The gods of fashion

The gods of fashion speak every season.
They tell us what to wear and sometimes what not.
They help us craft artificial self-esteem:
we feel cool with ourselves
because we’re wearing that that they’ve prescribed for the day.
Declaring what to trend,
they ask us to sync with what’s trending
— feeding their fame and fortune.
But we have taken the red pill.

I still like my two-button, and not overly fitted, suits.
That one-button suits, with fitted fitting, are in now, will soon pass.
And for what? I would not try to tell.
We leave that for the gods of fashion.

Because their fashions are fickle, are the gods not fickle.
Trusted to be arbiters of style,
we give them power:
if we have to bother about how to wear ourselves
as they describe for winter, fall, spring, or summer.

You can’t beat the decent and the sensible, can you.
Principles the gods of fashion cannot overrule, by principle.
Some follow these, others try to redefine the fine.
Many claim a variable morality;
variable by the seasons, ‘artists’ whims, and volitional caprices.

Beauty makes sense.
And crazy isn’t beautiful.
It can’t be, by design.

Advertisements

The Democrats are good but…

The Democrats are openminded. And that’s good. But they’ve been so openminded that they’ve lost their brains enough times to cause serious concerns about their sanity and America’s future.

That’s why the Republicans might have the better following by truly free thinkers. And why they’re probably better for the United States in the long run. The republicans have their own madness, looking for that good place only found in God: life, liberty, and (the pursuit of) happiness. Democrats as the opposition sounds just right for them today.

When you see democrats act undemocratic, uncharacteristically unfriendly, near foolishly, and according to some mundane philosophy and a hatred of one. Should one not also again fear their reign?

If you can give solid foundations to at least one of these statements, then you must have a case to vote against.

Re-evaluate

Change your name

‘I love you’ rings in my head

Thinking of how many times I’ve heard them

Those words, they appear in me now and again

Whether you’re here or some where

‘I love you,’ rings in my head

You were in love with me yesterday

“What have you done to me”
I still remember those words
“I can’t get you out of my head”
You were so in love — with me

That you wanted me like I wanted you
Was a feeling of heaven in my world
That’s someone else’s heaven now
You were in love with me yesterday

“Knowing and doing are two different things, …”

“… especially when it comes to pleasure.” An ‘o so true’ statement by Levitt and Dubner in Superfreakonomics.

It got me thinking…

Knowing and doing are two different things, especially when it comes to [a] pleasure:

Have you ever known the pleasure of pride or ignorance, or of ‘happiness’ or an addiction, etc, to prevent some one (I, for instance) from seeing/following the ‘truth?’ Likely yes, at least on television.

Knowing and doing are two different things, especially when it comes to [a] pain:

Have you ever known the pain of future responsibility or success, or of failure or ridicule, or of losing a pleasure or a happiness, etc, to prevent some one (I, for imstance) from doing the ‘truth?’

Knowing and doing are two different things, especially when ….
[Complete the statement for you, then move—on/off—as you please.]

And you might find that knowing and doing are two different things, especially when it’s not inconvenient for them to be so.

So, if I want change, it would be helpful to make it inconvenient for knowing and doing to be different.

Contented

She has travelled wide
I’ve only lived in town
I’m happy for her
And me, contented

My car is old
And sometimes I walk
I am happy for the mechanic
And me, contented

My wife is awesome
She’s my wife
I am happy with her
Contented