Grex Agora46 Conference

Item 50: Butt fucking and gun control.

Entered by pvn on Tue Jul 1 07:24:16 2003:

Yeah.  I admit it.  I entered the title of this item to be a bit, how
shall we say it, unusual?  Provocative?

Ok, so what about the recent SCOTUS ruling re butt fucking?  It sounds
like good news to me (pollyanna) in that it clearly prohibits any gun
control laws.  Clear as a bell and the weather at the time.  All
community standards rules are out the window and in the dumpster.  Its a
libertine free for all.  Not to mention its close to the 4th of July.
Surely I can now enjoy all manner of fireworks in my own backyard  -
2-inch festival balls rule!  They are cheap and I have to hardly drive
more than a half hour to purchase them - in Indiana.
50 responses total.
#1 of 50 by polytarp on Tue Jul 1 09:30:25 2003:

IT really wasn't unusual for you, sir.  I, as usual, picked out the AUTHOR
(IE YOU) just from the topic!!!!

#2 of 50 by other on Tue Jul 1 11:55:04 2003:

The author of #0 is exhibiting incredibly poor grasp of legal logic.  One 
must wonder if his actual intent is no more than that indicated in his 
first paragraph.

#3 of 50 by polygon on Tue Jul 1 12:48:15 2003:

Provocative?  Nasby?

#4 of 50 by flem on Tue Jul 1 14:28:11 2003:

I'm amused (and a little disturbed) that when pvn thinks of butt fucking, the
first thing he thinks about is assault weapons and 2-inch festival balls. 
Oh, and don't forget polyanna.

#5 of 50 by slynne on Tue Jul 1 14:31:29 2003:

I think the recent SCOTUS ruling probably means that I can play lawn 
darts in my bedroom...if I want to. ;)

#6 of 50 by other on Tue Jul 1 15:07:50 2003:

JARTS!!  :):)

#7 of 50 by gull on Tue Jul 1 15:47:32 2003:

I remember those!  They were fun, but they're also one of those toys
that you look at and wonder how anyone ever thought giving them to kids
was a good idea. ;>

#8 of 50 by other on Tue Jul 1 16:06:59 2003:

Lay down over there and let me see how close I can get without hitting 
you!

#9 of 50 by slynne on Tue Jul 1 16:20:01 2003:

Sounds exciting!

#10 of 50 by rcurl on Tue Jul 1 17:35:00 2003:

Not the least bit provocative - just dumb.

#11 of 50 by oval on Tue Jul 1 20:12:03 2003:

curmudgeon.

#12 of 50 by bru on Tue Jul 1 21:48:06 2003:

I never got hurt in a game of JARTS.  OR shooting my bow and arrow Either.

#13 of 50 by tod on Tue Jul 1 22:03:13 2003:

This response has been erased.


#14 of 50 by jaklumen on Tue Jul 1 23:55:48 2003:

I loved JARTS, but I definitely wouldn't have little children around.

#15 of 50 by other on Wed Jul 2 05:27:49 2003:

Yeah, it was probably the combination of drunkenness and JARTS which 
caused the end of JARTS.  Too bad, because the really logical thing would 
have been to end drunkenness.  Of course, what's logical and what's 
possible are not necessarily the same...

#16 of 50 by mvpel on Wed Jul 2 22:19:06 2003:

Re: 15 - or they could have just let the law of natural selection take its
course and left everyone else out of it.

#17 of 50 by other on Thu Jul 3 05:08:07 2003:

Yeah, but that would only select against people who play with people who 
have really bad aim...  (or really good aim...)

#18 of 50 by sabre on Sat Jul 5 13:36:38 2003:

I guess all you faggots can now legally buttfuck each other.

#19 of 50 by orinoco on Sat Jul 5 14:39:34 2003:

Hasn't buttfucking been legal for a while now in Michigan anyway?

#20 of 50 by jmsaul on Sat Jul 5 14:42:34 2003:

Technically, no.  Michigan has a law barring "the detestable crime against
nature" or something like that, which is usually understood to mean buggery.
They just haven't been prosecuting people for it.

We have a Blasphemy statute too.

#21 of 50 by drew on Sat Jul 5 17:05:27 2003:

I seem to remember reading in the handbook for a Michigan Con that the only
legal requirements for a sex partner were that they be at least 16 years old
and of ones own species.

#22 of 50 by remmers on Sat Jul 5 17:07:55 2003:

I can understand why a Con would be concerned about that, considering
the number of extraterrestrials who attend such things.

#23 of 50 by jazz on Sat Jul 5 17:45:14 2003:

        ... and furries.

#24 of 50 by jmsaul on Sat Jul 5 18:10:17 2003:

Re #21:  Don't take legal advice from SF convention committees.

Re #22-23:  Does make you wonder...

#25 of 50 by other on Sat Jul 5 18:18:48 2003:

My geek factor must be incredibly low...  I thought he was reading from a 
handbook for Michigan Convicts...

#26 of 50 by pvn on Sun Jul 6 04:50:54 2003:

Heh, me too.

#27 of 50 by gull on Mon Jul 7 15:19:10 2003:

Ngh.  This sort of thing is why I always resist friends' suggestions
that I attend any sort of sci-fi con.

#28 of 50 by tod on Mon Jul 7 17:12:15 2003:

This response has been erased.


#29 of 50 by gull on Mon Jul 7 18:19:49 2003:

Hell no.  Cons are the only places a lot of geeks can get laid.

#30 of 50 by tod on Mon Jul 7 18:31:18 2003:

This response has been erased.


#31 of 50 by jmsaul on Mon Jul 7 22:09:36 2003:

Re #27:  Don't take crap like that as an indication of what most attendees
         are like.

#32 of 50 by tod on Mon Jul 7 23:19:39 2003:

This response has been erased.


#33 of 50 by jmsaul on Mon Jul 7 23:35:52 2003:

Like with any group, there are dipshits and good people.

#34 of 50 by tod on Mon Jul 7 23:45:10 2003:

This response has been erased.


#35 of 50 by jmsaul on Tue Jul 8 00:49:50 2003:

Damn right.  And Todd, for that matter.

#36 of 50 by pvn on Tue Jul 8 07:21:29 2003:

I just finished _Snowcrash_.  Its pretty interesting considering it was
written like in the dark ages (1989?), like BI (Before Internet) - I
know, not really BI but pretty much.  I got the sense that about a third
of the way through the story the author was told to wrap it up, kill off
all the interesting characters except for the good guys and put it to
bed.  His second novel was better, longer, and only ended about half way
through.  (Cryptonomicon or something like that).  It'll be interesting
to see what comes next.  If the publishers are smart they will encourage
the author to write the prequels to the first and the sequels to both.

#37 of 50 by polytarp on Tue Jul 8 11:17:17 2003:

Those books suck.  I hate that guy who wrote them.

#38 of 50 by jazz on Tue Jul 8 14:44:39 2003:

        Snowcrash was written at the height of "the Movement", known popularly
as Cyberpunk, and was released in 1992, when the Internet existed, just wasn't
commercial.

#39 of 50 by janc on Tue Jul 8 16:44:34 2003:

Yeah, but at the time I thought of it as the first cyberpunk novel written
by anyone who actually knew anything about computers (I didn't discover
Vernor Vinge's "True Names" until later).  Gibson's vision of cyberspace never
seemed to connect to anything I knew about computers or the net.  It sounded
more like something invented by someone who had be running a lot of sound
boards at rock concerts.  Gibson's vision of cyberspace, while far from the
real net, seemed to me to have much more nearly the right feel.

#40 of 50 by jazz on Tue Jul 8 17:42:51 2003:

        Gibson's early works were written on a typewriter, and he had little
or no actual knowledge of the internet.  He later moved on to a Mac, and it
somewhat dulled his far-reaching fancies.

        Bruce Sterling was pretty literate at that time, though, and Rudy
Rucker was a comp sci professor.

#41 of 50 by scott on Tue Jul 8 17:51:09 2003:

I like Stephenson's work best, though.  He seems to do a really good job of
imagining a future greatly changed by technology, but with still-interesting
characters and social groups to populate that future.  "The Diamond Age" is
just brilliant that way.

#42 of 50 by jazz on Tue Jul 8 18:47:42 2003:

        I concur.  Sterling has an incredible grasp of politics and sociology,
but it leaves his writing dry and lifeless at times.  Gibson is a sublimely
visual writer, but in his longer works, that tendency leaves me with a better
picture of his characters than an understanding of them.  Stephenson's got
the most well-rounded talent, and if you take the time to research any of the
ideas he presents casually in his works, you'll find there's a wealth of
background which really exists.

#43 of 50 by russ on Tue Jul 8 21:38:50 2003:

Re #32:  Anyone who sees you there... is there too.

#44 of 50 by tod on Tue Jul 8 21:43:05 2003:

This response has been erased.


#45 of 50 by polygon on Wed Jul 9 00:39:08 2003:

"Snow Crash" is cyberpunk with a sense of humor.

#46 of 50 by pvn on Wed Jul 9 05:52:38 2003:

It is that.

#47 of 50 by russ on Wed Jul 9 22:48:33 2003:

Re #45:  Indeed.  I knew I was going to love it when I found out
that the lead character's name was "Hiro Protagonist".  It was a
fun read, and especially welcome given that I was waiting for
car repairs that weekend.

#48 of 50 by jazz on Thu Jul 10 00:43:48 2003:

        Trivia fact:  the first chapter(s) of Snow Crash were originally
written as a comic book, but Neal made a later decision to write everything
as a novel.

#49 of 50 by flem on Thu Jul 10 17:28:44 2003:

Ah, that explains it.  Both times I've read Snow Crash, I've noticed that I
like the style of the first chapter far more than that of the rest of the
book.

#50 of 50 by pvn on Sun Jul 13 05:38:25 2003:

Actually, it was supposed to be what we would know of today as
'multimedia' only the tech at the time wasn't up to it.

There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: