I like cruis­ing down the dirt roads of the in­ter­net to see what pops up. Dead sites, delet­ed threads, ran­dom things from the Internet Archive and some­how by do­ing this I end­ed up on a zed-list celebri­ty gos­sip site that had pa­parazzi pic­tures of Britney Spears no-no spot. In an in­ter­est­ing bi­fur­ca­tion of thought I clicked on the link. I didn’t re­al­ly want to see it, but I was in­ter­est­ed in what all the fuss was about. It looked like any oth­er no-no spot. What was more in­ter­est­ing to me was the c-sec­tion scar.

In any case, there is this preva­lent fas­ci­na­tion with what cer­tain celebri­ties look like with the wrinkly bits vis­i­ble. Almost as if, since they have celebri­ty, their junk must look or some­how be bet­ter than some­one elses. It is self-con­scious­ly chuck­le-dumb. Everybody has the same bits, more or less, so pay­ing at­ten­tion to per­son­al­i­ty, fo­cus and wis­dom should be the main swing of things. Except it’s eas­i­er to let the lizard hind-brain do the think­ing, es­pe­cial­ly when teh in­ter­nets are in­volved.

One thought on “Detour

  1. Check the Kama Sutra. It states that not every­body has the same ‘junk’ but that there are three types of both the male and the fe­male ‘no-no spots’. These are dif­fer­en­ti­at­ed, in­ter­est­ing­ly, by size — even the fe­male. The book states that the most per­fect of unions are those whose size match­es.

    While I will in no way dis­agree with your the­sis here, I will ad­vo­cate that we can’t sim­ply strive to ap­pease the high­er brain func­tions. I mean, I like wit­ty satire, a good turn of phrase or play on words, but a good prat­fall works re­al­ly well too, you know? The lizard-mind must al­so be sat­ed.

Comments are closed.