take a bow

i finally understand what got me so riled up.

it seemed to me that the person who replied (a touch cuntily to my comment by broaching on internet filtering / policing, and that my blog has too many pictures of gorgeous nude men, thereby inducing minors to become horny, resulting in them seducing "innocent" adult gay men), was in essence saying that the adults get a free pass, all because the minor was the seducer.

again, wtf???

is he saying that it was all the minor's fault for provoking the adult to lustful actions?

therefore, the blame is on the minor, and not on the adult?

holy crap.

this is the kind of thinking that gets me.

as adults, we are responsible for our own actions.
we should know what to do.
shouldn't we?

never mind that the minor was the one who made the first move.

the adult shouldn't encourage it.
nor should the adult make the first move, or any succeeding moves.
at all.

what if it were to happen to their children? to their relations' children? to friends' children?
would they sing a different tune?

we know what's wrong and what's right, and given that we lean towards the good, we should firmly discourage sexual invitations from minors.

are we that weak, that cowardly, that irresponsible to blame others for our actions or reactions???

if one ends up blaming the minors as the instigators, and they the adults as the victims, who has the more responsibility to know what is right and wrong?

who becomes the adult?

my god.

and i think it was just less than five who protested it.
the rest seemed agreeable.
i was disappointed, horribly so.

i think it's time to start thinking of leaving that group and its strange sense of morals.

first, it was the group owner who cried "stop your faggotty ways!", and now this seemingly indifference towards adults having sex with minors.

viva la loca.

why

why is it, that once girls, gay men, and fag hags know of your sexual orientation, they immediately think you can speak various versions of swardspeak? (i can't and i don't)

why is it, that once men know of your sexual orientation, they immediately think you are attracted to them, no matter how unattractive they are (to me, anyway - hehe)? i actually have a theory on this one.

why is it, that once people know of your sexual orientation, they immediately think you must be attracted to young or teenage boys? (so far, i'm not)

why is it, that once people know of your sexual orientation, they immediately ask why you're not very girly? (because like the rainbow, gay men come in an assortment of colors)

just some thoughts that occurred to me while reading reactions to a post i made about gay men having sex with hardly legal-aged seducers.

i quickly determined that my sudden and violent reaction to the nonchalance of this event was due to my idea of a utopian society. which means i live in a dreamworld.

i will not be a hypocrite and say that the thought hasn't crossed my mind when i was a teen. in high school, i did imagine myself kissing someone older, a 15-year old boy. i was 14. hehe. that was probably the extent of it. i guess i lived a sheltered life in terms of sex. i still do.

and i will admit i have daddy-son fantasies. and i'm always the son. how vain of me. (lol)

and it's a good thing i don't like children very much. it serves a purpose that is twofold: one, that i have less chances of being sexually attracted to one, and that two, i wouldn't have to worry about having a child in the future that might indulge in sexual encounters (with adults or peers) without being equipped emotionally and psychologically.

although if it is indeed true, that most youngsters today are experimenting with sex at an early age, what would that entail, in terms of moral and legal parameters? or in emotional and psychological definitions? would the laws change? would society change?

are children today much more matured than their previous generations? i don't think i would be as much disturbed if todays teens are sexually active with their peers, and not their peers' parents.

true, sex is messy. but it's messier when one belongs to a (gay) society that has already been marginalized, categorized, and ostracized by the majority. ized, ized, baby.

gay adult men having sex with legal minors.

i think i was the one of the few who protested that this is just wrong.

gay adult men having sex with legal minors.

i kind of think it takes the civil rights and gay recognition movement back a step or two.

kind of like electing a black president into office, just to have an equal-rights proposition overturned in the span of a few hours.

but who among those i communicated with, would care?

as perezhilton would say... WTF?

when we deny ourselves

i admit it. there are some times when i am not my biggest fan.

some moments that shame me are those when i am reminded of my lack of courage. courage to fight for myself, courage to fight for others, and courage to just be.

so it is with a little bit, a wee bit, of courage that i write this.

i do not know why many discriminate amongst ourselves. i include myself in this category, though i prefer to think i am not the most homophobic gay man out there.

"yuck, ka bayot niya! (yuck, how gay of him!)" - from a 'discreet' man who has sex with other men.

i smell a hint of self-loathing with a base of delusion and a whiff of self-importance in this common street fragrance.

perhaps when one is drowned in this stench, it becomes like perfume.

spay it. don't spray it, sister.

cause i think i still have that stink on me.

the cutest thing ever

on a typical saturday morning

i just discovered i like watercolors.

i made several sketches today (since i was bored and a little creative at the same time), and it seems i'm more suited to watercolors than colored pencils.

this means if ever i plan to add colors, i'm going to use watercolors. i've tried pastels, and it's a no. oil is a bit expensive for me.

and i'm terribly frightened of using cracked photoshop/coreldraw installers to create artwork. luck doesn't seem to be on my side for these things, as they tend to end up destroying my pc. now, sharewares are a different story. i love them, and they love me back.

so i'ts manual for me, for now.

i posted the first part of the story, which i hope is intriguing at the start.

there are two versions of the drawing, both in mixed media of ink and colored pencil. the difference is that the second one has watercolor over the ink and colored pencil.

but probably, i'm most kilig by this one, which i also made today.

black in white

obama: a new hope.

when models talk

while perusing the quite limited channels of interest on cable tv, i chanced upon a "real" local show with a model as a host.

truth be told, she was rather pretty and delightful, if one turned off the volume.

perhaps the head honchos thought that just having a pretty face is enough to host a tv show.

no.

one needs charm and tact, and definitely a more tolerable voice.

but wait, maybe it's not entirely the girl model's fault. the editors also have to be blamed for letting the show come out like that.

i could tell she was trying to be witty, charming, and informative. i think she's been trying for over a year without success. or maybe she really is all that. but it just didn't come across as such.

the funny thing about this local channel is that they are trying to promote a hip style. but their style is a little lacking. maybe it has to do with their vision of what exactly is hip.

i've seen other good segments before while flipping through the channels, but oh my. overall it's a little sad.

and if what i heard about the late salary payments is true, i can't blame the employees either if they turned out lackluster products due to ill feelings.

i was happy to know one thing: i could switch the channel.

which i did after a minute of her inane chattering with a human resource personnel from a call center company.

i love remote controls.