy according to Western standards. Here are important excerpts from Poli's notes:

"... The resistance to gays are infinitely greater than against the Blacks. With the Blacks, it was only fear, but against gays are the whole gamut- fear, taste, religion, family, tradition, normality. The fear is infinitely greater with gays because every parent wants his child to become straight, they already know their child won't become Black so the horror of being gay is a real pervasive fear shared in the society. Forget the posturings of the alleged intellectuals in the West regarding this issue, there'll be a new intellectual culture. By historical necessity, they will be marginalized at best...

...The expected backlash within America as they search for reasons why they sunk will zero in on one of the most readily available scapegoats - the very visible gays. They will most likely be driven underground again just like in the past because I don't think the Western Bill of Rights will still be tenable when countries with supposed to be less democratic aspirations have beaten the system. The likely winner, the Chinese model, will be the golden standard. No need for military conquests, the practical forces in the West themselves will do the proper resets just to protect the remaining assets. The American Constitution is outdated anyway, no way would a bunch of old men two-hundred years ago in the past could have imagined present realities...

..Human rights? Not as the West sees them. When they gave a Nobel to Ai Wei Wei, all the so-called democratic countries close to China boycotted the proceedings in Oslo despite protests by human right organizations. Did anything happen to them?

... Spent forces. There's ideological exhaustion everywhere anyway. The Occupy New York, as expected, fizzled. The Arab Spring will ultimately usher in the default Islamic societies of the areas because Western values are simply anathema to the local cultures. Even France is expected to go to financial skids shortly while Alain Juppe, the foreign minister, still have the illusion to bluster that it will withhold funds that it doesn't have to any country not respecting human rights (that nearly killed me laughing). The West simply doesn't have the resources & credibility to impose anymore. To an astute mind, history is inevitable. That's why Plan A of all big Western companies are projecting a market dominated by Asia in the very near future. Even the Western media is fighting for attention now while before, it dominated so Western culture is inevitably losing its appeal. Frankly, it would be a relief from the outdated babbling of the smart-alecks.

... Hollywood is a business. The gay agenda is a trend there for the meantime but as business in the emerging countries gets bigger, they eventually won't allow their impractical fantasies to get in the way. It already knows it has no carte blanche to proselytize. Sharon Stone was forced to keep quiet her criticisms when China threatened to ban her films. China simply banned the songs of Lady Gaga & what do you know, her publicists are coincidentally now drumming up her relationship with a man when she just did a propaganda clip in Paris saying she's more attracted to women. Just imagine the picture ten years from now when the Chinese entertainment market would be bigger than the Western market as a whole. Aside from small sectors in the West largely magnified by the media, nobody really is biting the gay agenda. They just developed their own bubble where they could kid each other. People would rather play Wii than read newspapers anyway... Just let the children play for the meantime...

Btw, you were right, gays are markers of civilization change..."

This blog is more a journal of my views at the time it was written. What keeps me going is the thought I'm interpreting history as it develops & it will be good reading when I turn forty a decade from now. Propaganda is not the primary objective or we would have pasted links to the articles everywhere. We post, we forget it. I know I have a select core audience anyway. I don't have to do active propaganda against the current gay agenda, you would be stupid to think it will realize its dreams of equality & no prejudice anyway. It is not realistic, just like Communism, it is a delusion. Not all men who are into men are delusional, they can find happiness & fulfillment without destroying their worlds. The innate defense mechanism of a human being to protect his self-respect is to think of himself as better than another (thus if you can't be beautiful, rich or a best-selling author, you can always delude yourself to have ascendancy just by posturing as "politically correct" so you can look down at anybody who, to you, are unsophisticated). For a straight, not being gay is a ready reason to feel uplifted so the gay one, by default, is, from the start, already subconsciously "slurred". You don't have to be very wise to realize the obvious. Homophobia, like poverty, is forever.