Source: http://vi.sualize.us/view/kallini2002/f436e6d4c09674e2e2a65fd429b1cf90/

Come here, rude boy, boy,

can you get it up?

Strangely enough, after I have watched the video clip for “Alejandro” and laughed and completely discounted it as rubbish, my flow of consciousness was inundated by thoughts about sex, erotica, sexuality and sensuality.  Not that there were no other factors that drove me in this particular direction.

The seeds were planted long ago, so to speak.  And all of a sudden I started paying attention to other clips and words in songs.  In the clip for the song “She bangs”, there is some banging, and lyrics are somewhat provocative (maybe it is not the best description), but it is how I am approaching the subject now.  Even if it is lame, let it be for now.  Then I listened to Rihanna’s “Rude Boy”.  I liked how she talks business:

Come here, rude boy, boy,

Can you get it up?

Come here, rude boy, boy

Is you big enough?

Never mind the grammar – “is you big enough?”

Rihanna “Rude Boy” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e82VE8UtW8A

Rihanna \”Rude Boy\”

That is how it should be.  “Can you get it up? Or what the hell are we talking about?”  Probably there should be no talking.  Words are nothing, action is everything.  Testing is everything (spoken from experience).  Testing is Everything.  It does not matter how imperfect my marriage was or the sexual aspect of it; at least my husband had no problem with the equipment or performance.  Which I found out only after it had fallen apart.  I don’t regret it, but I feel that in that sense I hit the jackpot the first time; I just did not know it.  Getting it up seems to be more problematic for men than I expected.  Sometimes you need a magnifying glass to find the equipment.  I speak like an engineer, LOL.  Equipment, measurements, length & width, performance…  That is not everything, of course.  There is technique. There is passion; at least there should be passion.  Good luck finding it….  There are plenty of other factors, too.  Otherwise, my marriage could have been much better.  My ex would have not blamed me that I ruined his sex life.  But I think the sentiment goes both ways.  The subject is complicated enough.  But my life was what it was and it is what it is; therefore there is no other choice but to continue my journey of discovery unabated.  Full steam ahead.

The reason I am breaking this barrier (not doing the deed, I did it two years ago), but talking about it in a public space is that the other day, my favourite character told me that “I am such a lamb”.  How I resented the comment!  I am not a lamb!  Maybe there is some truth to it; otherwise I would not be so much irritated.  Well, if there are barriers to be broken, maybe it is about time.

I broke the barrier two years ago.  It was more an act of courage and rebellion, than sex.  And what was the first thing that I encounter?  My second partner could not get it up.  Neither could the third.  And I thought “What the hell?”  I am not going to continue with numbers, performance evaluations & statistics.  It’s all private.  But the question remains “Can you get it up?” Testing, testing 1-2-3.

What is more important to me, can I get past my shyness, inexperience, prejudice, moral barriers?  Can I move on?  Can I get it up?  Can I free myself?  Overcoming fear is intoxicating.  What a stupid question!  Of course, I can!

Questions are never indiscreet.  Answers sometimes are. (Oscar Wilde)

Victor Pelevin “The Sacred Book of Werewolf”

People often argue about whether this world really exists, or is something like The Matrix movie.  It’s a very stupid thing to argue about.  All problems of this kind derive from the fact that people don’t understand the words they use.  Before discussing the subject, the first thing people ought to do is get to grips with the meaning of the word ‘exist’.  Then a lot of interesting things would become clear.  But people are rarely capable of correct thinking.

Of course, I don’t mean to say that all people are total idiots.  There are some among them whose intellect is almost the equal of a fox’s.  For instance, the Irish philosopher Berkeley.  He said that to exist means to be perceived and all objects exist only in perception.  You only have to think calmly about the subject for three minutes to realize that any other views on the matter are like the cult of Osiris or belief in the god Mithras.  In my view, this is the only true thought that has visited the Western mind in its long and funny history: all the Humes, Kants and Baudrillards are only embroidering the canvas of this great insight in a fussy satin stitch.

But where does an object exist when we turn away and stop seeing it?  After all, it doesn’t disappear, as children and Amazonian Indians think, does it?  Berkeley says that it exists in the perception of God.  But Cathars and Gnostics believe that it exists in the perception of the diabolical demiurge, and their arguments are no worse than Berkeley’s .  From their point of view, matter is an evil that shackles the spirit.  By the way, reading Stephen Hawking’s horror stories, I often used to think that if the Albigenses had had a radio telescope, they would have declared the Big Bang a cosmic photograph of Satan’s rebellion…  There is a middle way through this morass of idiocy – to believe that part of the world exists in the perception of God, and part in the perception of Devil.

What can I say to this?  From the point of view of us foxes, there never was any Big Bang, just as the Tower of Babel that Breughel painted never existed, even if there is a reproduction of the painting hanging in a room that you dream about.  And God and the Devil are simply reproductions that are dreamed by some people to hang in a room of the tower on the picture hanging on the wall in a room they dream about.  Berkeley assumed that perception has to have a subject, and so the coins that rolled under the cupboard and the socks that fell behind the bed were solemnly interred in the cranium of the Creator specially created for that purpose.  But how do we deal with the fact that Berkeley’s God, in whose perception we exist, Himself exists mostly in the abstract thinking of certain representatives of the endangered European race?  And he doesn’t exist at all in the consciousness of a Chinese peasant or a little bird which is unaware that it is God’s?  How do we deal with this if ‘to exist’ really does mean ‘to be perceived’?

We don’t, say the foxes.  Foxes have a fundamental answer to the fundamental question of philosophy, which is to forget this fundamental question.  There are no philosophical problems, there is only a suite of interconnected linguistic cul de sacs created by language’s inability to reflect the truth.

But it is better to run into one of these cul de sacs in the first paragraph, rather than after forty years of searching and five thousand pages of writing.  After Berkeley finally got the point the only thing he wrote about was the wonder-working properties of the tincture of bitumen that he’d come across in North America.  And as a result, ever since then he has been mocked by various philistines, who aren’t aware that in that distant time bitumen was produced in America from a plant called Jimson Weed, or Datura.

Religious hypocrites accuse us were-creatures of addling people’s brains and distorting the Image of God.  The people who say this have a rather poor idea of the Image of God, since they mould it after their own sanctimonious mugs.  In any case, talk of ‘distortion’ and; addling; is too judgemental; language like that shifts the question on to the emotional plane and prevents any understanding of the real nature of the matter, which is as follows (please pay close attention to the following paragraph – I have finally reached the most important point).

Since the existence of things consists in their perceptibility, any transformation can occur by two routes – either through the perception of transformation or the transformation of perception.

In honour of the great Irishman, I would like to call this rule Berkeley’s Law.  It is absolutely essential knowledge for all seekers of truth, gangsters and extortionists, marketing specialists and paedophiles who wish to remain at liberty.