Up Front by Emma Hart

Read Post

Up Front: Take Strictly, as Directed

154 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last

  • Stewart,

    And there was me thinking "Oh, a tiger-skin rug in the bedroom - that's nice".

    Te Ika A Maui - Whakatane… • Since Oct 2008 • 577 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    And yeah, I've heard a variation of this one, which is that the reason men feel sleepy after orgasm and women don't is so that when the tiger comes along, it gets to eat the now-useless man, while the woman, carrying the genetic future of her species, gets to run away.

    Bitch could have woken me up before she buggered off. Lost half me leg!

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    Bitch could have woken me up before she buggered off. Lost half me leg!

    Oh, yeah, we appreciate your valiant sacrifices and what-not.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Stewart,

    Kyle, she's lying about the valiant sacrifices; it's only your what-not that is appreciated by teh wimminz .

    Te Ika A Maui - Whakatane… • Since Oct 2008 • 577 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Oh yes, we're big on the "leg half full" approach to life.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19688 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Valiant sacrifice is when you give up your car for a more responsible ride, innit?

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19688 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    Valiant sacrifice is when you give up your car for a more responsible ride, innit?

    Ba-doom-tish. Also, true in my family. Though a 'family car' (insert appropriate sneering tone) is anything with a back seat.

    it's only your what-not that is appreciated by teh wimminz .

    I need something to put my knick-knacks on! (This is one of those moments when I wonder if I've made a joke only Danielle will get.)

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    I am not fussy about daleks..

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19688 posts Report Reply

  • Kong,

    I'm more curious about an evolutionary explanation of fake orgasms. It's something I've only done once, but I was wearing a condom so we're in an evolution free zone there.

    Since Jul 2009 • 89 posts Report Reply

  • JackElder,

    There isn't an evolutionary explanation for everything. Sometimes stuff just happens.

    We're a very explanation-centric species, though. People like identifying patterns, like "knowing how it works", because if you can understand something you've got a bit of power over it. The notion that sometimes stuff just happens is pretty frightening for a lot of people.

    Wellington • Since Mar 2008 • 708 posts Report Reply

  • Kong,

    It's pretty rational really. An explanation is better than no explanation. Even a wrong explanation. You can move forward from a wrong explanation to a less wrong one, because an explanation can be tested. A failure or refusal to explain can't, and gives no way forward.

    Of course in moving forward, a lot of damage can be caused using the wrong explanation as if it were certainly true. All of our explanations are hypotheses at best (except perhaps in maths and logic).

    That's why we act as though our scientists really understand the universe, when history suggests on past performance that they are only less wrong about it.

    Since Jul 2009 • 89 posts Report Reply

  • Kong,

    I should probably temper that statement by saying that an explanation that can't be tested also gives no way forward. Which, in a funny way, is exactly the case for most evolutionary explanations.

    Since Jul 2009 • 89 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    I am not fussy about daleks..

    Which is a dubious opening to Larry Niven's Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex - or, getting jiggy with the Last Son of Krypton could be injurious to your health.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Craig, that qualifies as a theory whose testing is unlikely to receive ethical aproval.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19688 posts Report Reply

  • tussock,

    That's why we act as though our scientists really understand the universe, when history suggests on past performance that they are only less wrong about it.

    Meh, not really. For a good few hundred years now each "wrong" has been more accurately described as "incomplete". Sometimes the bit you don't know yet is important (some radiation is bad for people), but usually what you do know works perfectly well whenever it matters (and when it doesn't, you go find the next part of the puzzle).

    Science is usually pretty good with the error bars too, even if ordinary folk don't seem to understand what "95% likely to be this bad or worse" really means when the error bars are that big.


    And then, of course, people do misapply science, even scientists outside their own field, and some people are just dicks, but science in general is pretty damned hot at being right.

    Since Nov 2006 • 608 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    science in general is pretty damned hot at being right.

    I think this is the phrase you're looking for.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Kong,

    science in general is pretty damned hot at being right

    Best thing we've ever come up with for discovering truths about the world.

    Meh, not really. For a good few hundred years now each "wrong" has been more accurately described as "incomplete".

    So before Darwin, Western ideas about the Creation were just "incomplete"? I suggest they were both completely different and a lot more wrong.

    I'm sure refinement of error is probably the most common scientific process. But every now and then there is a revolution, in which most of the ideas we had before about something are turned right upside down. When two opposing ideas are contrary, then they can't both be right, so at least one must be wrong. Since these revolutions continue to happen, I favor the view that they are probably both wrong, but one is 'less wrong', than another. By that I mean it may have more explanatory power or more accuracy, and there are other criteria that could apply. Even if a scientific theory is completely and totally true, we could never really be sure of that.

    This might seem like splitting hairs, but it isn't. There is a very dangerous tendency when you think you are right about something, or only out by some error margin that you think you can predict. That tendency is to close out new ideas, and if anything is anathema to science, that is. It is particularly dangerous if you are talking about science you don't really understand, where you are merely reporting on the authority of others. Which is actually most science, since it is a vast field, and most people are not scientists (in the sense of calling science their job).

    Since Jul 2009 • 89 posts Report Reply

  • JackElder,

    Actually, if anyone wants a decent dose of endorphins, actual pain, and physical exertion, I'd highly recommend long distance cycling. After the first 150k you get very relaxed about pretty much everything, I find.

    Wellington • Since Mar 2008 • 708 posts Report Reply

  • Kong,

    Those endorphins must be good shit to put up with all that.

    Since Jul 2009 • 89 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    Those endorphins must be good shit to put up with all that.

    Too right they are. I find now that I get definite endorphin lows on days when I don't ride or run.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1609 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    Too right they are. I find now that I get definite endorphin lows on days when I don't ride or run.

    I now feel that I should start a campaign to make this problem a health issue, rather than a legal one. Norml will help kick it off.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Kong,

    Norml's advice: Endorphins should be used in moderation. Try to have some days when you don't have any at all. Overdoses are very rare, it is much more common to pass out before a fatal dose can be reached, but combining endorphins with other substances may increase the effect. Do not drive or operate heavy machinery whilst under the influence. Try to use them in company you know and trust. If it's not fun any more, stop.

    Since Jul 2009 • 89 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Williams,

    My tattooist of choice is a half hour drive away, so I get the fun experience of driving home through rush hour traffic afterwards.

    Jack (and TracyMac), so reading your discussion, shoulder and outside bicep are tolerable and possibly pleasurable for newbees to tattoos? Any recommendations for artists in Akl? What's the consensus on pain of line-work vs. colouring?

    PAS, I've missed you all and I recently started a new job in an open plan setting... first time in something like 12 years... I've not yet worked out the culture of "my online time".

    Sydney • Since Nov 2006 • 2273 posts Report Reply

  • stephen walker,

    hope the new job's going well Paul.
    don't worry, some of us are active well after all those nyzilndz are into the zzzzzzz...

    nagano • Since Nov 2006 • 645 posts Report Reply

  • JackElder,

    Jack (and TracyMac), so reading your discussion, shoulder and outside bicep are tolerable and possibly pleasurable for newbees to tattoos? Any recommendations for artists in Akl? What's the consensus on pain of line-work vs. colouring?

    I wouldn't go as far as pleasurable, but the outside bicep was certainly a relatively easy spot. Plus, it's easy to both conceal or reveal, and it's a pretty traditional spot for your first ink. In general, I found that the closer to the underside of the arm, the more it hurt. But, y'know, the pain's pretty temporary, the ink's permanent. Also, everyone experiences pain differently - I've had friends who said that their ink didn't hurt at all, while the best I've got to was "only somewhat painful".

    In general, line work is more painful - it uses a smaller needle cluster, so it feels more focussed. Shading/fill is usually a bit easier.

    Artist recommendations: depends on what sort of tat you want. Most artists specialise in a particular style, so knowing what you want is a good step. I highly recommend going to see their studio and looking through their portfolios, to check their previous work. Plus it can give you a good hint on whether you actually get on with the artist (more important than it sounds). Expect to have to book a couple of months in advance (could be worse - Paul Booth apparently has a 2-year waiting list for his work).

    In Auckland, Sacred Tattoo has a very good rep. They tend to do more old school stuff than I like, but they have a good reputation for turning their hand to things. But if you're in Auckland in November, it might be worth popping in to the Auckland Tattoo Convention on the 14/15th Nov at the Viaduct Harbour boat sheds. Lots of artists from around the world, including a number from NZ/Aus - a good way to get a taster of the styles of things available, chat to a few artists and collectors (trust me, most people react well to "man, that's a great tattoo - can you tell me who did it?", which is a great way to find out who does the sort of stuff you're interested in) and generally see what's out there and what you can get.

    Wellington • Since Mar 2008 • 708 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.