Month: May 2015

Gender Equality: Taylor Swift and the Pussy-Cats


Yes, I watched the video and I laughed at the glorious Internet headlines.  Well, what can I say?

To me, the really sad thing about the delirious puppets featured in the Bad Blood video is their conviction that they are real.  Even sadder: because they generate 8-figure annual earnings, have some pull in their closed-off entertainment realms, and are constantly followed by TMZ – they think that they are badass, that they represent the ultimate “Girl Power.”  

Well, the truth is they represent nothing but silliness, artifice, and utter emptiness.  What are these little Girls are made of?  Digitally enhanced voices, and unmemorable music with the life expectancy of butterflies, and silly meaningless lyrics, and even sillier antics, and fake emotions, and amateur face-making, and PR-boosted media frenzy, and airbrushed images, and a whole bunch of CGI.  That what these little Girls are made of – not a single fresh thought, not a single lasting idea.  I mean, they hit such level of dilettante mediocrity in that video, it’s hard to soldier through it.

Even worse, they don’t realize that they are objects AND instruments of manipulations by the men with real power. 

You see, it serves the men’s ambitions quite well for this type of Girls to be celebrated.  The dominant gender wants their pedestrian, shallow, benign values to be imprinted onto general public.  These girlish marionettes are very important -their individual contributions into the dumbing of the masses is incredible!  But this video opus is something special!  It amplifies the Girls’ damaging effect: together they stay united – not as powerful human entities they think they are, but as a bunch of well-compensated Barbie Dolls on display.  Of course, all girls want to be just like them!  It’s the Toys”R”Us effect!    

And for the hetero-male audience?  It’s the same ages-old flesh peddling: hooker looks, non-existent clothing or skintight latex, seven-inch heels, and, as a bonus, the all-time favorite subject matter – the catfight.

The bitching kittens are not a threat to the gender disbalance at all.  On the contrary, with every step they make and every sound they utter, they throw away everything women were able to gain so far in the hard-fought struggle for equality, for the right to be treated like humans rather than members of a particular gender.

That’s why the male record executives and agents who HANDLE these Girls keep pushing their sissy, non-threatening projects so hard – the more of it is out there polluting every visible and audible media, the less there is room for something real and stirring!       

If these girly bitches really cared about Female Power, they would go and hide their painted faces under their huge pillows in their oversized doll houses.  Their withdrawal from the toolbox of mass manipulations would really benefit the women’s fight for equality. 

And you, Joseph Kahn, The Bride is coming for you.  Now, that she is done with Bill, she can find time to teach you a lesson or two.  Because, there is homage and there is cheap, uninspiring imitation.  And you wouldn’t know the difference even if it ruptured you with a katana.       

Anatomy of an Internet Argument


Judging by the number of memes related specifically to the subject of Internet arguments, the vast majority of people online, at one or another point, have gotten themselves involved into this futile and unpleasant exercise.  It’s understandable: Connectivity is the Internet’s primary purpose – people come together in the virtual space, communicate, discuss topics (frequently controversial)…  And, when was the last time you have witnessed a discussion of a controversial topic without emotions flaring up and things getting personal?  Humans are acting human – what else is new? 

Of course, the Internet makes fighting especially intense.  In absence of the face-to-face confrontation and a possibility of someone throwing a punch, people feel protected by the distance, their own walls, and virtual anonymity.  We used to say that paper can bear anything.  Well, data cables are even more tenacious.  Some opponents get really wild, frequently vicious, and the keyboard gets it.  It’s hard to make your adversary to absorb your words in person.  Online?  Fahgettaboudit!  Hence, the universal opinion that one cannot win an Internet argument.  By the same token, people don’t lose Internet arguments either – one of the sides just gives up or runs out of free time.    

I personally have enough controversy in my physical existence.  Plus, ever since the beginnings of the Internet, I have realized that it is not a democratic forum where everyone has the right to their own voice.  On the contrary, it is the most oppressive and hostile equalizer.  This is a “place” where someone with no ability to even comprehend your words and not a single shred of civility feels free to call you “a retard” regardless of who you are and of the level of your intellectual prowess.  So, acutely conscious of my own time (and sanity), I simply don’t engage.  I just don’t.  I don’t even reply to the comments on my own posts. 

Except… That Roger Waters’ open letter to Dionne Warwick…  God! It was so bluntly anti-Semitic!  It was fed to me by Pink Floyd’s page, which I follow and, I have to be honest, it got me upset.  I strongly oppose political correctness and prefer people express their animosities openly, but the fact that this stark example of hatred was masqueraded as a pro-Palestinian stance – that just stunk of hypocrisy.  

Also, in person or otherwise, I usually don’t get into the Middle-East arguments.  Not because I have nothing to say, but because my opinions are too unusual; unacceptable to the majority of the debaters on both sides.  I’m not taking any sides.  And I wasn’t planning on getting into it this time either.  But antisemitism is not a political opinion – it’s a manifestation of millennia-old bigotry.  And I have a right to judge it according to my personal moral code. 

Thus, for the sake of highlighting Roger Waters’ thinly veiled true nature, I ignored my self-imposed restrictions on Internet and Middle-East discussions and commented on the open letter.  What transpired was an incredibly typical example of an online “exchange of thoughts.”  It couldn’t possibly come out more standardized even if I deliberately scripted it.  It’s literally a classic case study.

My comment was:  

“Oh, a son of a British communist from Surrey is an anti-Semite?  Why are people surprised?  I expect nothing else.  In fact, the pro-Palestinian stand is a total sham: It’s all about hating the Jews.  Roger Waters doesn’t care about Palestinians.  Otherwise, he would try to convince them to raise their children in the comfortable houses the Israelis have built instead of burning them down.  But he wouldn’t, because he is blinded by hatred.  And how silly for him to call ANYONE ignorant!  This is not the first concept he has been confused about: Remember his total misinterpretation of George Orwell?  Then again, people should stop expecting enlightenment from celebrities.  As humans, most of them are nothing special – just your average schmucks touched by God’s gifts; the channeling instruments.  And I always said that one should separate an artist from the art.”

I didn’t criticize pro-Palestinians or pro-Israelis in general – just expressed my reaction specifically to Roger Waters’ letter.  Yet, of course, it didn’t matter what I actually wrote.  People don’t take time to comprehend the message- like bulls they only see the red flags, in this case “anti-Semite.”  I got almost an immediate reply from “Agus Alexander”, who, judging by his latest photo, is about 20 and appears to be a student.  He is originally from Ireland, spent some time in Argentina (probably as an exchange student), and now lives in Nova Scotia.  (This is actually very important, because that Canadian province is heavily populated by immigrants from Arabic countries.  Personal experience shows that Nova Scotian youth interacts far more frequently with Arabs than with Jews). 

He wrote:        

“So pro-Palestine is equal to anti-Semite …. Nice one I almost bought it but I’m not that dumb. You see what you are saying is either or you buy the whole pro Israel package or you are a fucking holocausting anti-Semite… Check how much deaths from each side have been through this years in this war and then refrain of your beliefs”

Note, that young Mr. Agus completely overlooked the fact that I explicitly expressed my doubts about Roger Waters’ pro-Palestinian position.  Moreover, nothing in my comment suggested that I consider everyone who is not pro-Israel an anti-Semite.  And while I was taken aback by the suggestion that a primitive death count would change any of my beliefs (none of which I expressed, by the way), I decided to underscore my focus one more time:    

“Pro-Palestinian who is not an anti-Semite (and I mean deep in the heart of hearts, not PC bullshit)?  I personally have not met one, but theoretically, sure, it’s possible.  However, if you actually read Mr. Waters’ open letter, you know that he doesn’t qualify as one.  And as I said, he doesn’t qualify as pro-Palestinian either – just an anti-Semite.”

It turns out that while I was writing those few lines, another reply to my original comment was posted.  This one by Beto Gabriel – a male facebooker in his mid-30s, who occupies himself by investing his money through ShareBuilder – CapitalOne’s alternative to day-trading.  Remarkably (you will see in a moment!) he is an incessant quoter of snippets from Humanity Healing (a “spiritual activism” network).  Here it goes (all caps are original):    

“You stupid IDIOT… Palestinians dont want handouts, THEY WANT THEIR HOMELAND BACK. Yes they do hate, but its a JUST HATE. Their homeland was taken away and they became refugees in their own land… JUST IMAGINE THE MEXICANS OCCUPYING THE STATES AND TAKING YOUR HOUSE AND FORCING U OUT INTO A DESIGNATED AREA…”

As soon as I read the words “stupid IDIOT,” I was out of this exchange.  It was over for me.  Not because I’m known to back out, but because bullies are better handled in a face-to-face confrontations.  They are not really as brave in person and the arguments end much faster.  My timing constraints are not a match to the luxurious freedom of a day-trader.  Plus, one cannot encourage further bad-mannered insolence. 

I even ignored the delicious morsels of bait such as “homeland” and “Just Hate.” (Is that what they teach at Humanity Healing?  How to justify hate?)  How did Beto Gabriel concluded that I am an intellectually disabled person with a complete lack of reason from that one comment of mine and what qualifies him as an expert in human intellectuality?  We will never know that.  As I said, I was out.

For the sake of completeness of the arguments’ dissection, let me note that while I was staring at Beto Gabriel’s berserk outburst, Agus Alexander opened up about his true confusion a little bit more:             

“I strongly encourage you Marina to think.. Outside the tv box and the popular opinion. Yes there are lots of people who consider what Israel is doing what it really is a holocaust… But they are afraid to speak because they will instantly labeled as antisemites, I have nothing against Israel  except for their actions. But I respect all religions what does that make me?”

Wow!  What a mess of thoughts!  Plus, the little boy invites me a.) to think period (implying that I don’t) and b.) to think outside of “the TV box and the popular opinion.”  Hilarious!!!  But, of course, he has no idea who I am.  And I cannot take it seriously – these people have no flexibility of mind; they learn three-four formulaic phrases, which become their slogans du jour, and they throw them around regardless of the substance of the actual discussion.     

Of course, I could’ve replied to Beto Gabriel that if I were a nomad in, let’s say, Nevada desert with no roof over my head, living hand-to-mouth, and my daughter was running around barefoot (this American boy I know, who served in Israeli Army, told me how sad those barefoot Palestine children made him), I would’ve welcomed any type of shelter with plumbing provided by Mexicans or whoever, let alone high-quality private housing.  Motherhood carries far more important responsibilities than political stands devised by vicious males.  And by they way, that Nevada desert, together with 7 giant states (1 million square miles – 117 times more than the entire State of Israel) was taken by the US from Mexico only 100 years before the formation of Israel.       

And to Agus Alexander’s question with regards to what his supposed respect for all religions makes him I could’ve answered that it makes him a very poorly informed young man who cannot expand his mind beyond his immediate surroundings.  Antisemitism has very little to do with religion.  My maternal great-grandparents were not religious.  Yet, it didn’t stop the Nazis from burying them alive in the field near their hometown together with all other Jews that lived there.  The majority of the 6 million Jews killed in WWII and of those killed in pogroms before and after the war were secular.  Hitler/Himmler’s the Ultimate Solution documents stated in writing that ALL ethnic Jews were to be wiped out from the face of this planet; religion was explicitly disregarded.  That what Holocaust means.  Look it up!

I could’ve made a list of the times through my life I was called a dirty Jew to my face.  And I could’ve shared how I felt listening to my parents talking about the Munich Massacre in 1972.  And I might’ve described how terrified I was flying from Rome to New York with my little daughter at the peak of Palestinian hijackings in the late 80s.   

But I didn’t reply with any of that to either of the men, because they lost me at “stupid IDIOT.”  At the end of the day, this is what you get for breaking your own rules twice. 

In all these Middle-Eastern debates, one thing perplexes me, though:  Why nobody ever throws stones at the entities that initiated this mess in the first place?  Don’t people remember that Palestine was a British colony until 1948 and that it was United Nations’ 1947 decision that implemented FDR’s “visions” of giving Palestine freedom from the protectorate and creating the State of Israel at the same time?  I guess 70 years back is way too much history for them.    

“Civilized” Overpopulation and Epidural


Bleubird-familySome time ago, I posted here a video quote of the Gates Foundations' family-planning message.  I mean, you say "family planning" and I will acknowledge your efforts, no matter how feeble, superficial, and confusedly motivated.  Yet, it's important for me to clarify that my own position on family planning is a bit stronger and much wider than those of the philanthropists behind the cute video.  Essentially, the title I chose for the animated citation intended to hint on my personal focus - after all, I did use words like "Key to Economic and Social Survival."

You see, the majority of charitable efforts and government aids are focused on the prevention of unwanted births and directed at either the "third-world" countries or our own domestic lower-income classes.  This is because the predominant idea behind these undertakings, granted too radical for Catholics and the conservative right, is still incredibly human-centric and terribly inadequate with respect to the ecological and other planetary concerns. 

It is basically limited to one straightforward notion that those who cannot afford to provide multiple children with sufficient sustenance, housing, clothing, education, and information technology shouldn't have them (the children).  So, disadvantaged people in poor countries and counties should stop reproducing (and they should, no question about it!), so that the emissaries of the bleeding rich hearts would stop sending to their bosses the unpleasant images of starving, sick, infested, and dying children.  Meanwhile, nobody is paying attention to the violent overpopulation crimes committed against our precious Earth not in some far away land but in so-called centers of "civilization."  

12 years ago my place of residence, a Manhattan high-rise, was famous for having more pets than children.  Today, the building is flooded with infants, toddlers, preschoolers, preteens, and teenagers.  Only after midnight you can pass through the lobby without stumbling into well-off pro-choice parents with the broods of two, three, even four children.   

Practically every single business owner I ever worked with has three children (I swear!).  How about the democratic billionaire couple that cares so much about the family planning in underdeveloped countries, i.e. Bill and Melinda Gates?  How many children do they have?  You guessed it - three! And their philanthropic cohort Warren Buffett?  Also three!  It's some sort of a magic fucking number!  And the funny thing is, they probably think that they are doing right by the Planet – they can afford a whole school of children, but they limited themselves to "just three!"  

So, now let me tell you what I think.  It is my firm believe that in the current state of ecological deterioration, unstoppable depletion of natural and fiscal resources, exponential mental and emotional degeneration of an average human, complete disappearance of merit principles, and overwhelming crumbling of social liberties - it is nothing short of a crime for anybody (and I mean, ANYBODY) to have more than one child!   

This is simple arithmetic, folks:  Why the hell my one child must share air with these endless triple offsprings?  Use your imagination for a second and replace those triples and duos with ones – how much air, food, resources, personal attention, and devotion would we have per each individual child then?  I don't know about you, but this mental picture seems like a much healthier and somewhat less doomed present and future to me. 

I cannot even begin to describe how angry these fucking people with multiple children make me, regardless of who they are – those with sufficient household wealth and those who keep popping them out because our federal and state governments throw our taxes at them (the more dependents, the higher the welfare payments); those who claim that they do it for God and those who "cement their marriages" using babies as cinder blocks. 

And, of course, I always fumed at fertility doctors endlessly pollinating multiple eggs with abundant sperm to ensure successful fertilization, thus exponentially increasing the probability of twin, triple, and even quadruple births.  But, as it turns out, the doctors, who take upon themselves the appalling task of correcting Nature and giving children to people who were meant to have none, are not the worst of medical offenders against our Planet. 

The whims of my life spared me from being exposed to child-bearing and births for the past 20 years.  As a result, I was sheltered from the macabre reality of what I can only call a large-scale bolstering of "civilized" overpopulation.  Until the last year that is, when one of my subordinates got pregnant for the first time.

We are fairly close and she frequently asks for my advice on matters outside of our professional relationship.  So, in the last trimester she approached me with the following: "My doctor asked me if I wanted Epidural." "Why?" I asked innocently, "You are not having a C-section."  She shrugged her shoulders, "Well, they give it to everyone who doesn't want the pain now.  And they've been doing it for years.  But I've read it's not good for the baby."

What???!!!  They give it to everyone?  Even to healthy young women who are built to go through natural labor without any complications?  No wonder these people think nothing of having one child after another.  Why not? But do they ever dwell on a pretty obvious concept that there might be a reason why Mother Nature intended for the birth of a child to be a labor of pain and love?  And don't even get me started on what all these drug-induced and anesthetic-aided infant extractions (you cannot seriously call them labors at this point) do to these newborn humans. 

Obviously, these parents don't care much about the future of their children.  And it's not shocking to me that the drug-pushing doctors and their sponsors, i.e. big pharma, don't care about the survival of their own descendants either.  It should be, but it's not.  The opportunism has become the blinding principle of everyone's existence and it always prevails – all they care about is their bank accounts' balances today!  As they say in French, Apres Moi, le deluge (After me comes the flood)!

And here is another angle.  The conveyor birthing and ballooning families are among the main causes for the perpetually increasing health insurance rates.  Do you realize that in addition to the terrible effect they have on the global environment and economics, these multi-child families are basic larcenists?  Daily they steal hard-earned money from single individuals and one-child parents who are forced to pay exorbitant premiums inflated by these thieves.

I thought that I would never align my interests with those of any big public organization, but in the fight for our Planet's survival any allies count, even those who take the right actions for the wrong reasons.  In their unyielding pursuit of stock "value" inflation, health insurers do whatever they can to assist those who want to stay childless or keep their families small: a vasectomy is covered 100%, so is a once a year abortion performed by a network provider.  Obviously, in the long run these procedures are far more economical than prenatal care, birth, child healthcare, etc., etc. 

Thus, inadvertently, the insurance companies actually contribute to the fight against overpopulation.  But they can do more!  How about they stop covering the goddamn epidural administered to absolutely healthy women?  The last I've heard, each shot costs about $2,000.  So, c'mon HMO, let them feel it, both in their pockets and, as Nature intended, in their birth canals.  Maybe this will make at least some of them to stop at #1.              

The Wealth of the Nation: Observation #2 – Apple Watch


People ask me, “How the fuck does Apple dare to price this watch at $18,000?!”  Granted, most of these people are representatives of the American “contemporary middle class.” 

This basically means that economic and social changes of the past few decades completely cut them out of the luxury goods market, its prices and its intricate marketing strategies.  While their well-employed fathers could still afford to splurge a portion of year-end bonuses on nice presents for their mothers at Saks or Tiffany, these people have no need to be bothered with prices of products that carry such labels as Hermes, Chanel, Bottega Veneta, or Rolex.  It’s far beyond their purchasing powers and (altogether now!) it’s only gonna get worse. 

Even if they get bonuses, they need to spend them right away on far more immediate needs – like replacement of a broken kitchen appliance, a leaky roof, or urgent car repairs.  They already borrowed against their 401k to cover the ever-escalating costs of their children’s after-school activities; and the astronomic college tuition… hmmm, they will deal with that when the time comes.    

The only reason they even know about the Apple Edition Watches ($10,000-$18,000) is because they are featured next to Apple Watch ($550-$1,000) and Apple Watch Sport ($350-$600) on Apple.com and are on display in the brick-and-mortar stores.  The pictured watch was showing itself off right on the front page of Apple’s site until literally a few days ago.  So, even if you needed some $19.99 cable, you would’ve seen it.

In an unprecedented move, Apple decided to capture both mass and luxury markets – at the same time and through the same outlets.  And guess what?  All watches, regardless of their prices, were snatched away within the first three minutes of the original release,  thus proving the marketing strategy a total success (well, at least its initial stage).

The supply and demand stimuli worked precisely as if it were a case in an Economics textbook: the cheaper pieces attracted many buyers with their relative value, while the alluring high prices of the gold Apple watches made them even more desirable to those who can afford to shell out this kind of money for a miniaturized iPad.

So, why shouldn’t then a brand charge such prices for its high-end products if the market is willing to bear them?   This constantly happens in the third-world countries, which consist of a vast majority of desperately poor people and a roomful of incredibly wealthy ones, with no middle class in-between.  Already expensive as is, luxury items are priced two, sometimes three times higher in those countries than in Western Europe or the US.  A pair of Prada shoes that can be bought on 5th Avenue in NYC for $750 will carry a $2,200 price tag in Moscow.  And again, why not?  The general population wouldn’t be able to afford them at any price, while the rich and powerful feel no difference between $750 and $2,200.

Of course, you need an extra-special kind of gall to sell exactly the same electronic gadget at a 3000% price differential just because you placed it in a bit of 18K gold (and it’s absolutely irrelevant how fancy the process of creating that 75% gold alloy is – it’s still the same metal).  I mean, a gold Rolex costs only 3-4 times more than the same model in stainless steel; not 30 times more!  Moreover, Apple as a brand has no track records in metallurgy, watch-making, or jewelry designing to support the exorbitant prices! 

A big portion of the premium prices charged for the established luxury goods have nothing to do with the label frenzy – it is supported by decades, sometimes centuries, of extraordinary workmanship, continuous ingenuity of designs, and the unreachable standards of quality.  I mean, Abraham-Louis Breguet started making watches in 1775; Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were his clients!  Every Hermes bag is still made by hand in France according to the quality requirements established in 1837.  The ownership of these items lasts for a very long time – they are passed from one generation to the next.  What will the owner of an Edition Watch pass onto his children?  A bit of scrap gold that surrounds a piece of an outdated electronic junk?

Nevertheless, I applaud Apple for being absolutely honest about it and not hiding the reality behind some bullshit political-correctness curtain.  It is what it is: We live in a society marred by a chasm of monetary division that constantly expands at a speed of light, with a handful of those who can afford whatever without even checking the price, including the damn Apple Edition Watch, and everybody else. 

And it doesn’t matter that the overpopulated side can be further divided into those who will go for a $1000 watch vs. the ones who will settle for the $300 one vs. those who cannot afford anything at the Apple store at all.  Even though our wages vary and, more importantly, we make different choices (a professional woman who decides not to have a suburban house and multiple kids still can afford a luxury bag or a watch once in awhile), our means are quite comparable.  If we are in our right minds, we will not throw away $18K for an Apple watch.  The other side, however, can go crazy to their heart’s content.

But the situation does beg the question: Are these the signs that we are fast becoming a third-world country?