Sometimes Sharing is Not Caring

Sharing is Caring?

Lots of people sext these days. Many do it as a naughty spice up. Nothing wrong with that. Sex is a basic human need like food and water. If you eat the same vanilla-flavored food every day you get sick of it pretty quick. The photos usually go back and forth and no one is the wiser. Easy peasy. Sometimes they go awry which embarrasses some and creates new careers for others (Yes Kim Kardashian, I’m talkin’ about you.), go figure.

But sometimes hitting the share button is intentional. One party knows and the other doesn’t. The conventional wisdom is this is a disgusting cadish male trait for which the boyfriend deserves evisceration. But apparently there are some women out there who enjoy the titillation (pun intended) of sharing the pics with friends.

Hmm.

“Laurie” says she’s “awfully proud of her husband’s package”, inordinately so. She started sharing pics of her hubby’s Johnson in a Facebook group comprised women who are close and share, or over-share, as the case may be. The ladies loved it like an out of control bachelorette party. The show and tell climaxed (another intended pun) with the Full Monty. Penetration. Photos of it all. The only problem is hubby doesn’t know wifey is sharing him on her electronic “coffee dates with her girlfriends.” Besides, the other women share in the Facebookery too. Laurie said she’d be OK if her hubby shared his with friends. I guess turn about is fair play as long as you don’t bend over to pick up the flogger.

After all, sharing is caring.

Now if everyone consented to the arrangement it’s no problem. Whatever blows your skirt off as they say. But hubby didn’t get a vote. Maybe he’s a little self-conscious about the Little General. Perhaps he abruptly bends into an attack on the right flank instead of attacking the front lines head-on. Maybe hubs has unsightly pimples on his ass. Maybe he’d shrink like a member of the Polar Bear Club on an annual swim if he knew. The point is he didn’t get a say in the matter, even if wifey thinks he’d stand to attention and be as “awfully proud of his package” as she is.

Exhibitionism aside, isn’t this where sharing may not be caring? Doesn’t it signify a bit of an issue with basic candor, truthfulness, even intimacy of the non-sexual kind? What if he’d freely bandied her furry fetish about to his buddies? I’d think even for her showing pics of her in a sexy raccoon costume might not be the best decision he ever made. I’d also think most women would be pissed about it, especially ones with a golden shower fetish.

I’m not a moral monkey and I’m usually OK with whatever people do short of hurting children, small animals, or unnecessarily scaring the bejeebers out of fundies by doing it on their front porch – though I suspect Rick Santorum might secretly like that last one. Who knows, I might even find my hidden 49 shades of grey…as long as I get to vote on the show-off ticket and maybe take care of those pimples before the big show. After all, I am middle-aged.

So what’s the verdict? Ask or not ask? Rip down the curtain or pay no attention to the man behind it?

It’s time to care to share.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Creating Jobs in the Booming Corporate Executive Sector

An industrial bonus

High ticket CEOs often complain those who object to their squeezing blood out of the nation turnip for their personal gain are simply jealous. I suppose that is true in many cases, but even if people are jealous it is understandable. It’s hard not to be jealous when the mortgage company is kicking your family to the curb – just as the CEO buys a multi-million dollar summer “cottage” in Aspen. But there are others, and I am one, who object on business grounds.

Much of the CEO’s “compensation” comes from companies that take the concept of corporations-as-people far past any original intent. Under the CEO’s direction, corporations reap record-breaking profits, even in recessions that crush those who buy their products or citizens that pay hefty taxes (which captains of industry caterwhal are breaking America’s back) to fund the profits through not insubstantial corporate welfare.

For all the talk about the value of small business, we could fund thousands of small businesses for years just on what a single multi-national gets in tax breaks in a single quarter. It’s a vicious cycle – multi-nationals take billions in taxes from just-plain-citizens to prop up corporate values to pay hefty dividends and fund expensive lobbying efforts to continue getting our money from the people who don’t live tax-free. In turn, CEOs get massive compensation to hire lawyers and accountants to make sure they get their money as tax-free as possible, and so on. This is not robbing Peter to pay Paul. This is robbing Peter and then complaining Paul wasn’t carrying enough cash for Paul to steal.

Continue reading

Christmas Wars: And Now, the Rest of the Story

Christmas Nativity Scene

Disclaimer: I’m an atheist who has nothing major against non-secularists. But sometimes this whole Christmas War nonsense is more tiring than Black Friday sales. Sigh.


 

“…and now, the reeesstt of the story,” as newscaster Paul Harvey used to say. For the past few years Paul’s pithy prose describes something we should all remember when it comes to the infamous Christmas Wars – look at the other side.

The latest battle has been fought before, yet it never seems to die. Christian organizations in Santa Monica, CA won’t be able to place their annual 14-scene Christmas nativity decorations in the city park and they’re miffed.  The Washington Post headlined the story this way, Atheists’ move halts Christmas tradition in Santa Monica, churches go to court to get it back.

Continue reading