The Enemy of the Good (eideteker) wrote,
The Enemy of the Good
eideteker

  • Mood:
  • Music:

The Valentine's

Withe voice of Richard Pryor in my head. It might be fair to say he dictated this to me from beyond the grave, if by fair you mean drugged out and fucked up.

Today is Saint Valentine's Day. For those of you who aren't religious, Valentino was an Italian guy who, despite his penchant for romance (and, consequently, premarital sex), managed to get himself canonized as the patron saint of spending a lot of fucking money on perishable goods one day a year in a desperate, Hail Mary (that's where the sainthood comes in, I guess) pass at getting some pussy.

I know a lot of you are in relationships right now, and I'm not talking to you motherfuckers. Valentine's Day was contrived as a day not of celebrating your acquisition of pussy, but of professing your love for a particular pussy (or several pussies, for those of you fond of the shotgun technique) in the hopes of getting some. It's no coincidence St. Valentine was a dude; there's not a lot of ladies tonight who want sex that aren't getting it. There are going to be a lot of homely dudes spanking it tonight, but not so for the ladies. Because for the ladies, no matter how ugly you are, nor how petty, stupid, jealous, vindictive, vapid, greedy, lazy, superficial, shrewish, or crazy you are, there is someone out there willing to put up with your bullshit to get that pussy. There is someone willing to marry you and put up with you for every day of the rest of his life, until you aggravate him into the grave. Everybody knows women outlive men, and everybody knows why. It's an open secret. No, it's not even an open secret. It's scientific fact. Scientists have said men die sooner because they want to. Oh, sweet release. And that's going on my tombstone.

Men have no such luck. To keep a woman, a man's got to go out there every day and bust his hump, and she'll still find things to complain about. But you had better bring home a check if you want that pussy. And prostitution is illegal. Why? Because women have something called marriage. What is marriage? It is a monopoly, supported by our courts, on the pussy. Once you enter into this contract to give your money for the pussy, you can't get out of it without giving up half your shit. People are talking about a Gay Marriage Ammendment to the U.S. Constitution. And what they mean is an Anti-Gay-Marriage Ammendment. So I'm supporting a Marriage Ammendment, and by that, I mean an Anti-Marriage Ammendment. Not only would it prohibit future marriages, but it would dissolve the extant ones. All bets are off. Which is what a marriage is: a bet that you will get your money's worth out of that pussy before it degrades. And you know who will celebrate and support this ammendment? Feminists. Because if women ever want equality, they will have to end the commoditization of the pussy and deal with men one-to-one.

There are probably a lot of women out there gasping right now, horrified that they should release the monopoly on the pussy, and allow their men to sleep with whomever they want. And some women say: "But then he won't love me." No. You're equating love with sex. It's easy to do; we've been conditioned to do it. Sex is even called "making love." NO IT'S NOT. It's making sex. What's that old saying? You can't make love, you have to find it. It's not the Bride of Frankenstein, Pygmalion, or Weird Science. Love is where you find it.

But what about the family? The nuclear family is an illusion, a product of the Nuclear Age; propaganda used very successfully against the Soviet Union, and against the American People. Spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on metal and rocks does not a good husband make. If extramarital affairs are socially acceptible, guess what? You won't have to worry about your man sneaking around behind your back. But what about a man that doesn't take care of his children and neglects his family? You know what, that man would not have made a very good husband, either. We're in a free market economy, set up to reward the most competitive businesses; so why not in marriages? A marriage is a contract, not unlike a business charter; except that a business can have as many partners as it wants. Of course, most small businesses--I'm not talking large corporations like on the Fortune 500 or Enron or Worldcom-- realize that too many cooks spoil the broth. Smaller is more efficient and more manageable. So why not apply the free market to marriage? Have both partners work their hardest to maintain their competitive edge or risk losing their clientele. "Clientele" you say? "Like prostitution?" Were you even fucking paying attention earlier? When I said marriage was legally-sanctioned prostitution? What this means is you are not allowed to get fat, be lazy, stagnate, and become a blight on the face of the nation. You have to work hard to maintain and improve yourself, which will up the baseline for all of us. Rather than writing yourself off the day you're married, you have to do all the things you did to make yourself seem attractive beforehand; like taking classes, working out, complimenting each other, and such. This shit should all be automatic already, and yet there are people trapped in loveless, lifeless marriages. These people are DEAD and they are in HELL.

So that's it. Abolish marriage. Free these people from their chains. Those who are happy will stay together. No harm in that. But the deception will end. The games, the disingenuousness, the jealousy; oh, yes, the jealousy will end. You have no one to blame but yourself, man or woman, for not keeping your partner satisfied and their needs met. But the hegemony of monogamy will end. True love cannot be realized until it is freed from false constraints. Thank you, and enjoy your pussy tonight.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 17 comments