Matt

Trojan condom commercial.

Today on A&E I saw a commercial that said 1 in 4 people with HIV don't tell their partner that they have it because they don't know they do - then the commercial went on to plug Trojan, and showed a man kissing a woman.

I have to say I take offense to this commercial, which definitely has a politically correct spin. In the commercial they target one of the least common demographics for spreading HIV - a straight couple (the least common demographic is lesbians). Meanwhile, in North America, 88% of people who have HIV are either homosexual men or IV drug users (or both). It would of course only make sense to have two men kissing in the commercial. But could you imagine how that would go down?

I would have respected the commercial if they didn't warn against HIV, but something more commonly spread amongst straight people.

Also, since I may have to say it again, I have to point out that HIV is NOT a "promiscuity disease". Try to keep in mind the 40 times efficiency rate in which anal sex spreads HIV, and while hetero couples do have anal sex, the person performing it doesn't ALSO have anal sex, so his chance of having the disease is much lower than a man who gives anal sex and also receives it (the 40 times efficiency rate applies to receiving anal sex). I always get fed this same tired rhetoric. ok, as far as straight people with HIV: where are the bodies? Of course you won't find any. Same question John Romano has been asking regarding moderate use of steroids. Of course no one has answered that one either.

I've always found when cornered and unable to debate with someone something...that well...you know...maybe, just maybe - I'm wrong. If something is true, you would be able to prove it. If you honestly have no way to defend your beliefs, start thinking that you may just be conditioned to feel that way.

http://www.whatisaids.com/wwwboard/messages/368.html

The first paragraph says it all.
Matt

Judge this situation.

Somebody I know doesn't have a parking pass at LU and in the the past year got $30 in tickets and paid them, which is still cheaper than the annual parking pass fee ($90). So, discuss the morality of this. In some sense, it is allowed to park in the lot, but the risk is the ticket. If no tickets are given, that would seem to be the responsibility of LU. But I am personally not sure about this issue so I brought it up here. It is an interesting topic.

Some points: I would consider myself mostly a libertarian or a utilitarian. I could never counter any points made by Ayn Rand in philosophy, Currie in economics, or Mike Mentzer in bodybuilding.

Then one day it hit me - I can't counter their points because they were right and I was wrong. Ouch. That was a tough pill to swallow. Especially in Currie's case, lol. In short, I didn't go on my previous economic of morality tirades because I expected to change my opinion. I was trying to educate people. If you wish, print out what I said and show it to the leading experts in the economics and philosophy community. I'll tell you right now that the sweeping majority of experts in both fields would side with me. By all means, print out what I said and bring it to any professor at your local university and see for yourself. In some sense, I feel that my comments fell on deaf ears though, because I don't think anyone wanted to open their mind to my point of view or knew enough about the topics to further their education with my comments. It would be like teaching stochastic process algebra to someone who had no previous math training. You could argue that I am the close minded one, but I've already debated this topic and made my conclusions after much research and learning about both sides. On the other hand, I suspect the people disagreeing with me had a preset notion and hadn't ever looked at the other side as I did. I also think that if they did they would change their opinions.

It seems very ironic, but my point of view brings greater benefit to the greatest number of people. Any argument against it is actually the selfish one because fewer people benefit and more people are harmed. Ironic, that selfishness can do that, but it is simply reality. So if you want to "live differently" and take the other side, be aware that you end up hurting more people for the sake of yourself in the long run. Again, it must be the mother of ironies, but any economist would tell you the same thing - doing what you think is altruistic sometimes turns into the most selfish decision of them all. This is one of those times.
Matt

The Wizard (1989).

This movie came out on DVD in August due to huge demand (a petition was even drafted for it). I watched most of it last night and it was actually pretty good, considering it was more of an advertisement for Nintendo and Universal Studios. I could see why I was so interested in seeing it as a kid, although I remember having to wait until it came out on rent. A lot of the former child stars are still working in Hollywood, so I would like to see what Fred Savage is up to.

Also, I forgot to add...

My cousin is coming to Thunder Bay and apparently has a job lined up (I doubt this). My uncle says he is dealing with all kinds of issues right now and feels helpless to help his son. He asked if I could basically take care of him when he is up here and get his life on track. Now generally I would be all in favour, but for years I've tried to help people who don't want to help themselves and it never works - not for me, not for anyone. Unless he wants to make an effort (which he doesn't), he would be useless to me, and I would be useless to him. In September, a friend of mine had some issues to deal with and needed a place to stay. Because he was so respectful of me and because I got so much reciprocation in our friendship, I let him stay here for cost (which is almost free, about $30 or $50 a month) for as long as he wanted. He was a pleasant person and it was really fulfilling to have him in my life. Then some other issues came up and he needed to move out. He didn't want to, but he had no choice. My letting him stay here for free, which I didn't mention to anybody until just now, are of course the actions of an exploitative and immoral man; moreso, and supposed obligations of such a man.

My cousin is not the same as this guy though. He already used me for as much money as he could get off me and by going out of my way and getting stressed out, I fell very ill, which to me is a total anomaly. Unlike the situation with my friend, I have nothing to gain and everything to lose by helping him. On the other hand, my uncle is a nice man, who is pleasant and easy to get along with, and I would like to help my cousin moreso to help my uncle who deserves it. Although to see my cousin improve would also be a good thing to me. But I won't let him live here. Doing so I would stand to lose a lot and of course gain nothing at all. I think what I would like to do is bring him to the gym regularly and to LU for hot meals to get him on a healthy diet. I can also try to educate him on ways to improve himself. That way, my personal risk is limited. If I see him making no effort, or if I see that I'm only being had once again, I'll cut him off in a second. If on the other hand, he is actually willing to try to make his life better, we'll take it from there.
Matt

Re: PS3s.

Look at this, I go out of my way for a chance to help friends save hundreds of dollars and myself lose up to $2,000, just to get hit with a jab like this:

http://ryan-the-great.livejournal.com/78543.html

Just as an update, I will be putting the PS3s on EBAY in about an hour. The market value is a bit random right now, and one day it is worth $1,200 and the next day, $1,000, and back again, so I'm putting them up now. Sorry if I got anyone's hopes up. For once, I'm actually thinking about myself.

Linda had a great quote that she posted on here some time back, where she basically said that she was so sick and tired of getting taken advantage of that she would no longer give the shirt off her back to help someone "in need". The thing about Linda is that she expects everyone to be as good hearted and generous as her and only expect favours when they actually tried their best themselves not to need them, and actually truly do need them. That's not the case of course, and some people will take advantage of somebody in a flash.

Two weeks ago, my cousin who lives out of town told me that he needed $1,000 for an unspecified emergency. I kept on saying no, and he kept pushing matters. Finally I said ok, and offered to wire him the money through online banking. Low and behold, he didn't have a bank account. I then said he could come down here to get the money - nope, not possible for whatever reason. At that point I just said no, and he kept telling me of the urgency of the situation. He pushed me to come down to visit the family and lend him the money. I figured it would be $1,000 loss but for a good cause and I could at least visit my other cousins. The next day, he let the cat out of the bag that he spent a huge amount of money on his girlfriend to rectify a fight they had been in. My uncle asked him where he got the money from, and my cousin went mute.

I flipped.

He actually had the nerve to blame it on roid rage too - as if being lied to and having a relationship and trust totally destroyed isn't grounds to snap. I yelled at him so much and the pollution over there was so strong, that I went home that night and came down with pneumonia. I get sick maybe four times a decade and I had never been so sick in my life. I went to the gym on Monday to see how things were, only to find that I lost 12 pounds of body weight and half an inch on my arms and my bench press went from 350 to 320. Then I see Peter squatting 500 pounds for reps and realize what I had - what I was willing to sacrifice to help someone "in need" - I lost $1,000 and a lot more by contracting an illness to help a friend "in need". Never again.

Last year someone asked to borrow $900 for rent. I asked if it would be reasonable to ask for interest for the loan. Some people said "I wouldn't charge interest" - the same people who would never lend the money out to begin with. Yet I am the bad guy for asking for $5 interest which didn't even cover the money that I lost had I applied that $900 to pre-existing debts. I lost money to help someone and was apparently in the wrong to try to curb my losses. I was the only person willing to help when all of his family and friends did not, and yet I was in the wrong to simply ask for something that any reasonable person would have offered anyway. In such an emergency, I would feel horrible for not openly GIVING the person $100 extra on top of the loan. I would never need to be asked for $5, I would have enough respect and courtesy to offer far more than that to begin with.

So the same guy came back in September with another "rent emergency". He needed a similar loan to pay first and last month's rent before his OSAP came in. I had Currie set the terms which was the best thing I ever did. All in all I would lend the money - IF he was willing to pay the same interest rate that VISA charged him. I didn't WANT to lend the money. I didn't want to be had again just because this guy couldn't take care of himself. Where were his parents? Where were his closer friends? Clearly they didn't want to help, so how was it my obligation? It wasn't, and if I was going to help, it would be on my terms.

My mother's family was physically and verbally abused by their father. I have no love for my grandfather, who has 0 remorse for what he did. If you beat your wife and kids you're a piece of shit in my book, family or not. One of my uncles grew up always on the defensive because of it. He would never tolerate mistreatment or being taken advantage of by people because of how his father treated him. I think he is a good guy, and I don't think there is anything wrong with watching out for yourself. My other uncle on the other hand, grew up always trying to help people in need - of course the type of people who he helped, the kinds who appear to be "in need", only walked on him and abused him his entire life. What's more sad - at age 38, he died of cancer, having been taken advantage of and used by these scumbags all the way up until his death.

When I came down with the pneumonia, I still went to school before I was diagnosed. When I got there, I had almost every worker at the cafeteria personally serving me. One went so far as to actually go to the other cafeteria to get me chicken noodle soup and bring it to me. She also brought orange juice from home for me because she was concerned I would catch more germs drinking OJ from the public tap. For dinner, I came late and all of the chocolate brownies were eaten which is my favourite dessert. Low and behold, another one of the workers actually had put aside a brownie for me in the fridge because there were none left. Talk about heartwarming. I never felt so loved in my life, and in general, I feel a lot of love by the people around me.

I would say that for my age I'm ahead of the game of life. Most people twice my age would be happy to be where I am. To be honest, I don't even care if I improve on anything from this day forward. I want to stay exactly as I am right now for as long as possible - though if I improve and if things get better - great. What I'm saying is that after years of work, I'm finally exactly where I want to be. If anything, I fear regressing because I've really found my groove. But one thing I've never learned was how to exercise any discretion when sharing my generosity with others. There is nothing wrong with the gem "Do Unto Others As You Would Want Them Do Unto You", and there is a lot right with it. The key is doing unto the RIGHT kind of people. People who are actually friends. The workers in the cafeteria are the type of people I should be helping out. Instead, all my life I've helped mostly the wrong people - people who would take the food off my plate if given the chance. People who are so selfish they spent 110% of their money to support themselves and their hobbies and had no gratitude whatsoever for any help I had ever given them. If you put yourself in a bad spot due to your own stupidity and ignorance and lack of effort, I'm not going to help. Because in reality, I'm not helping - I'm enabling more of the same bad behaviour which got you there to begin with. If on the other hand, you're out there trying your best, making every possible effort to do what you can to make the best of your situation, you can bet I will help.

50/50 is the ONLY way relationships should be. What I try to do is seek out relationships with people with that same mentality. Then I try to give 60 to balance things out and make sure it is 50/50. If you try to even give 50 to the wrong person, you end up giving 100 and getting nothing in return except for abuse.

The lesson I learned from this is to only help the right people. The self abusive, self destructive, selfish types can starve on the street corner for all I care. I definitely am not going to enable their bad behaviour. From now on, I will only help the right people. If you expect more than 50% in a relationship, you need to take a good look in the mirror and realize how incredibly selfish you are. From now on, these types of people have no place in my life.
Matt

PS3s.

I have three PS3s available for sale for $750 each. Well, $750 for any of my friends or people who I respect anyway. Of course, I can get anything. Need a rare movie produced in the 1930s that isn't available for purchase anywhere that you can see? Give me 24 hours.

I hate to say it, but I think people who are willing to buy this system off me for cost + $1,000 are idiots. What can I say - they paid for my new 62" TV. I figured in one year of only spending $500 on myself (if that), I would get something new for the house. Maybe it's time for me to start to live.

Someone I know waited all night to buy a Wii from the Superstore. I said that if he sold his Nintento Wii on EBAY that morning he would have made $800 profit and that he could have found someone in town selling the Wii that same day, for much less (probably $500 or less). He refused. Low and behold that same day there were ads at LU for a Wii going for $420 by someone local. His net profit for waiting six hours to play the Wii: $700 US. But nope, he couldn't wait six hours. I should point out he is in massive debt too. That is very unintelligent decision making if you ask me.

Reminds me of those people who camp out for a week to see the premiere of a movie. Maybe consider waiting an extra two days to prevent all of that?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's all relative I know, but I still think it is incredibly fucking stupid no matter how you cut it. I hate to say that, but geez. Relative or not, I seriously cannot wrap my heads around this type of behaviour. Now for very rich people who don't want the inconvenience of waiting in a long lineup, I can understand. What's an extra grand when you're loaded anyway? But for your regular Joes working for minimum wage and spending a month's pay on a video game console - I just don't get it, at all.

$750, and the price is not up negotiation, since I know I can get $1,200 US for it on EBAY. I just figured I would offer this as a favour for anyone who is interested. We're not talking about food here so I don't feel like I'm coercing anyone. I highly recommend against it though. Even regular price for the PS3 is way too much for a video game system in my opinion.

This thread is still ongoing.

http://mattcanning.livejournal.com/401788.html
Matt

Stem cell research.

What I find particularly disturbing is that the same right wing Christian fundamentalist neocon nutjobs who are stalling potentially lifesaving stem cell research will be lining up in droves for cures when they get developed elsewhere and imported into the US. I live by certain golden rules, and that includes not being a hypocrite. If they stalled a cure for a disease and they later end up getting it when the cure is developed through the means they originally stalled, they do not deserve to take advantage of that cure...but they will.

Looks like stem cells have shown new developments in colon cancer research:

LINK
Matt

AIDS: The Facts.

http://www.whatisaids.com/wwwboard/messages/368.html

In the commentary of Ron Jeremy's movie, Ron said AIDS was mostly a homosexual male's disease and IV drug users' disease in North America. He explained that at the HIV clinic he would get his monthly tests at, that the person doing the testing for him never had a straight man get test positive for HIV in her entire career.

A problem that I see with some people is that they like to believe what they want. I suppose admitting that you are wrong and may have been wrong for many years is just too difficult to swallow. Reminds me of when I had to concede Currie was right about so many things before. I hated doing it, but I did. But since that's so hard, you can throw as many scientific facts in their faces and they are just too set in their ways to realize the truth. I don't care what I believe in as far as preset beliefs go. If you told me that some type of mill pollution was good for the environment and then showed me proof of that with an ironclad scientific study, I would believe you. Media doesn't count, because media is not peer reviewed by scientists. Some think that if they see it on TV enough, it must be true. This is very poor reasoning and I find that a lot of people fall for the same stuff. Unfortunately, unless you read something in a peer reviewed scientific publication, you don't "just know" anything.

The funny thing is, the Christian right hates that people have sex and hate homosexuals. So why was it more important for them to bring AIDS out in the open as a sexually transmitted disease, and not as a "gay cancer" type of disease? Although I know both were done, it seems the prevailing thoughts amongst people is that straight males should be concerned about getting HIV through unprotected sex. I know that statistically, I have more things to worry about...

...like drowning in a pool, falling down the stairs, getting hit by a car while crossing the street, dying from an animal attack, or getting struck by lightning. And you know, more of those types of worries that are just oh so concerning to most people.
Matt

Woten.

Looks like Woten tried registering again on getbig a couple of times but was banned both times. He is on youtube as "Shitbags69". LOL. I posted this clip already, but scroll to the comments here (Peter = maxsho):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNJqeyiIYac

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA. I'm dying here LMAO!! How did he know about Peter's hair? LOL. Hilarious.

My dad came back in town and is currently renovating my basement, here is how it started out:

PICTURESCollapse )