The Thinker

Danger: white male

Since I’m a white male, I’m starting to think that maybe I need to be profiled and tracked. It seems like we white males as a class are pretty dangerous critters. Maybe we need a tag, neuter and release program. (Good news: I’m already neutered.) These days it seems like any one of us white males could go off like Vesuvius at any moment and probably take out a dozen or more innocent bystanders in the process. Of course we’ll use a gun, a semi-automatic one if we can get one. It makes killing strangers so much faster and lethal. Not a problem, according to the NRA and, hey, Buy American!

I know what you are thinking: “Mark, what the heck are you talking about? It’s the black males that are being tracked and profiled mostly because it’s black males that are committing most of these crimes. Why should a relatively prosperous, older, white guy like you be thought suspicious?”

Dear reader, it’s because it’s us white guys that are most likely to pop their gaskets and do crazy stuff. You know something is up when you encounter this statistic: white men make up 36% of the population but cause 75% of mass shootings. I may be out of the woods, as I am pushing sixty, living in Massachusetts and my testosterone levels are now officially low. If you are looking out for dangerous men though you’d be smart to profile us white guys. I can see it now: police cruisers driving around bowling alleys and American Legion halls and pushing around white guys in undershirts with rolled up shirtsleeves. Particularly when we are in our early manhood years, we can be teakettles on high boil without a ventilation hole. But it’s also possible we’ll go postal if we feel we are victimized, unloved or suffered one too many misfortunes. We are white men, after all. If there is supposed to be one privileged class in the United States, we’re it. After all, all but one of our presidents was a white guy.

It seems though that surging with testosterone and a sense of entitlement, psychologically we white men are more often on a hair trigger. I base this in part on my own personal experience. Ages eighteen to 22 were particularly challenging for me. My testosterone levels could not have been higher. There were times when walking down a hallway I would literally shake from another testosterone surge. I’d ache for the intimate touch of a woman (never forthcoming) the way an alcoholic craves that next spot of gin. I was reading arguably crazy and wacky books like this one and that one and kind of accepting them. Eventually my hormone levels receded to the point I realized I felt embarrassed that I even took those books seriously. (I’m wondering if Rand Paul’s hormones are still surging. I mean, Atlas Shrugged? Grow up!) To quote the musician Meat Loaf, I was “all revved up with no place to go”, just like Dylann Roof. I obviously did not go psycho but it’s not like the occasional psycho thought did not pass my mind. Sometimes they frequently passed through my mind. Lots of days I battled an inner rage masked by weak smiles and hiding behind books.

So if you want to talk about who’s likely to be a deadly and homicidal wacko, it’s hard not to single out us white guys. I think Americans tend to deny the obvious because there are so many of us. It also helps to be the sex and gender that basically runs most of the United States. I might add that as a class we aren’t doing a great job of it. It’s hard to imagine that any other class of people couldn’t do a better job of running the country.

And then there’s the stuff we do just to get attention. Of course there are the stupid jock tricks, puking our guts out, harassing women, drag racing on public streets, knocking over mailboxes and plastering graffiti, which is actually the more benign stuff. When it comes to the really wacko stuff though, white males are Number One. Take a look at this Wikipedia page of rampages in the Americas and sift through those that occurred in the United States. With a few exceptions, it’s us white guys going postal. Here are a few in the top dozen:

  • James Eagan Holmes, white male, age 24, killed 12 and injured 62 in Aurora, Colorado in 2012. He is just now coming to trial. (I blogged about this one.)
  • George Pierre Hennard killed 23 people and wounded 12 in Killeen, Texas in 1993. He was 35 and white.
  • Michael McLendon, white male, age 28, killed 10 and injured 6 in 2009 in incidents in three cities in Alabama
  • Charles Raymond Starkweather, a white male, age 19, killed 10 people at various places across the United States 1958
  • Michael Allen Silka, age 25, killed 9 and injured 1 in two incidents, one in Alaska and one in Alabama in 1984

I did find a few exceptions. James Edward Pough was black and he killed 11 and injured 6 in Jacksonville, Florida in 1990. Caril Ann Fugate was an accomplice of Charles Starkweather and was only 14 at the time. She holds a dubious record of sorts: the youngest woman to ever be tried and convicted for murder as an adult. Jiverly Wong is sort of white (Vietnamese) and a naturalized American citizen. At age 41, he killed 13 and wounded 4 in Binghamton, New York in 2009.

Anyhow, check out that Wikipedia page. It’s not hard to document that white men, most of them age 30 and younger, were responsible for most of these rampages. Dylann Roof’s recent racist rampage killed nine worshippers in a Charleston, South Carolina black church. Guess what? He is a white male, age 21, and a social loaner that is convinced that whites are superior. He says black men are disproportionately raping white women, although there is no evidence to back up this preposterous claim. He also conveniently forgets to mention the raping that often was instigated by white slave holders on their black female “property.” This likely included our third president, Thomas Jefferson.

It’s likely that all men suffer disproportionately from the same tendency, so the roots of these rampages are more likely environmental than genetic. You rarely hear about a woman going postal, even though women tend to suffer more from mental illnesses. I have a number of logical guesses for why white men are usually to blame for these mass murders here in the United States. These include:

  • Expectations for white men are unrealistically high. They are expected to clear more hurdles more regularly than other men and women.
  • White men compete with other white men for social status. Most of us won’t be in the top 10%. It’s hard not to feel inferior or worthless if you are on the left side of the bell curve.
  • The male self-reliance myth that is mostly handed down from father to son, but is also part of the white male culture. When real life shows that we white men are as human, vulnerable and need help and meaningful connections from others like everyone else, it sets up a bad case of cognitive dissonance.

It all amounts to feeling disproportionately inferior and put upon, which can feed introversion and social disconnection. Eventually it leads to hurt feelings, and sometimes the anger we saw on Dylann Roof’s web site. In extraordinary cases it results in a rage so extreme it generates mass homicides of strangers.

It’s these myths imposed as things that white men must live up to that I believe are often triggering these men. Until more white men give up these stereotypes and these myths, more events like the one in Charleston are sadly predictable. Also predictable will be the sex, race and age bracket of the perpetrators.

 
The Thinker

Second viewing: M*A*S*H (the TV show)

When you are retired you often find you have time on your hands. Netflix streaming provides lots of content, but much of it is comfort content, i.e. stuff you have seen before. So I’ve slogged my way through all eleven seasons of M*A*S*H, mostly in microbursts, over the last few months.

For a show that began in 1972, it is still surprisingly good. “Good” is relative, however. In a time when most markets had four or 5 TV stations, you took what you could get. For its time, M*A*S*H was excellent TV. Today, it just rates as very good. Why is this? It’s because forty years later TV has gotten much better. This is due to the proliferation of cable and pay TV. While lots of dreck can still be found on TV, there is now so much excellent content on TV that it is excruciatingly hard to decide which ones merit your time. I’ve finished three seasons of House of Cards. While waiting for new episodes I have been watching Mad Men. Each episode of Mad Men sends jolts of adrenaline to my enjoyment system: it’s just so well done!

So M*A*S*H is comfort TV, although the harshness of that war would not normally make it something you would want to watch. There had never been a TV show that showed the reality of war before M*A*S*H. It showed life at a mobile Army hospital during the Korean War, and the crazy antics and horrifying things that happened there. Going through it again, I realize that I have seen every episode, not just once, but several times at least. I’m not sure when I found the time to see them so many times. I’m guessing it was when they were endlessly repeated on late night TV. Thirty plus years of distance has at least made me a more critical viewer. Some modern day reflections and observations:

  • The show is actually a reflection of the emerging values of its time (the late 60s and early 70s) than the time of the Korean War. Hawkeye (Alan Alda) and Trapper John (Wayne Rodgers) might as well be flower children with shorter hair. Their liberal and antiwar positions would have put them in the extreme minority in the early 1950s, and dangerously so. Both would have been children of the Great Depression but they are all flower power. The 1969 movie by Robert Altman provided the template for the show, and in 1969 the Hippie movement was everywhere, the Vietnam War was obviously a disaster and cynicism was rampant. It’s entertaining as hell, but it’s simply not an accurate reflection of the years it purports to represent.
  • You can sort of break down the show into three rather distinct segments: the slapstick/buffoon comedy years (Seasons 1-3), the serious comedy-light years (Seasons 4-7) and the extended mediocre denouement years (Seasons 8-11).
  • The first year is particularly hard to watch today. Its blatant sexism and the casual way women are treated as objects rather than people is actually hard to endure today, and this is good. We have evolved.
  • The second segment is actually the best part of the show. The horrors of war and the imperfect way its characters react to it is the heart of the show.
  • There are some good episodes in the third segment, but it’s perfectly okay to stop at the end of Season 7. Those last seasons will disappoint if you’ve seen the other seasons. The show feels played out, particularly since the show lasted eleven seasons and the Korean War lasted less than four years.
  • Alan Alda won a number of Emmys for his performance as the surgeon Capt. Hawkeye Pierce. I found myself having a love/hate relationship with both the actor and the character. I don’t think there was that much difference between the actor and his character, aside from the fact Alda is not a doctor. Alda must have been insufferably difficult to work with on the set. He dominates the show in frequently unhealthy ways, making it hard for other characters to shine. On the other hand, he’s really good, very intense and totally convincing. It’s not too surprising that Wayne Rodgers left after three seasons, sick of playing Harpo to Alda’s Groucho (in some episode literally). McLean Stephenson must have felt the same way portraying Lt. Col. Henry Blake.
  • In spite of Alda’s overwhelming presence, most of the other characters do make their marks. Most notably is the maturation of Major Margaret Houlihan (Loretta Swit), the head nurse. For three seasons she played comic relief but in the second segment she becomes human, matures and deepens as a character. It’s lovely to watch and an excellent reason to stick around.
  • Who’s the better sidekick: Trapper John or B.J. Hunnicut? Seeing it again, I found Trapper more real and interesting. M*A*S*H would have been a much better show if directors had restrained Alda a bit more so Trapper’s character could shine. Mike Farrell is not really funny, but Wayne Rodgers certainly is. Rodgers was intense where Farrell was understated. It was a real loss when Rodgers left the show.
  • Who’s the more entertaining commander: Henry Blake (McLean Stevenson) or Sherman Potter (Harry Morgan)? Henry Blake for sure, even though he was there for only its first three years. Stevenson was consistently hilarious but somehow grounded in the insanity going on around him. Harry Morgan is not a comedian at heart, and it showed. The show lost a lot of its luster when Stevenson exited stage right.
  • The series most memorable and adorable character is unquestionably Radar O’Reilly (Gary Burghoff), who was the only character that also appeared in the movie. He is an innocent thrown into a complex adult game that remains a good person with childlike tendencies. He’s cuddlier than his frequently present teddy bear.
  • Corporal Clinger (Jamie Farr) makes good comic relief but simply does not convince in any other role other than a Section 8 seeking transvestite. He should have been kept in a dress and probably let go after a couple of seasons.
  • Larry Linville as the one-dimensional Major Frank Burns was actually an excellent comedian. His character is so insufferable that it is hard to see this. I don’t think he ever won an award for portraying Major Burns, but he should have.
  • David Ogden Stiers as Major Charles Emerson Winchester did much to make the second half of the series worth watching. It declined steadily anyhow, but Winchester was certainly an interesting and quirky character.
  • Some of the sporadic characters are delicious, particularly Sidney Freedman (Allan Arbus) and Colonel Flagg (Edward Winter). Any episodes with either of them in it are worth watching, and in one episode they both appear together. Flagg is actually the funniest character in the whole show; he just appears so irregularly.

You have to be a die-hard fan to watch all eleven seasons, particularly the last few years of the show. If you are tempted to watch the show, cringe your way through very funny but hard to endure first season and stick with it through seven seasons if you can. By the end of the first season all the characters are well established. Certain shows are gems and worth watching if you don’t have the time or patience for the many episodes that endlessly repeat the same theme (war really stinks). These include:

  • Yankee Doodle Doctor (Season 1, Episode 6)
  • Tuttle (Season 1, Episode 15)
  • A Smattering of Intelligence (Season 2, Episode 24)
  • O.R. (Season 3, Episode 5)
  • Abyssinia, Henry (Season 3, Episode 24)
  • Welcome to Korea (Season 4, Episodes 1 and 2)
  • Change of Command (Season 4, Episode 3)
  • Quo Vadis, Captain Chandler? (Season 4, Episode 10)
  • Dear Sigmund (Season 5, Episode 8)
  • Fade Out/Fade In (Season 6, Episodes 1 and 2)
  • Major Topper (Season 6, Episode 25)
  • Point of View (Season 7, Episode 11)
  • The Party (Season 7, Episode 26)
  • Good-bye Radar (Season 8, Episodes 4 and 5)
  • Mr. and Mrs. Who? (Season 8, Episode 9)
  • The Life You Save (Season 9, Episode 20)
  • Goodbye, Farewell and Amen (Season 11, Episode 16 – the extended end to the series)
 
The Thinker

Letting freedom (and common sense) reign

It was just a year ago that I blogged about the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius decision. While not entirely unexpected due to its earlier disastrous Citizens United decision, this decision, which let a “closely held corporation” opt out of the birth control provisions of the Affordable Care Act, still felt like a kick in the groin to us progressives. June can be a very frightening month in the United States since it’s when the court’s most controversial opinions get released.

For 2015 though progressives have much to cheer about, and it’s the conservatives that are furious. This is principally because of two cases decided in the last two days that had seismic impact.

In case you just climbed out of a cave, these were King v. Burwell and Obergefell v. Hobson. In the former, a majority of the court said the Affordable Care Act could not be gutted because of the ambiguity of one section of the law that talked about state health care exchanges. In the latter, a closely divided court decided that no state could prohibit two people of any sex or gender from marrying, and that every state had to recognize same sex marriages issued in other states. In short, gay marriage was instantly legal everywhere in the United States.

If you are a progressive, this makes for a very good week indeed, but it gets even better. Almost ignored was Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. The ruling said that even if a housing developer did not knowingly engage in housing bias, it could still be subject to a civil suit for such bias. Apparently, ignorance of the law by housing developers is no get out of a civil suit free card, even though the plaintiffs were hoping it was.

So while the court’s decisions last June were mostly a fright show for us progressives, this year it is mostly a fright show for conservatives. It caps an excellent week for President Obama, who also resurrected his Trans-Pacific Partnership proposal by getting Congress to agree to special rules to enact it with an up or down vote with no amendments by either chamber. For progressives though this was the sour political note of the week. The TPP, or actually the TPA, sort of rose from the dead after we thought we had put a stake through its heart two weeks ago in the House.

Include into the melee the nine people brutally murdered by Dylann Roof last Wednesday at Charleston, South Carolina’s historically black Emanuel AME church in what only a few of the craziest conservatives agree was a racist act of domestic terrorism. The tragic and horrifying event though had a special power in a way that its perpetrator did not intend. Just a few months after the 150th anniversary of the end of the Civil War, the South seems to suddenly want to actually end it, just in spirit this time. The Confederate flag, even in the South, is no longer cool. Once South Carolina governor Nikki Haley spoke in favor of the removal of the Confederate flag from its special flag post at the state’s capitol, Republican politicians were practically jumping on top of each other trying to agree that Confederate flags everywhere needed to go to museums and stay there. States across the South are anxiously revisiting their previous pride about the Confederate States of America.

Despite Republicans controlling a majority of the state houses and governorships and the U.S. congress, their agenda is being beaten back. It’s not supposed to be this way and in fact in many ways it’s not happening. It’s largely not happening with their increasingly onerous restrictions on abortion rights, or voting rights, or on many other issues. But on some of the issues that animate them the most, like gay marriage and Obamacare, they got bitch-slapped something bad this week. They are furious but largely impotent. If you see someone foaming at the mouth these last few days, it’s probably a Republican.

Whereas progressives like me are kind of stunned by it all, but particularly on the court’s ruling on gay marriage. It’s not its decision that surprised me, but I am stunned by how quickly the nation and the courts evolved on the issue. I wrote in this post back in 2008 that I expected it would take a few more decades for gay marriage to be legal in all fifty states. In the court’s 5-4 decision today, it’s now legal in every state, just seven years later! To put this in perspective, it was just 11 years ago that Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage. This is a stunningly fast change. Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority in Obergefell v. Hobson, was almost poetic in his writing:

No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.

The 14th amendment to the U.S. constitution was the legal rationalization for the decision. It is also known as the “equal protection” amendment. Its citing was not a surprise, but using it as a justification was poetic as well. Here’s why: the 14th amendment was passed after the Civil War to protect the rights of blacks who were no longer slaves. The amendment can be thought of as the “equal means equal” amendment. The Supreme Court simply stated that its ruling was constitutional because otherwise gay, lesbian and transgendered individuals would be denied privileges available to others, which is both the intent and spirit of the 14th amendment. Progressives can feel giddy because had there been no Civil War it’s unlikely that this amendment would have been introduced at all, so it’s quite possible this ruling would never have been enacted. There probably would have been no constitutional rationalization for this decision otherwise, and conservatives would have won the day. In short, you can tie the court’s ruling on gay marriage as a very belated response to the insurrection of the southern states and the apartheid principles that Dylann Roof perpetrated last week.

In the case of King v. Burwell, the Supremes essentially undercut the premise of the self-proclaimed constitutional conservatives on the court. Constitutional conservatives believe that every law must be judged against the original intent of the constitution and it means exactly what it says and nothing more. No less that Chief Justice Roberts, who wrote the majority opinion, explicitly undercut that rationalization. He wrote:

The combination of no tax credits and an ineffective coverage requirement could well push a State’s individual insurance market into a death spiral. It is implausible that Congress meant the Act to operate in this manner. Congress made the guaranteed issue and community rating requirements applicable in every State in the Nation, but those requirements only work when combined with the coverage requirement and tax credits. It thus stands to reason that Congress meant for those provisions to apply in every State as well.

Roberts and a majority of the court affirmed, as it has hundreds of times throughout its history, that when a portion of a law erroneously works against its clear intent, then the intent of law is what prevails. It was a ruling that faithfully reflected the will of Congress when the ACA was written, and a majority of the court thus held to the fidelity of the law.

For us progressives, this has been a week of largely good news. It is good news that gays, lesbians and the transgendered have the same marriage rights as heterosexuals. Equal now really means equal. We see it as an expansion of freedom. Strangely, conservatives only want to expand freedoms for those who look and act a lot like they do. Anything else is the overreaching hand of big government at work. Similarly, in the case of the interpretation of the Affordable Care Act, conservatives think that every law should be interpreted literally, whereas the Supreme Court reaffirmed that its rulings should be faithful to the law’s clear intent. These rulings were victories for common sense and for the spirit of the law and constitution.

What goes around though will come around. These court decisions seem to ping between favoring liberal and conservative wings, usually based on Justice Kennedy’s interpretations of the law and the constitution. So it wouldn’t surprise me if in a year from now I will be railing against the court again for their ill-informed judgments. For now though it’s pop the champagne time. Obergefell v. Hobson in particular is a landmark opinion of a scope and breadth rarely seen these days, and whose impact will be strongly felt for decades to come.

 
The Thinker

Searching for the exit

Dad is lying on his bed, half human and half ghost. He is not as pale as he was during his last bout with pneumonia, but he certainly looks ghost-like. His companion machine with its steady pulse is squirting oxygen into his nostrils with each breath. Dad is wearing pants in bed, a linen shirt and a felt shirt on top of that, despite the open door to the balcony letting in the warm moist Mid-Atlantic summer air outside. It doesn’t take much to make you cold when your body fat is gone. My father, who once towered six feet tall, was now diminished, and now weighs about 140 pounds.

He is lying flat because it is hurts less to lie, but also because standing takes work, which means using oxygen. Standing also requires muscles to move and right now it hurts to move his muscles. It probably hurts because he is not eating much, so to stay alive his body is looking for energy elsewhere and is busy converting the protein in his muscles into energy. All his muscles hurt, he tells me. Dad has the appetite of a bird, except that I suspect a bird eats more. A spoon or two of food makes him feel full, and then he wants to lie down. NPR news fills his bedroom while he lies, but mostly he is not listening. He sleeps a lot: all night and most of the day.

Frankly, there is little incentive for him to get out of bed. When he does he hurts and even with oxygen going into his nose it’s easy to feel winded. His left lung is still there but essentially it is non-functional as it is full of fibrous tissue. His stomach hurts a lot, particularly when standing. The good news is he can still stand. Dad can sort of take care of himself. In reality though he has lost a lot of his agility, so he needs someone to help him into clothes and out of clothes. He gets through the night by keeping a urinal next to his bed. Dad is not so much living as he is existing. His wife (my stepmother) provides companionship and helps in the nursing duties, that is until I arrived.

My father is scared but cannot seem to admit it, and depressed, which is something he will grudgingly admit. The Lexapro may help with the depression, but he just started taking it and it takes a few weeks to have an effect. The psychiatrist cannot see him until mid July. Dad needs lots of things, but mostly he needs to eat a whole lot more. It’s not clear if his stomach can process it.

What Dad needs even more is family and that’s why I made the four hundred mile journey to see him and spend four nights with him. I was there out of love and concern, but also because I am retired, so I can spare the time. He needs someone to listen with compassion. He needs someone who understands his whole person. I can do that, as he did the same with me many times growing up. I can hold his hand. I can make gentle suggestions. But mostly I listen. It’s pretty clear that Dad wants to leave his mortal coil. His way of doing so strikes me as passive aggressive: eat very little and spend much of his time in bed.

While he can walk, he walks haltingly. And he cannot walk too far and he walks somewhat unsteadily. When he gets out of his apartment he needs to be in a wheelchair, and generally that means Marie is pushing him. But at least for four nights it can be me. His oxygen bottle is slung from the back of the wheelchair. There is not much to look forward to in his condition, but there is at least dinner in the dining room of his retirement community, where almost everyone knows him by name. He looks diminished but when asked how he is doing he says “okay”.

It’s in the evening when something resembling life reemerges. He is energized around people and can maintain a conversation and at least for a while forget his pain. He eats little of what is on his plate, but takes sustenance from participating in the conversation around him. Returning home, with me there he will sit on the living room sofa and engage in conversation, but most of the time he hurts too much and wants to return to bed.

Getting him ready for bed is a time consuming and tedious process, which involves disrobing him, re-robing him, and cleaning him in between these states. It means assisting him with flossing and brushing and when not his shower day washing his chest, back and face. It means laying out clothes on chairs, shuffling shoes around and getting his urinal ready for night, all while tethered to a fifty-foot oxygen line. For me it means seeing his 88-year-old body so gaunt, with bones practically protruding from his skin and waiting to assist when he stands and sits. It means buttoning and unbuttoning shirts, helping him on with boxer shorts and pajamas. It means getting him a glass of water to use when brushing his teeth. It’s a ritual that varies little every night.

My presence means a lot but it is hard to quantify. On Friday I noticed him eating a little more and felt a bit cheered. I tried to be nonjudgmental as he tells me how he feels. I encourage siblings via email to call him and cheer him up. On Friday after dinner he goes to his desk and sifts through papers for a little while. This small act is actually a hopeful sign.

Fathers Day means company and phone calls, dinner provided by my sister and cookies provided by my nephew. It means love and companionship and, being my family, a discussion of contemporary politics in the living room where my conservative stepmother offers me reasons why she hates President Obama. My father mostly listens passively until I critique Fox News when he offers me a handshake. My Dad makes a point of being apolitical in front of the children, but occasionally a liberal viewpoint will leak out.

By Monday when I leave he is eating more. I encourage him to keep doing so. To start he needs enough calories not to lose any more weight, but his traditional passion foods like chocolate do little to engage him. I leave him with my stepmother who won’t coddle him and wonder if he will improve or regress again after I am gone. I can’t stay with him forever. I have a wife back in Massachusetts with chronic issues that also needs support.

There is always hope for a recovery, but realistically the best we can hope for is that he does not slide further. His pulmonary fibrosis won’t go away. He will be tethered to an oxygen container for the rest of his life. If things get much worse it will be more than my stepmother can handle. Nursing assistance will be needed and perhaps a nursing home. It’s not hard to predict that if he gets into a nursing home that he won’t live too long. He needs a social life to survive and there is none of that there.

Meanwhile, I hope that he will retain enough muscle mass not to fall, and I hope that some infection does not quickly fell him. He is doing far better (at least so far) than my mother did in her decline. Dying however slowly and incrementally is still an ugly process. Love and companionship help, but it’s not quite enough. He slips a bit further away from me with every passing day. It leaves me sad and melancholy.

Dying is not fair, but it must happen. There seem infinite paths for dying and my Dad seems to be choosing his way through it somewhat. All I can do is try to make things better, which may be giving Dad a sponge bath, holding his hand when he is low and letting him know how much I love him.

 
The Thinker

Craigslist casual encounters weirdness: June 2015 edition

It’s that time of the month … for my review of the local Craigslist casual encounters section. When I say “local”, in this case “local” is Hartford, Connecticut, about an hour’s drive south from where I am living now. It’s the first sizeable metropolitan area near me now. If it’s not sizeable, the postings tend to be lame. I tried reviewing Hartford last month and found it quite promising.

I can count at least 194 web page views for this stuff in May, or about 11% of my total web traffic. Today at midweek looking at the first page of ads I find that as usual horny men are taking over the place:

  • 41 men are looking for a man
  • 42 men are looking for a woman
  • 1 man is looking for multiple men
  • 4 men are looking for a couple
  • 2 guys are teaming up and are looking for one woman
  • 2 transgender women are looking for a man
  • 2 couples are looking for a couple
  • 3 women looking for a man

Hopefully, Hartford won’t disappoint me in June. Let’s dig in:

  • Legitimate postings from women in this part of Craigslist are pretty rare. Here’s a 63-year-old woman looking for an endowed man to give him a blowjob. The only thing that piques my curiosity is how many men (probably much younger) are so horny they don’t care about her age. I’m betting it’s a lot but I’m not convinced the ad is legitimate.
  • Can a FWB (friend with benefits) also be a freak? That’s what this self-proclaimed big beautiful woman wants from her FWB. She doesn’t want just any freak, but a very well endowed black man who is freaky. She’s 44 but doesn’t want you if you are attached. Speaking for myself, the last thing I want in a friend is someone freaky.
  • Two female roommates are looking to “share” a well-endowed man, presumably at the same time. Curiously though they won’t host. What’s up with that?
  • She offers “sweet relief” but it sounds like she really offers especially intimate massages, all completely safe, so don’t expect kissing or penetration. I’d bring a lot of cash.
  • She offers even safer sex: naughty pictures by email of her 19-year-old coed body, but only for a fee, of course. She’s posted at least twice: here and here.
  • She is looking for officer material … literally. If you aren’t a police officer, don’t bother responding.
  • How respectful is a 59-year-old man posting as a woman so he can get you to read an ad where he says he wants to watch you masturbate to orgasm? Not very. Respect starts with being truthful, dude. Post this crap under m4w.
  • Are you a submissive lesbian woman hoping for a dominant 28-year-old woman? This lady from Glastonbury looks great in her red dress, so even if you are not submissive you might want to fake it for the chance to play with her.
  • Ladies, here’s your opportunity to try out a woman from Vernon who has never had a woman, but only if her 21-year-old boyfriend can watch. Pass.
  • In a similar vein, here’s a submissive lady looking for a “sister slave”. Pass on this one as well.
  • This is odd: a couple is looking for a well-endowed black man to see intimate pictures of his 45-year-old wife, but you will never meet. It all has to be done virtually. Why do their requirements matter? And why bother if this is your thing? You can see five intimate pictures of her posted in the ad and save yourself the hassle of contacting them.
  • This is odder: a couple is looking to get spanked by a man age 60 or older, but they are not looking for sex or inappropriate touching. A dirty old man can’t catch a break on Craigslist!
  • It’s not often that you can see what you will get in advance. Hartford has an art cinema and this couple is coming there to play on Saturday, and the wife will be very accommodating to all men that meet her criteria. Freshly showered and well-endowed guys should plan to be inside the Hartford Art cinema starting in the afternoon. They’ll be playing on both levels. She may be 51, but she can wash my car anytime. See photos.
  • This is a confusing ad: a man-woman couple is actually a dominant man and “she” is his slave boy, age 24. They are looking for you (a guy) to have “her” to degrade and do many other nasty things to “her”, but only safely.
  • He’s 55 and is looking for a man to “rim”. If you don’t know what that is, suffice to say you probably don’t want to know. He doesn’t want to reciprocate but you must be half his age or less. The main requirement is to have nice buns.
  • They are a couple. He wants her to squirt, but she doesn’t know how, so she needs a teacher. You (a woman) should come over and show her how it is done. My question: where do you get certified in this stuff?
  • Hair is good, the more the better according to this gay man who likes his men natural, including sporting an untrimmed beard.
  • Finally, an honest man: he’s simply looking for a “piece of meat”. I’d suggest a tube steak from the local Big Y.
  • Last but not least is this truly kinky ad from a woman looking for a man. Dildos and an open mouth are required. She’s in her late 30s.

More in July.

 
The Thinker

Two short movie reviews

Ex Machina

In January, we saw The Imitation Game: the story of Nazi code breakers. Its principle character, Alan Turing, introduced the idea of the Turing test: a machine so sophisticated that when you interact with it you can’t tell it from a real human being. A lot of very wise people are quietly freaking out that we may be close to an era where we will be controlled by the machine. In Ex Machina we get to see what a machine that might pass the Turing test would look like and what it might mean. “She” is Ava (Alicia Vikander), the creation of mega billionaire Oscar Isaac (Nathan Bateman). Isaac created the next Google search engine and became so rich that he created a house and laboratory for himself so remote that even Verizon can’t reach it. Its location is unclear, but it appears to be in Alaska. One of Oscar’s employees, Caleb Smith (Domhnall Gleeson) is invited to Oscar’s remote location to be the second person to meet Ava. At the end of the week he is supposed to make a judgment on whether Ava passes the Turing test.

Ava is pretty obviously a machine because much of her frame is transparent. The 26-year-old Caleb though quickly finds her mesmerizing, although they cannot touch each other. They interact through a glass partition. However, her programming is obviously top notch. Caleb has a hard time not thinking about her, although their daily sessions are relatively brief. While Ava seems real enough to him, there are some unexpected glitches in their laboratory. It suffers from occasional power outages. During this time Ava is unmonitored. Like Ava, Caleb is pretty much a prisoner in this weird estate. His keycard will get him into certain rooms and won’t allow him into other rooms. During power outages he is locked in his subterranean room. He talks daily with Oscar, who tries to be something of a distant buddy to him. Oscar may be a genius but he also has human frailties, including binge drinking.

This is a movie with hardly more than a handful of characters. It’s clear there is something else going on but it’s unclear what it is. Oscar is a bit of a control freak and Caleb is perhaps too intelligent for his own good. During power outages, Ava tells Caleb that she wants to escape from her room. Caleb eventually plots a way for them to escape together. I won’t spoil the ending but it does indicate if Ava passes the Turing test.

The movie is creepy without feeling like it is out of an Albert Hitchcock movie. Director Alex Garland’s greatest achievement might be the technical wizardry that shows that Ava is actually a machine. She is mesmerizing to watch with her blue tubes pulsating with artificial life. Yet she is not the only android on the premises. It’s unclear at first but Ava is but the latest version, and Kyoko (Sonoya Mizuno) who does the cooking is another one. In fact there are a whole lot of robot parts in the closet.

This is a tightly focused movie that should keep you engaged and curious. It’s not exactly Oscar material, but it is a good use of your time nonetheless. 3.2 out of four stars.

Rating: ★★★¼ 

Tomorrowland

I was expecting Tomorrowland to be a different movie than the one I watched. I was expecting this Disney movie to be saccharine, but it wasn’t. It starts out that way when twelve-year-old Frank Walker attends the 1964 World’s Fair in New York City. The fair is pretty much Tomorrowland from Disney World, but Frank is there to impress the judges with his version of a jet backpack. Unfortunately it has some technical flaws, but he at least catches the eye of Athena (Raffey Cassidy), a mesmerizing freckle-faced young girl who we will later learn is a robot.

Athena senses in Frank a wild-faced optimism, not atypical of its times. In the early 1960s our future looked a lot like The Jetsons, and it was mostly filled with well adjusted and happy white people. Tomorrowland is at least faithful to that naïve way of thinking. Following Athena while at the fair the young Frank stumbles briefly into a real Tomorrowland, or at least its slick representation.

Fast forward to the present. We are quickly introduced to Casey Newton (Britt Robertson), another incurable optimist in an age of climate change. She spends her evenings sneaking into the Kennedy Space Center to prevent a famous launch pad there from being disassembled. This helps keep her father (Tim McGraw) employed but everyone sees the writing on the wall for the pad and for the end of human spaceflight. Casey is like a somewhat older version of Athena: she is mesmerizing to look at and full of positive spirit. Being an optimist she believes that global climate change can be averted and that the future will look like something out of The Jetsons. This also makes her of interest to Athena, who surreptitiously provides her with a token from the 1964 World’s Fair that takes her to this future, at least while she is touching the coin. It works great when she isn’t running into walls or ending up in the muck. And apparently its battery is not an Eveready.

What Frank and Casey have in common is Athena. They are destined to intersect, but Frank has aged fifty years and now looks suspiciously like George Clooney. This Frank is a cynical one who understands the forces pitted against a happy future, and these include David Nix (Hugh Laurie), the leader of Tomorrowland. Nix’s Tomorrowland bears little resemblance to the slick advertising that a younger Frank and Casey encountered. In fact, human life is about to end very abruptly on the planet and its end is certain. Just watch the countdown clock.

With Casey’s arrival though, the probability of this happening mysteriously drops from 100 percent. Athena eventually connects Casey and Frank, and a series of improbable adventures starts that forms the heart of the movie. Can somehow at this late date the future be changed for the better? It will take a lot of optimists and the time is very late.

So Tomorrowland was a bit of a surprise, both for the quality of the acting and the slick way director Brad Bird puts it altogether. Somehow the lovely Disney optimism is woven around the truly depressing reality of what mankind is doing to its biosphere. It makes you want to click you heels three times and find yourself back in Kansas. The depressing reality is that we are already victims of climate change and it will only get worse. Still, while this movie entertains its real mission may be to introduce to mass audiences the very serious problem of climate change. And if it is to be fixed it will take the masses demanding action. Given our general inability as a species not to look much beyond tomorrow, I am not hopeful, but perhaps if we were filled with less adult cynicism it would be otherwise. At least Disney is doing its part in describing the magnitude of the problem, while likely reeling in profits for shareholders for doing so.

I think Uncle Walt would be proud of what his gang did some fifty years after his passing.

3.4 out of four-points.

Rating: ★★★½ 

 
The Thinker

Ghostwriter (or the art of tricking Google)

All my life I wanted to be a paid writer. Being a writer sounded quite glamorous. You are paid to create and if you were good enough or wrote for just the right mass audience you could be wealthy like Stephen King.

Life didn’t work out that way for me. It’s probably for the best because most writers are starving writers, which means they do it as a hobby and not for much real income. They have other jobs that pay the rent. Moreover most writing is not glamorous, even when it pays well. Most writers dream of writing popular fiction. What most writers actually do is write articles for magazines or trade journals, or the local newspaper. They adhere to editorial guidelines. Their writing is not very creative. It’s about putting a number of facts and quotations on paper or online in a way that may be interesting enough for the reader to make it to the end of the article. These days even publishers don’t care if readers read the entire article or not. They are looking to serve ads. They care about whether your article attracts a lot of ad views. Whether it gets read is not that important, unless they are going for some sort of award.

So if you can find a writing job it is likely to pay poorly and be demoralizing to you and your self-esteem. And if you do manage to get a book published, it’s likely to sell a hundred to a thousand copies, with extras ending up in a discount book bin or just shredded for pulp for the next book. For the vast majority of creative writers, writing does not provide close to a living wage. Most editors will refuse to acknowledge your brilliance.

Recently though I did get paid to write. I was paid to ghostwrite. So in a sense I have become a published writer, although I think the content is going strictly online. Essentially, I’m being paid to influence Google’s search engine. Yes, I am writing for a set of algorithms! I’ve become something of a slave to the computer!

Google of course is the king of search engines. Getting high or higher on its search index is important. For many businesses it’s the difference between life or death. The only question is: how to get ranked higher than your competitors? Google is not telling, although it does give some hints. Needless to say there are plenty of companies out there that claim they can get your company ranked higher.

Most of these outfits are selling snake oil. There are lots of obvious things that can be done which don’t hurt, such as having URLs with meaningful information about your article, providing a sitemap.xml file and removing bad links. In the trade this is called “search engine optimization” or SEO. Everyone with the means to do so is already doing SEO. What you really want is for your company to appear in the top page of Google’s listing, ideally at or near the top for a given search phrase. These are links that people will click on.

One of my clients has made a business of SEO. I’ll call him Dick (not his real name). He’s hired me for odd jobs maintaining his forum, generally because he’s too busy making real money to mess with it. Dick has a reputation in the SEO world of getting results. That’s why Dick sought me out to be a ghostwriter.

Dick’s success has come through building a company’s online reputation. He figured out that Google ranks higher those sites that publish honest articles. I have no idea how Google assigns an honesty rating to an article, but somehow it’s got a built in bullshit detector in its algorithms. If it doesn’t look like bullshit, it’s ranked higher. If it looks authoritative, it’s ranked even higher. If you publish lots of articles that look honest and impartial, over time it will raise the ranking of your company in Google’s search index. This is a long-term strategy and it’s a costly one as well.

So I was hired to write some technical articles in this client’s particular domain. It turns out I have pretty good credentials. First, I do information technology for a living, so I have practical and current experience along with a masters degree in software systems engineering. Second, I write fairly well. Third, I am mostly retired. And fourth, I can write an impartial article. My years in government have actually helped. Government employees develop finely honed bullshit detectors, because we are constantly dealing with vendors trying to get their products and services into our enterprise.

Dick is also kind enough to provide a few sample articles for my topic. I use these as well as my thirty years in the business to crank out these articles. Generally they are no more than 800 words and follow a format. I charge by the hour. Since most of these are survey articles, I don’t have to really do any research. I just start writing. It takes me about three hours to write an article. I bill at $30/hour (my retiree rate). So far I’ve done two articles and earned $180 ghostwriting. There will probably be more, as the client is satisfied with my work.

I have no idea where these articles will be placed, but Dick tries to get them in online publications of authoritative sites. I could probably find them online if I looked. Dick does edit what I send him, so it may appear somewhat altered. But at least I am a published writer. Some people may find my articles interesting, but the only “person” of real interest is Google’s search engine. We are basically trying to fake it out. Dick’s client is essentially renting my experience for potential future customers and an improved reputation.

I’ll probably never know how this will all pan out. Some part of me thinks I am being dishonest. I am writing honest articles, but I am doing it on behalf of a company that doesn’t have the in-house skills or the time to do it. They are essentially renting my reputation, such as it is, to add to their reputation.

But hey, at least I am a published writer now! My pseudonym? Call me Anonymous.

 
The Thinker

Election 2016 preview

You need quite a long scorecard to keep track of the people running for president these days. As in 2012, the number is disproportionately high on the Republican side. This time around the number of Republicans running is even higher. As of today there are eleven officially declared candidates: Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, George Pataki, Lindsey Graham, Rick Perry and Jeb Bush. Unannounced candidates will likely include Scott Walker, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal and John Kasich. Fox News and CNN get to figure out how to put them all on a debate stage. As a practical matter they should have two or three debates with subsets of the candidates at each. That way at least there is some chance of a debate.

But will any of them say anything that truly distinguished them from the other candidates? With the exceptions of Rand Paul (who recently tried to kill the Patriot Act) and George Pataki (a suspiciously moderate former governor of New York state) the answer is pretty much “no”. The rest are all cut from the same cloth; they accept the same orthodoxy and thus all kind of blend into the debate stage together. Some are slightly more socially conservative than others, but even Republicans will have a hard time finding any meaningful differences between them.

Some of these candidates could at least be laughed off the stage as simply not credible or for suffering from terminal foot in mouth disease. It appears that shame is no barrier to running for president:

  • Carly Fiorina made a mess during her tenure as Hewlett Packard’s CEO. Despite this and never having held a political office, but she thinks she can lead the country.
  • Shortly after the death of his son Beau to brain cancer recently, Ted Cruz joked about the Vice President.
  • Ben Carson opined that prison makes men gay, as if being a victim of rape in prison makes someone gay. He also said that Obamacare is the worst thing to happen since slavery. Presumably it is worse than two world wars and the Holocaust.
  • Mike Huckabee, referencing Caitlyn (formerly Bruce) Jenner, says it would have been convenient to pretend to be a woman when he was growing up so he could have gone into the women’s showers.
  • Rick Santorum, supposedly a devout Catholic, said the pope should shut up about climate change because he’s not a scientist, presumably ignorant that the pope worked as a chemist before joining the priesthood.

So far at least Democratic candidates haven’t suffered much from this problem. Hillary Clinton has learned the hazards of opening her mouth to the press from past campaigns and largely ignores them with listening tours. The closest crazy candidate is not the “Democratic socialist” Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, whose opinions are actually mainstream. No, it’s Lincoln Chafee, former Rhode Island senator, governor and Republican whose announcement the other day at least managed to draw some attention for some controversial opinions. These included proposals that we should negotiate with the Islamic State and that we should embrace the metric system. (Those of us who remember the 1970s remember how popular moving to the metric system made politicians.) Martin O’Malley is running to Hillary’s left. The exception, if he decides to run, is Jim Webb, the only candidate in either party that could be considered a genuine moderate.

How all this will play out at this time is anyone’s guess. Republican candidates figure they can increase their odds of success with affiliated PACs stuffed full of cash, or by quietly getting the endorsement of well funded billionaires like the Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson. At the other end is Bernie Sanders, whose campaign is funded through lots of small donations, principally from committed liberal activists. While the effect of money on campaigns will doubtless be an issue in the campaign, every candidate will be doing their best to rake in obscenely large campaign contributions, if they can get them.

Eventually though one or more candidates has to break through somehow. Hillary Clinton arguably has already broken through with her wide name recognition and her wide approval among women of all parties. On the Republican side it’s much less clear who will break through. One strategy is to see who can hold on the longest and generally that means the candidate with the most money, i.e. the Jeb Bush strategy. Occasionally a distinct personality will emerge that tickles Republicans. All bets though are off on who this will be. Already sure things (Chris Christie and Jeb Bush) look like has beens. Last time Mitt Romney won in part because he looked like he could bring in non-Republicans. Fewer Republicans are willing to try what they see as a failed strategy. If I had to place my money on a Republican candidate right now, I’d probably go with Scott Walker, who’s not even announced yet.

The general election dynamics are in great flush as well, with much riding on who wins the nomination and the extent to which they excite both their base and moderates. Obama won in 2008 because he was seen as very different and thus exciting. Hillary won’t seem at all fresh but she can draw excitement from women, who comprise a majority of voters anyhow. If so 2016 could be a wave election favoring Democrats. Lacking a wave election much will depend on how enthusiastic voters are in general. Also voter disenfranchisement is a considerable factor and will tend to tilt things toward Republican states where it exists.

What’s unknown is what the sleeper issues, if any, will be. Bernie Sanders seems to speak for a lot of people. He is dragging the Democratic Party in general to the left, which could be dangerous in a general election. But many of his issues are issues most Americans feel strongly about but candidates aren’t seriously addressing, such as a living wage. If voter apathy can be harvested, the political dynamics might move sharply toward the left, at least in the Senate and in presidential races. Gerrymandering has made it unlikely that Democrats can regain the house before 2022.

So who eventually wins really depends on whom we choose to focus on and why. Will we choose to be dazzled by showmanship and money, or will we vote based on common values? Few candidates are speaking to the political moderates. The candidate that can do this and win their party’s nomination is the one likeliest to be our next president.

 
The Thinker

Dying well

Dear old Dad is dying. It’s been an inference most of us have made based on his condition, which has been slowly but steadily worsening. Yesterday it became more explicit in his email to us. Dad’s left lung basically doesn’t work anymore. In his case it is due to a condition called pulmonary fibrosis. With just the right one working, he doesn’t get as much oxygen as he used to. Consequently he is frequently tired. He now joins a dubious but rather large club at his retirement community of men getting supplemental oxygen. His wife (my stepmother) now gets to wheel him to and from the dining rooms for his evening meals.

That’s not the half of it. He’s lost weight and is continuing to lose weight. For a man that was once six feet tall, he is down to 146 pounds. He looks gaunt. He has little appetite. In fact, his stomach hurts most of the time. It hurts more when standing and less when lying down.

When we saw him last toward the end of April he could walk unassisted. He can still walk but of course it will tire him so it’s not a great idea for him to do too much of it. He could also engage in conversation, although my stepmother was the more articulate of the pair. That he can still type an email means he retains motor skills.

If you have to die he is doing it pretty well. He is still at home, which is his apartment in his retirement community. He may be able to avoid assisted living altogether before he goes. How much longer he has is a mystery, but his time is likely in months, if not weeks. He has clearly given up trying to prolong his life. At 88, his body is simply wearing out. Even if he had extraordinary surgery like a lung transplant, he is very susceptible to infection. Visiting his dying sister last year involved flying cross country, which meant he caught pneumonia somewhere across the country at 35,000 feet. He informed us last month that he won’t be coming to a planned family vacation in July. His driving days are likely over. Unless he needs to see a specialist or go to the hospital, he’ll probably remain inside his retirement community until he dies.

Dad is pragmatic about death. In a retirement community, death is hardly a stranger. It is all around you. It is simply a matter of wondering when your number will be called. The community mailboxes have new death notices posted nearby pretty much every day. People drop out of your life rather mysteriously. It usually means they have passed on but didn’t want to make a fuss over it. You either accept death pragmatically or you let it rule you. My Dad has opted for the former.

His will has long been in order, along with end of life directives. He tries not to look too far ahead and take each day as it comes. He is gracious in his decline and grateful for his life. He realizes his dying could be much worse. He probably won’t lose his motor skills, like my mother did. He probably won’t end up in a nursing home, except possibly at the very end. If he needs hospice there is a good chance it could be done in their apartment. He could die in his bed, which is probably how he would prefer to go, the same bed (moved many times) that he and my mother inhabited over their fifty plus year marriage.

It probably won’t be the pulmonary fibrosis that kills him. Most likely he will succumb to some sort of virus or infection. In the end it was not the Progressive Supranuclear Palsy that killed my mother ten years ago, but a common bladder infection that she could not fight off. At this stage of life, what once you could fight off now is more likely to kill your overwhelmed body. His last bout with pneumonia required a hospitalization, but he survived it. Another one would likely kill him.

Still, he is grateful. He is grateful for his long and mostly healthy life. He is grateful for all of his eight children who turned out to be all good eggs. He is grateful for my mother and grateful to find a new partner in marriage late in life. He is grateful for having his wits together, being able to speak, being able to think clearly and being able to participate in much of what makes life enjoyable. He has lived a long life but he senses his end is not too far away. He neither wants to postpone it nor accelerate its end. He is tired of fighting what he cannot change. He is dying and he is content to die when he is called.

I can’t speak for all of his children but in general we are content to let him go in his own way and his own time. Of course it saddens us that he is dying and of course we will grieve when he is gone, and probably a lot before then too. But he has lived a long and rich life. He has done all those things that good people are supposed to do and much more. While my mother was dying, when he wasn’t caring for her he was tutoring one of the staff in the nursing home in math. Until very recently he ushered at church. He gave generously of his limited treasure. He loves us all and treated us all with kindness and respect, which we returned. He retains a serene confidence in his Catholic faith and his belief that he will be in heaven soon. His issues are not so much dying, which is inevitable, but day to day issues. Like most aging men he has an enlarged prostate. He needs convenient and frequent access to a bathroom.

Still, it is hard not to feel some grief as he declines. Some parts of him simply are no longer there. He took enormous comfort in food. Chocolate cakes used to be his passion. Chocolate anything was largely unsafe in his house. With so little appetite, chocolate is no longer a passion. He most likely has eaten his last slice of chocolate cake. He hasn’t the interest or the appetite for it.

I’ve urged my siblings to go see him and tell him what he has meant in their lives, although I think he already knows. I need to see him again soon too. Now that I live in New England it is not as easy, but I can probably drive down monthly to spend time with him. It’s unclear to me how much handholding he needs. It may be that I simply need to hold his hand a few more times. He is serene in his decline and accepting of it, seemingly without apprehension, taking one day at a time and eking out whatever remaining joy it will offer him in the time he has left.

 
The Thinker

Craigslist casual encounters weirdness: May 2015 (Hartford CT) edition

Now that I’ve moved I’ve considered giving up monthly reviews of the local Craigslist Casual Encounters section. But my web statistics keep telling me to persevere. These posts remain popular for my small blog: 206 hits in the last 30 days, 218 hits for April, about 12% of my total hits. And that’s just the web traffic, and only the top ten pages with “Craigslist” in the title of the post. Add in syndicated traffic and my email subscribers and the number is doubtless higher.

Where I’m living now (Western Massachusetts) these postings are too lame to share. Springfield is fifteen miles away from me. It is Massachusetts’s third largest city with 700,000 people in the greater area. But it doesn’t warrant its own Craigslist section. So if I’m going to look for weird casual encounter postings, I either need to stop or broaden my range of “local”.

Aside from city of Springfield, the nearest largest cities are Hartford, Connecticut; Albany, New York; and Boston. Boston’s Craigslist includes most of the eastern part of Massachusetts including Worchester. Hartford is practically in spitting distance from Springfield. Its greater metropolitan area has about 1.2 million people, which makes it comparable to the Northern Virginia region that I used to scan. So it will do. But will it have the same bizarre flavor as Northern Virginia’s Craigslist section? Or are people less kinky in Greater Hartford? Let’s sample postings on this Wednesday night to find out.

  • This sexy black man with quite a bit to spare between the legs could have his choice of women into “larger” men, but for some reason is posting for a “tranny” instead. Whatever floats your boat, dude.
  • In Northern Virginia it wasn’t hard to find groups of heterosexual guys looking to gangbang one or more women. There is little evidence so far that there are groups of guys like this in Hartford, but there is at least this dynamic duo, age 30 from Newington.
  • Oh my goodness! There are scam artists on Craigslist! Who would have thought? Off Pascal Lane in Manchester is this “woman” (see her picture) who is actually a passable transvestite with a secret boyfriend in the back. Meet her and rather than get sex her boyfriend will rob you. At least this poster was kind enough to warn fellow casual encounters readers. Let’s hope this deters a few of these many highly hormone-infused men.
  • In fact there are plenty of women who are using Craigslist to pay a few bills, and then some. Yes, shockingly there are whores in this area of Craigslist. Of course, this is not news to regular readers of this area, and when looking at W4M posts they are easy to find. Some get missed but are easy to spot if you read between the lines:
    • She claims to be 25 and is looking for an older guy who “knows how to take care of a girl”
    • She’s 24, a BBW (big beautiful woman) and wants to spend quality time with you but only if you are not cheap
    • She’s not technically a whore as you won’t get any sex, but she is “trying to make ends meet” and will send you “private pictures” presumably only if you meet her ends, but not meet in her end
  • He’s stuck at an airport hotel. His idea of successfully getting unstuck is to stick something very personal of his into you (a woman). He wants to know if any women are intrigued enough to come to his hotel, but most likely a woman won’t even read his ad. I suggest the hotel’s bar, if it has one, for his cruising ground tonight. This guy from Enfield is also at a hotel and feeling frisky, so feel free to shop around ladies! Ask if there are free chocolate chip cookies at the hotel’s front desk.
  • Why are women having so much trouble finding age 60+ men for sex? My guess it is the generally high incidence of erectile dysfunction in this group caused by the lower testosterone levels of older men in general. Anyhow, this woman from Middlesex County is pissed about it and will give you a piece of her mind because she says she’s legit. She may actually be this poster too. She’s available near Dartmouth Crossing and is usually available between 9 AM and 1 PM. Perhaps the local Red Roof Inn has convenient hourly rates and a senior citizen discount.
  • Attention clueless Craigslist men: here are some signs that a posting from a woman might not be legit. She has the same URL plastered three times over her picture. Her ad title says she’s looking for “skaters” and “bbc” but her ad doesn’t mention either of these. Of course she looks very young and hot. How is this happening? Some scammers are picking erotic pictures off the Internet, embedding their adult site in the picture and wrapping them around a simple program that spits out lurid titles and one line “sentences” with no punctuation then posts them probably using an automated process. There are dozens of these a day that look similar, usually with no location attached because a spammer can’t be bothered to take time to find the names of cities near where they are targeting. Enlightened yet?
  • Women embed their phone numbers in these ads all the time. These women are hookers and their ads are quickly flagged. It is unusual to see a guy looking for a gal adapt the same strategy, but this 54-year-old dude seems to want mostly to cuddle and have conversation.
  • Another “dad” (49 from West Hartford) is looking for his “son”. Not to worry Dad, your 22-year-old son wants to hear from you too.
  • Apparently Hartford has an “art” cinema. You don’t find many of these anymore. They used to be called adult theaters, in those days before X rated videos became widely available. Now it’s all the porn you can want for free on the Internet. Anyhow apparently the Hartford Art Cinema is one of these theaters still catering to the raincoat crowd. Based on this review on Reddit, it sounds like a pretty disgusting theater, but apparently at least occasionally consenting adults do naughty things in semi-public there. It sounds like a place where dirty old men and dirty middle aged men can hang out. When not surreptitiously masturbating on a good day maybe a couple like this one will come in and provide a show, and maybe more.
  • Ladies: if you want to see a guy jerk off, this 50-year-old guy is happy to oblige. Here’s another guy with a simpler proposition: you want to get high? If you want to get high badly enough, you won’t care that he’s 39 and married.
  • If you are a gay man and want to use a man’s mouth for your urinal, this 27-year-old guy from Hartford with a suggestive picture taken in a men’s room is ready.
  • Most men looking for women in this section of Craigslist know it’s a waste of time. If you are going to post this type of ad anyhow, be specific. Ask for women with pigtails and sneakers, like this 36-year-old man from Hartford.

More next month, maybe. Hartford looks promising for this sort of entertainment.

 

Switch to our mobile site