angry genius boy

why men who like big boobs and butts are dumb

exsanguinate | issue 7.2 | winter 2005 - 2006

If you ask a man to describe a sexually attractive woman, most of the time they won't paint a vivid portrait of a wonderful personality or even a pleasant face to look at. When it comes down to it, there are three purely physical things most men desire to see in a woman. The first is big bountiful breasts. Most men don't care whether they are real or fake, so long as they are ample and able to jiggle about despite a woman's best efforts to contain them. The second thing most men desire is a nice round butt, characteristic of a woman with well-shaped hips. It's a wonder that butt implants for insecure women with flat assess has not become all the rage. Yet a woman with fake boobs or a fake butt wouldn't bother most men as long as her vagina was real. Which, of course, brings me to the last thing most men would like to see in a woman, and that of course would be, their own penis.

But do most men ever stop and think about what make these things so sexually desirable? Or are they simply unthinking cretins motivated by primal desires they haven't the slightest ability to understand or control? In short, the words "thinking" and "sex" are often mutually exclusive in the primitive mind of man. The male brain is simply incapable of performing the two tasks at the same time, and as such, most men are clueless as to the origins of their desires.

If the male brain could think and have sex at the same time, certainly he would eventually ask himself, "What is it about these mounds of bouncy flesh on the front side of a woman that I find so irresistible?" If the question were answered correctly, many men would probably be so turned off by the answer they might not be able to go through with the sex act. If one of them did manage to make it through the act with the disturbing images in his brain, he would only be able to go through with it if all of the necessary precautions were taken. The answer to the question of why big boobs and butts are desirable is a paradox of sorts. Most men don't want to have children every time they have sex -- or at least any children they have to take care of. Yet, most men are driven to women who have big breasts because historically, big breasts were critical when it came to feeding potential offspring. Women with big breasts have the appearance of being good mothers with an ample milk supply for children. So why then do men fall for fake boobs? Fake breasts are a clear indication of an inferior mother when it comes to nurturing and suckling a child. Of course, most men are too stupid to realize why they are attracted to big breasts in the first place, so it's a given that they are too dumb to realize they are even bigger morons for falling for the fake boob trick. Breast enlargements do not make for better mothers even though most men would agree they make for much better strippers.

So what about asses? And by that, I'm not talking about the asses that most women think men are for placing boobs and butts above personality, I'm referring to the butts themselves. Why are men attracted to well-shaped bottoms? This question may seem a bit more puzzling because unlike breasts, butts have a darker more stinky side to them. The answer, however, is the same. A well-formed butt is indicative of the correct hip ratio for birthing children. So once, again men are motivated on a subconscious level of sorts to desire women who would make good mothers, even though the last thing on their mind is the conscious motivation to be a father.

So wouldn't it then make more sense for a man who didn't want to have children to find a skinny flat-butt no-breasted woman sexually desirable, rather than a women who is clearly a better designed child-producing machine? Even if a child managed to make it past such a woman's pelvis without being strangled, the likelihood that it would starve to death at the dry-well of a teat would still be significantly higher. On the bright side, if a child born to such a mother did manage to survive in spite of all of these impasses, at least he would appreciate his mother for who she was rather, than what she simply appeared to be. Such a male specimen would be a rarity. Imagine a man who might not be so quick to buy into the stereotypical visions of buxom baby-producing beauty that are so deeply engrained in his biology and so frequently reinforced by his society.

why people who believe in aliens and UFOs are dumb

exsanguinate | issue 7.1 | summer fall 2003

For about ten bucks, a company on the internet will microwave encode your message and beam it into space via radio transmitter. I don't want my position to be misunderstood, so I'd like to make one thing clear before I proceed. I think that people who are that 'into' aliens and UFOs are really stupid. If I had a nickel for every moron who thought "the truth was out there," I probably could send hundreds of messages of my own into space to try and reverse the trend of stupidity so popular among these freaks. Here is what my messages might say, "Disregard previous transmissions. All intelligent inhabitants of earth have been enslaved and or eaten. The planet is completely uninhabitable save a few remaining deadly bacteria and a virus or two which would surely liquefy your internal organs should you have any. Stay away."

Of course I agree with the late astronomer Carl Sagan. There certainly is no god, but there is the possibility of the existence of blue-green slime that lives phototropically on a planet similar to earth, a few thousand light years away. However, forking out ten bucks to tell single-celled algae that I am here and that earth and I look forward to meeting it, is a bit silly. The idea that I would be sending out that same message to an intelligent life form could only be classified as dangerously retarded. What happened when the Europeans discovered there was intelligent life on Africa and North America centuries ago? They enslaved the ones they could, and they killed the ones they couldn't. If the Europeans were willing to do that to members of their own species, imagine what an intelligent life form from another planet would do to us. The typical, alien geek response to this argument is inevitably some mumbo jumbo about how an advanced civilization with the ability to travel through space couldn't possibly be barbaric. Now that's a likely scenario: a highly advanced race of super-intelligent vegans travel light years across the galaxy simply to exchange a few tofu recipes and hold hands with us. Sci-fi zealotry among these people runs so deep that they fail to realize, like the breakfast they had that morning, their contribution to any alien visitors will be made in a sausage form.

An even dumber view than the "we need to be visited by aliens" view is the "we have been visited by aliens" view. Some of these people actually believe that aliens have crash-landed on this planet, and the government is now in possession of their technologies. This is also a very likely scenario. Kang and Kodos are members of a highly intelligent species with technologies well beyond anything we can conceive, but when they get to earth, they run out of gas, or an o-ring blows sending them spiraling down to our planet. And how do you argue with the idiots who claim that aliens are already among us? You don't. They are the aliens. It just so happens that they didn't come from outer space, and they are few clades away being classified as an intelligent life form.

why SUV drivers are dumb

exsanguinate | issue 6.3 | summer fall 2002

Where else but in America do women don designer clothes and spend hours on their hair so they can look pretty while driving a 20-ton school-bus-sized vehicle to their destination? If I didn't know any better, I'd assume these women who drive SUVs live smack dab in the middle of some very rugged country where rampaging rivers and unpaved roads were not uncommon. Either that, or these women are breeding machines who require their transport to comfortably fit a family of 25. Who would have guessed that these women are more often than not, the mothers of two children and that they live a quarter mile from the convenience store where they plan to pick up a candy bar and a can of Pepsi One?

Their husbands and boyfriends have no better rationale for driving an SUV either. Most of these men don't have jobs that require an off-road vehicle so they can rescue trapped hikers on mountainsides or pull stuck vehicles from flooded washes and snow banks. Instead, they live in bland suburban settings and have mundane corporate jobs that require them to be just like everybody else. Sadly, the SUV becomes the last refuge many of these men have of looking rugged or feeling like unique individuals. They all work the same type of white collar jobs which require them to wear the same type of clothes and have the same type of haircuts. Driving an SUV is a last ditch effort to convince co-workers and friends that they are cool. A man in an SUV wants to tell the world, "Look at me. Although you wouldn't guess it, I am very different than everyone else here at '9-to-5 Incorporated' -- I don't drive a sedan."

But the stupidity of SUV drivers doesn't end there. Amazingly, some SUV owners will admit their idiocy by complaining about the price of gas for their SUVs. It's as though these people missed their entire high school economics class and are ignorant of even the most fundamental economic principles. The more demand there is for something, the more expensive it tends to become. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that if you drive an SUV that guzzles twice as much gas as a sedan, you are doubling demand for gas, and hence, you are the ultimate reason why everyone's gas is so expensive. Please don't complain about the fact that you are obligated to buy expensive gas when you had the choice not buy a vehicle that requires twice as much fuel as a car to get you to the same place.

Of course, there are a SUV owners who don't complain about gas prices and who may not own their SUV for status or fashion purposes. What about those who claim to drive SUVs because they are safer? Well, if safer can be defined as being 100 times more likely to roll over and crush you inside, I guess you could call them safer.

The more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to side with auto manufactures who deny that SUVs are dangerous... after all, they are culling the heard, so-to-speak. Rather than requiring more bureaucratic laws regulating the safety of SUVs, I think the government should instead mandate auto manufacturers to design SUVs to be more easily removed from our roadways once they are totalled. In fact, I think that designing SUVs to crumple up into a coffin shape upon impact would be a great idea. We could simply market it as another "feature." This particular feature would not only make for more efficient clean up of the debris and corpses after accidents, it would also eventually result in fewer and fewer stupid people and their stupid vehicles threatening the lives of everyone else smart enough not to buy an SUV.

why Republicans are dumb

exsanguinate | issue 6.2 | summer fall 2001

When you declare yourself a Republican but you are not a white male, you are making a bold statement about yourself. If you don't have an annual income of at least a hundred thousand dollars, the message is even more clear. You are unashamed of being a total moron.

Don't get me wrong... I don't think the Democratic party these days is much better than the Republican party. If you bother to take an objective look at either of them, they both put the interests of big business above the interests of the public. The only notable difference between the two of them is the deeper roots Republicans have in conservative politics. In a nutshell, this means, more often than not, Republicans are opposed to changing things. If you happen to be a woman, a minority or simply a white guy who does not yet earn at least a hundred grand a year, keeping things the same is really not in your best interest.

Nearly all minorities are well aware that the situation in the ghettos and inner cities is pretty dire. Any type of change is probably in their best interest. Not all of them have forgotten that just a few decades ago, much of the conservative movement under the guise of the Republican party was in direct opposition to their plight. Although many of them may be apathetic when it comes to the current American political climate, the few that do care are well aware that being a minority and being a Republican is almost as conflicting a choice as being Jewish and deciding to be a Nazi.

Like minorities, women are frequently deprived of advancement opportunities. Women often do not earn the same wages as do males for comparable work. Making matters worse, most women cannot always afford to get pregnant every time they voluntarily or involuntarily have sex. Even Barry Goldwater, who ran for president in opposition of minority rights, felt that a woman should not be forced to have a child she does not want. When he went on public record with this view, Republicans lambasted him. The point was painfully driven home. Many Republicans believe that a woman should be forced to carry a child to term no matter what the circumstance. Any woman who would actually embrace this belief is more than likely so mentally deficient that a government-mandated sterilization is probably in order to prevent her damaged chromosomes from leaking more stupidity into the gene pool.

Although contemptible, it is at least understandable why a rich man would embrace a conservative ideology. The wealthy are content with their lot. Any significant social change might threaten their current standard of living. But what about the white guy who isn't well-to-do? If he doesn't benefit by things such as capital gains tax cuts and the like, he is probably driven to the party by a single issue even though Republican economic policies are not in his best interest. For some, it is the right to own a gun. For others, it is a moral opposition to abortion. For still others, it is the conviction that criminal "justice" should be cruel and unusual.

And for a select few, it is martyrdom in honor of these three core traditional Republican values. Receiving the death penalty for shooting an abortion doctor in the ultimate exercise of your right to own a gun is banner way for a poor person to tell the world they are a proud to embrace Republican family values.

why Christians are dumb

exsanguinate | issue 6.1 | winter spring 2001

I don't consider Christians to be any less intelligent than the members of any other religion. Of course I consider most members of other religions to be pretty stupid, so that gives you some idea of what I think about Christians. However, Christians should be singled out because they certainly are the most common of the vocal, obnoxious, religious types around. Hasidic Jews and Buddhists never knock on doors because they want to distribute cartoon pamphlets depicting happy people basking in the glory of their God's goodness. If Christianity is such a good product, why do they have to sell it door-to-door? Everyone knows that products sold door-to-door are second- rate when compared to the products that require getting off your ass and obtaining them elsewhere.

Making matters worse, anybody who doesn't rush out to become a Christian and accept Jesus is automatically condemned to hell no matter what their moral character is. George W. Bush, for example, had a heated argument with his mother because he believed that only Christians go to heaven. The argument prompted the two of them to call the Reverend Billy Graham who confirmed that only Christians go to heaven. I can't possibly think of a better way to bring new people on board to your way of thinking. If they can't be convinced to believe because of the merits, condemn them to hell and try to frighten them into it as a last resort.

So let's suppose for a minute that I haven't been frightened into Christianity but I happen to live by the ten commandments. I don't lie, steal, cheat, kill or commit adultry, etc. The only thing is, I do not want to be a Christian, I don't believe in God, and I think that Christianity is no different than Greek mythology. Do I still go to hell? The answer according to the Christian consensus is inevitably a big fat yes. In other words, even if you always behave like a good Christian but you don't believe in God or Jesus Christ, you are doomed to hell. Of course if you are a Christian who has committed violations against God, you can still accept Jesus after your crimes and go to heaven. What sense does that make? Apparently, the Christian God is just so unbearably vain and insecure that when good honest moral people don't believe in him, his feelings are so hurt he has no choice but to burn their flesh for eternity in hell. Fortunately for murderers, rapists and child molesters, if you chose to be born again and accept Jesus in your heart, the Christian God is very kind and loving.

Christians and their God could certainly learn a thing or two from a religious leader who wasn't quite as stupid. Buddha explained to others that human suffering was caused by earthly wants and hence suffering could only be ended by ridding the self of wants. Anybody who didn't agree with Buddha was allowed to do so without Buddha continuing to bother him. Buddha had the self control and wisdom not to push the matter any further. He didn't insist on knocking on the doors of those who disagreed with him to distribute little drawings he made of them suffering in hell for eternity. He didn't participate in the writing of a book in which he is depicted as a vengeful God who enjoyed smiting the wicked with his magical super-powers that could flood out the earth or cause global-wide pestilence. Buddha was wise enough to realize that anybody who could be enlightened would choose to do so on their own volition. Obviously, anybody who could not be enlightened was destined to be a Christian.

home to eristikos | exsanguinate menu

eristikös launched angry genius boy online in February 2001
this page content last updated 14 November 2005
this page design copyright © 2001 eristikös