Monthly Archives: September 2016

September 30, 2016 · 6:54 am

CONFIRMED: Wonder Woman is “Queer”

In my limited experiences in this wonderfully imperfect world we live in, one of the most infuriating retorts is the horrendously overused, “Better late than never.” Every time I hear someone say that, I want rip my ears off punch the nearest brick wall. I’ve said it myself and I want to punch myself whenever it comes out of my mouth.

That said, there are some circumstances where this annoying phrase applies. It’s very true that good things are worth waiting for. Whether it’s a pizza, a cookie, or a lap dance at a strip club, the wait and anticipation can make the end result more satisfying.

Well, some things are just so damn late that you stopped giving a shit years ago. It becomes one of those unspoken taboos, like asking someone about a tattoo they regret or an oddly shaped scar on your ass. Even so, it’s still satisfying on some levels when someone finally gets around to finishing something that should’ve been finished.

Today is one of those days. Today, DC Comics finally came clean about one of the worst kept secrets in all of comics. That’s right. They admitted that Wonder Woman is “queer.”

Newsarama: Is Wonder Woman Queer? “Obviously yes,” says Rucka

Let that sink in for a moment. One of the most iconic superheroes of all time, and definitely one of the most iconic female superheroes of all time, is not entirely heterosexual. For most people in 2016, who have already seen same-sex marriage legalized and major gay actors become successful, this is barely worth a raised eyebrow. For noted comic book fans (and romance/erotica fans) like myself, it’s a big fucking deal.

Now I’ve talked about Wonder Woman before on this blog. I’ve explored the hidden BDSM elements of her origins and the unorthodox ideas championed by her creator, William Marston. By and large, these elements were ignored or outright nullified by DC Comics. It wasn’t until recently with the release of Wonder Woman: Earth One that these elements were finally revisited.

As a result, this created kind of a problem for Wonder Woman and by “kind of,” I mean “are you fucking kidding me?” After Marston, DC Comics took Wonder Woman down a very different path. They completely and utterly removed sexuality from her character. Yes, she was a woman. Yes, she was a beautiful woman by almost any standard. However, her sexuality could only ever be assumed and never explored.

This is a problem and not just because it allows fanboys on message boards to ascribe every kind of perverse proclivity to Wonder Woman and believe me, they are pretty damn perverse. The problem is that it removes a critical element from Wonder Woman’s character while sending a terrible message about female characters in general, albeit indirectly.

For most of her history (a good chunk of which was spent distancing her from her BDSM origins), Wonder Woman has been conveyed as a badass female warrior. Now there’s nothing wrong with that in the slightest. There’s definitely a place for badass female warriors in our culture. Woman can, and do, kick ass. They’ve kicked plenty of ass throughout history and that should be celebrated.

The problem with Wonder Woman, as she was developed for most of the 20th century, was that being a badass female warrior meant effectively nullifying her sexuality. That’s not to say she was completely asexual. She did have love interests, the most famous being Steve Trevor.

However, this relationship never developed into the kind of epic love story that other male superheroes enjoyed. Superman got to have a relationship with Lois Lane. Reed Richards got to have a relationship with Sue Storm. Spider-Man got to have a relationship with Gwen Stacy, Mary Jane Watson, the Black Cat, and a whole host of other women that would probably qualify him as a man-whore.

For Wonder Woman, though, Steve Trevor has rarely been more than a supporting character. They were never really that intimate. Most of Wonder Woman’s story focused on making her this badass warrior who could hold her own with Superman, Batman, and the rest of the Justice League. So it’s not right to say that Steve Trevor got relegated to the Friend-Zone, but he did get grossly overshadowed.

That’s not to say she didn’t have actual, functioning, intimate relationships with men. For a brief time between 2011 and 2016, Wonder Woman was in a relationship with Superman. It was a pretty serious relationship too. This was a time when he wasn’t with Lois Lane and she had a different role in the comics, but it was as serious a relationship as Wonder Woman has ever had.

It was one of the few times when DC Comics even acknowledged that Wonder Woman had a desire for intimacy. They never show them naked in bed or anything, but they do heavily imply that Superman and Wonder Woman engage in a little super sex. I’ll leave readers to fantasize about what that entails.

Admit it. You’re curious and intrigued by the idea of these two getting frisky. I know I’ve thought about it. Then again, I’ve thought about a lot of crazy sexual things in my life. That actually makes DC’s efforts to limit Wonder Woman’s sexuality all the more egregious.

It’s hard enough that DC goes out of its way to avoid sexual issues with Wonder Woman. They’ll let her get romantic with someone. They’ll even let her get intimate. However, they don’t dare dig a little deeper, as though a woman who grew up on an island of women would be a perfectly functional heterosexual woman.

This is where the context of this news gets pretty asinine. On top of all the taboos surrounding Wonder Woman’s sexuality, there’s the not-so-minor detail of Wonder Woman growing up on an island full of immortal women. Despite every effort by prudish comic creators who wanted Wonder Woman to be a kid-friendly superhero and not a gay icon, there’s only so much anyone can do to avoid the implications.

On an island populated only with women, do they all become lesbians? Do they all become bisexual? These are all questions that DC Comics was all too happy to leave unanswered. They had to know that generations of fans would assume that there would be a lesbian orgy on this island every now and then. It just took them until 2016 to actually acknowledge the possibility.

Greg Rucka, the current writer on the Wonder Woman comic and an accomplished comic book writer in his own right, finally ended DC’s silence. He didn’t put it in terms best reserved for an issue of Hustler, but he does finally put a dent in this old, outdated taboo.

“And when you start to think about giving the concept of Themyscira its due, the answer is, ‘How can they not all be in same sex relationships?’ Right? It makes no logical sense otherwise,” he continued. “But an Amazon doesn’t look at another Amazon and say, ‘You’re gay.’ They don’t. The concept doesn’t exist. Now, are we saying Diana has been in love and had relationships with other women? As [artist] Nicola [Scott] and I approach it, the answer is obviously yes.”

It’s painfully true, albeit in a sexy sort of way. Wonder Woman comes from an exotic culture of warrior women, gods, and demigods. Naturally, her approach to sex and her understanding of what means to be gay, straight, or bisexual will be very different.

We need only look at the matriarchal societies in the real world to see just how different our assumptions can be on matters of sex and intimacy. Why should Wonder Woman’s situation be any different? It shouldn’t.

It’s 2016. We have same-sex marriage, gender-neutral bathrooms, and enough lesbian porn to build a small island in the Pacific. The news that Wonder Woman isn’t entirely straight shouldn’t be an issue. It also shouldn’t have taken this long to come out, but better late than never, right?

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go punch myself for saying that.

2 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 29, 2016 · 6:32 am

Sex-Positive vs. Sex-Negative Feminism

I know I keep saying I don’t like talking about feminism. I know I make it a point to belabor that concept way more than I should. Well, it still needs to be belabored.

It still needs to be emphasized too because I really don’t want to get too deep into this issue. It’s only going to distract from the larger purpose of this blog, which is to get people interested in issues that will make them inclined to by more romance/erotica novels, hopefully the ones I write.

Well, as much as I don’t want to talk about this, there still a few more things that I feel need to be said. Then, we can get back to talking about more interesting topics, like the several different kinds of orgasms. Again, if this is the kind of discussion that makes you want to punch your computer screen, you may want to skip this article and Google “cute baby pigs” to cheer yourself up. Here, I’ll even help.

Still with me? Did the cute baby pigs help? If not, then I’ve done all I can. It’s up to you to brace yourself from here on out because I am going to talk about feminism again. I want to get this over with as much as you so let’s do this.

I didn’t originally intend to write another post on feminism, but during my research (which is basically nothing more than multiple Google searches) for my article on sexual objectification, I came across an issue that ties in closely with this concept. It’s an issue that highlights an ongoing struggle within feminism that, at least from the perspective of a straight male who writes romance/erotica, is a major source of division and disdain among those in this field.

A big part of the issues the surrounding sexual objectification of women in movies, TV, and video games comes from these sets of assumptions that certain feminists hold regarding female sexuality. These assumptions include esoteric concepts like “rape culture” and “male gaze.” I won’t discuss these concepts at great length, if only because they require even more assumptions than I can reasonably make for this discussion.

However, these assumptions are at the core of a larger conflict. That conflict is between feminists who consider themselves sex-positive and those who are more sex-negative, who are often referred to as radical feminists. It’s not an irrelevant conflict. Sex is pretty damn important in any issue that involves either gender. As an aspiring romance/erotica writer, I know how important it is.

In that sense, it’s completely understandable that there would be disagreements among feminists about how to handle sex. Hell, there are disagreements among men about how to handle sex, but it’s more likely to involve whether breasts or butts are sexier. With women, there are more issues at play here and these are issues wholly unique to women.

As a man, I really can’t contribute much. As I’ve said before, I believe that women’s issues are best handled by women and men like me have next to nothing to contribute. However, since men have sex too and it is kind of important to us, I feel like I can add at least something to this conversation. I’ll just try my best to be polite and thoughtful about it.

First, here’s a little background on the conflict. Back in the 1970s, a time when wearing bell-bottoms wouldn’t earn you awkward glares, the emerging feminist movement developed some radical elements, as all movements do. Just look at recent trends in boy bands for proof of that.

Within these radical strains of feminism, this extreme ideology developed on issues involving pornography, prostitution, and marriage. These strains saw all these things as inherent evils of a patriarchal, white heterosexual male dominated society that must be destroyed, outlawed, or overthrown. Pretty much anything men deemed sexy was considered wrong. Even by non-patriarchal standards, it’s pretty extreme.

In response to these radical strains, which also created some nasty PR for those who didn’t want to live in world devoid of sexiness, a different strain of feminism emerged. This was sex-positive feminism and, as the name implies, they had a much more positive view about sexy issues.

That’s not to say they didn’t oppose certain patriarchal traditions. They most certainly did. However, they did not agree with their radical counterparts that the world needed to be devoid of pornography, prostitutes, and sexy Super Bowl ads. A society like that isn’t very free or just. Look at Saudi Arabia for proof of that.

It’s an entirely reasonable response. It happens in every movement that gets too radical. One part goes too far so another has to emerge to counter it. It’s like a house party that’s starting to get out of hand. Someone needs to step in before they burn the whole house down.

This debate between sex-positive feminism and radical feminism remains unresolved and will probably never be resolved. As is often the case with ideology, be it feminism or opinions on a message board, people are fairly entrenched in their beliefs.

They will not, and in some cases cannot, change their minds on an issue until there is a clear benefit to doing so. I’m not going to try to change anyone’s mind with this post. I know I’ll fail. Instead, I’m going to try and assess this conflict within a proper context.

Since the issue of sexual objectification was the catalyst for this post, I’ll use this to help make my point. There are cases when women (and men to some extent) are overly objectified and exploited. Slavery, forced labor, and forced prostitution reduce women and men to glorified slabs of meat whose thoughts and feelings have the same value as a dead fly. Those are crimes. Those should be fought.

However, the picture of a sexy woman in lingerie or a man in tighty-whitties should not be lumped into the same category. The same goes for the porn we consume and the romance/erotica that guys like me write. We can, and sometimes do, sexualize things to an extent that sends a bad message.

Nobody should assume that a shampoo endorsed by Jennifer Lawrence is going to make someone as beautiful as she is. Nobody should assume that a diet pill endorsed by David Beckham is going to make them as fit as he is. Nobody should assume they can fuck like porn stars after watching a few hours of porn. This is that obscure gray area where we, as a society, have to inform one another that the real world still exists.

Yeah, it sucks. It has limits. Some of us are incapable of exceeding those limits while others have more opportunities than they deserve. However, that doesn’t mean that we should obsess over making sure nothing is sexually objectifying to anyone. That’s not possible. Human beings are sexual creatures. We are going to see our media and each other through a sexual lens. It’s just how we’re wired. It’s part of what makes us human.

This is where the radical feminists get too radical and where the radical Men’s Right’s Activists follow suit. In this extreme context, a few stains on a couple shirts warrants throwing out an entire wardrobe. One crack in a single window warrants demolishing the entire building. Can you see why that approach is problematic, not to mention needlessly destructive?

It already manifests in ways that are disingenuous to women and men alike. Recently, Playboy magazine featured its first Muslim woman wearing a hijab. Naturally, it’s going to generate plenty of criticism from a population of religious zealots who think their god wants women to be glorified pets/baby-makers. However, even some women got worked up over this.

One of them was a blogger named Nishaat Ismail. In many respects, she takes on the radical feminist ideology that all sexual media is inherently exploitative towards women. Considering that many Islamic countries continue traditions that are grossly exploitative towards women, it’s pretty ironic. Look up “honor killings” for proof of that.

It is a twisted form of irony that radical feminists would share the same sentiment as religious zealots, who would prefer to see women subjugated and censored in a way that even Christian Grey would find excessive. Ms. Ismail did try to make her criticism sound reasonable though, but the irony is still there.

Blogger Nishaat Ismail also questioned in an opinion column the wisdom of Tagouri associating with an institution “based on the objectification of women.”

“Are the voices of women — and in particular Muslim women — buried so deep under the cries of those who claim to speak on our behalf that our only available response is (to) involve ourselves with Playboy, a magazine that has solely existed for the past 63 years for men to gawp at the bodies of half-naked women?” wrote Nishaat.

“Is this really how we reclaim our own narrative?”

I can actually answer that to some degrees. Yes, it’s part of how you reclaim your own narrative. You’re a woman. You’re a human being. Humans are sexual creatures. So why suppress what you are? Celebrate it!

There are flaws in our society and some of those flaws dis-proportionally affect women. There’s no doubt about that. We live in an imperfect society full of imperfect people. That’s why it’s important to keep making improvements every step of the way.

This is why, in the grand scheme of things, sex-positive feminism is more conducive to the human condition. It acknowledges that women are sexual creatures too. It acknowledges that women can enjoy sex just as much as men and why shouldn’t they? It’s something that gives pleasure to both genders when done right. It literally brings us together in a deeply intimate way and that’s definitely a positive.

32 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

September 28, 2016 · 6:51 am

Re-Objectifying The Concept of Objectification (Including the Sexual Kind)

Picture, for a moment, the following scenario. A man and a woman are sitting on a couch watching a movie. Since every movie outside of gay porn is supposed to include an attractive woman, a scene comes along where the cameras emphasize just how attractive she is. Sometimes it’s a body double. Sometimes it’s Photoshopped. The brains and genitalia of men don’t care. It often leads to a conversation like this.

Man: Wow. That woman is pretty damn hot!

Woman: Yeah, I can see why you’d think that.

Pretty mundane, right? How many people have had that exact conversation with only a slight variation in the verbiage? Hell, I’ve heard my own parents have this conversation. It’s not awkward, nor should it be. When something or someone shows up on a screen and we find it attractive, it tends to start a conversation.

That scenario is not an issue. It probably happens, in some form or another, on a daily basis. Now, let’s picture another scenario. It’s the same scene. A man and a woman are watching a movie. Right on cue, the attractive woman shows up. Then this conversation happens.

Man: Wow. That woman is pretty damn hot!

Woman: How dare you think that way! You’re objectifying that woman! You’re a disgusting excuse of a man! You should be harassed, denigrated, and shamed! You are contributing to the sick and disgusting culture of rape and patriarchy that has disenfranchised women for centuries! If you had any decency, you’d apologize to all women and kill yourself!

It’s hard to really assess all the issues with this scenario. I think Ron Burgundy said it best.

Now I don’t claim that this kind of conversation happens all the time. I’m sure it has manifested in some form, if not among feminist circles, then definitely in blind dates that go horribly wrong. No matter what form it takes, it’s a growing part of our culture, specifically the growing tumor that is politically correct culture.

I’ve talked about feminism before on this blog and I always feel like I have to walk over a pile of broken glass before I get to the issues. I don’t expect this to be different.

I know without a doubt that I’m going to offend some people with what I say here. I know there are some people, male and female, who will never be convinced that they’re wrong about anything. So long as we don’t elect these people to public office, I’m okay with that. I want this post to be thought-provoking and informative to those who are actually open it.

With that said, I’m going to put on my politically correct flak jacket and talk about sexual objectification. I’m bracing myself as much as I can, but I guess this is one case where being a no-name aspiring erotica/romance writer works to my advantage. Not enough people give a shit about who I am or what I say to whine so I guess I don’t have to brace for much.

Even so, I know this is a sensitive issue. It also relates closely to my recent posts on body shaming. My position on this issue isn’t a popular one. I understand that. I try to see it in the context of the real world that functions on the functionally flawed processes of human biology. In politically correct crowds, who think reality can be muted, this is a big no-no.

In these crowds, objectification (especially the sexual kind that emphasizes women) is right up there with animal cruelty, slavery, and poor wifi in terms of evil. Say the word “sexual objectification” in an overly PC crowd and you’ll send most of them into a rage that rivals that of the Incredible Hulk. As a noted comic book fan, I can say that even the Hulk would be taken aback by the anger that this concept evokes.

So what the hell is sexual objectification anyways? Well, the fine folks at Wikipedia define it as follows:

Sexual objectification is the act of treating a person as an instrument of sexual pleasure. Objectification more broadly means treating a person as a commodity or an object without regard to their personality or dignity. Objectification is most commonly examined at the level of a society, but can also refer to the behavior of individuals.

That’s fairly reasonable. I think most people would agree with it. On the surface, it really doesn’t sound like a good thing. Reducing a human being to the same status of a used dildo or semen-encrusted sock just feels wrong. Ask radical feminists and overtly PC folks and they’ll say that’s what happens whenever there’s a pretty girl in a movie, comic book, or video game.

They’ll even take it 10 steps further than any reasonable person should. They’ll claim that the mere presence of a woman with attractive features, be they big breasts or hourglass figures or shapely butts, contributes to rape culture and the denigration of women. They’ll argue that just seeing these images is enough to make men feel like harassing and degrading women is okay.

Anyone know this woman? Also known as the most hated woman on the internet?

I won’t say her name. I refuse to give her more attention that she deserves and she already gets way more than she should. She is just one of many in the overly PC/radical feminist crowd that go out of their way to look for something to get offended over. Then, for some reason, they’re surprised when people call bullshit.

People like this, male or female, don’t deserve to be taken seriously. They are ill in the sense that they’re addicted to the attention and the money/fame/legal protections that come with it. There’s nothing valid or honest about it whatsoever and it contributes nothing to this issue.

So if we’re going to ignore these people (and they deserve to be ignored), what is the true context of sexual objectification? How serious is it? Has the bombardment of Victoria’s Secret ads and Nikki Manaj videos made the world more dangerous for women?

Well, believe it or not (and PC/radical feminist types usually don’t), we have data on this issue. According to the US Department of Justice Statistics, there has been little to no change in the rates of rape, sexual assault, or domestic violence over the past 10 years. During that time, everything from internet porn to Megan Fox movies have come out and spread, but they all failed to turn society into a smoldering pool of misogyny.

Shocked? You probably shouldn’t be. Those same statistics show that crime as a whole is going down. People today, men and women alike, are far less violent than they were 50 years ago. So either we’re learning to get along or patriarchal media conspiracies are woefully inept. I like to be optimistic about the progress of humanity, but that tends to get me into trouble.

That’s not to say that objectification isn’t a relevant issue. It is. However, I think our approach to sexual objectification is a bigger problem than the objectification itself. There’s no question that we should prosecute crimes against women to the fullest extent of the law. There is a question, though, on the full context of objectification.

Last year, Alexia LaFata wrote an article for Elite Daily explaining “Why it’s Completely Okay To Objectify Men…No Really, It Is.” With a title like that, it’s safe to assume that the context is going to be horribly misconstrued. She ends up validating those assumptions with quotes like this:

Well, I hate to silence straight white males again (I know you guys have been getting a lot of flak from me for merely existing lately), but until you live in a world in which your objectification leads to excessive victim-blaming, unwelcome catcalling, mortifyingly high rates of sexual assault and rape and having your value in society based exclusively on what you look like, I will continue to exercise my God-given right to objectify you.

Offended yet? I doubt it. I’ve seen worse on a Harry Potter message board. That said, there is something very flawed about this sentiment. For one, it’s an excuse, not a reason. Reasons have logic and facts behind them. Excuses are just the less stinky, overtly contrived shit we pull out of our asses to justify something that’s too hard to justify with facts.

It is a double standard, plain and simple. Ms. LaFata doesn’t even hide from that. However, double standards rarely have a basis in reality or morality, for that matter. They’re just elaborate excuses. Men look for ways to justify how they feel about women, even if those ways are bullshit. Women can do the same for men. The bullshit stinks just as much.

Moreover, and this is the point that Ms. LaFata avoids completely, it ignores the one important fact that completely undermines the politically correct approach to sexual objectification. Brace yourselves because this is going to send everyone crying to their safe space.

Men and women are just wired differently.

I’ll give the radical PC crowd a moment to stop gasping. Once again, reality doesn’t give a shit about your excuses. It’s sticks to the crude, but effective forces of biology. Unfortunately for the PC crowd, that biology doesn’t agree with them.

According to a 2013 study, men are more significantly aroused by visual stimulus than women. When measuring their state of arousal, they responded much more to what they saw whereas women’s responses were more complex and varied. That’s not to say that men are solely aroused by sight, but it is more pronounced.

With this in mind, the use of beautiful women in movies, TV, and video games makes perfect biological sense. There’s no patriarchal conspiracy needed. Men are already hard-wired to respond to the sight of a pretty girl. It’s one of the easiest ways to arouse them that doesn’t involve bacon. I’m sorry PC folk, but when something is that easy, people tend to do it. It’s not laziness. It’s pragmatism.

In this context, can you see why using beautiful women in media is a thing? Can you see why fighting it is akin to the Pope telling people not to masturbate? That’s not to say it can’t go overboard. As with masturbation, it can manifest in disturbing ways. Let’s just try to maintain some level of context here.

What does that mean? Well, remember those scenarios I mentioned earlier? Let’s try and make the first one more acceptable than the second. I think men and women alike can do more to address this issue.

Men, understand that women aren’t aroused in the same way as you and be respectful in how you admire the female form. Woman, understand that men are visual creatures who will be attracted to the sight of beautiful women. That doesn’t mean they hate you or want to exploit you. That’s just how they’re wired.

I’m trying to do my part with my books. I’m also trying to focus on relationships in the media that are well-balanced in terms of male/female dynamics and sex-positive characters that deserve more respect. We can make things more pleasant between men and women. In an age where we can find plenty of reasons to hate each other, let’s at least make those reasons valid.

17 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

September 27, 2016 · 6:00 am

How I Shamed Myself Into Being Healthier

There’s no way around it. Compared to all the characters in movies, TV shows, and comic books, we’re ugly as hell. We don’t take care of ourselves. We’re fat. We’re weak. We’re unmotivated. Despite all this, we still like to pretend we’re sexier than Jennifer Lawrence in a bikini sucking on a popsicle. It’s as unhealthy as it is delusional.

What I just wrote is not to be taken as motivation or a sales pitch. It’s not even directed towards any person or group in particular. In fact, what I just said is merely a reflection of the thoughts I once conveyed whenever I looked in a mirror, minus that part about Jennifer Lawrence. Just like I am with my writing, I am my own harshest critic when it comes to my body and health.

I shamed myself. I shamed myself a lot for a good chunk of my adult life. It wasn’t just about my looks either. I had a serious self-esteem issue growing up. It wasn’t because of anything my friends or family did. That’s for sure. I did it to myself and not for all the right reasons. I was fucking miserable. I hated myself. In the end, however, it helped me in a profound way.

Confused? That’s to be expected. Annoyed? Yeah, I have that effect on people. Anxious? Well, you should be because I’m about to get personal again. I’ve talked about sleeping naked. I’ve talked about my own circumcision. Those topics are bound to fill peoples’ heads with unpleasant imagery. I hope this time is little anecdote is a bit more pleasant.

This personal story is a follow-up, of sorts, to my post on body-shaming. I understand that what I wrote probably offended certain people because I took the unpopular position that there’s some kind of merit to shaming. Then again, the people who took offense to that probably get offended when someone points out the color of the sky so I’m not going to worry too much about those people.

Instead, I want craft a real-life example of how shaming can make us better ourselves. It’s not enough to just be happy with who you are, love yourself no matter what, and never acknowledge any flaws you may have. I think it’s an important lesson to learn because people make a big fucking deal of self-esteem these days and worry endlessly that kids and adults alike or suffering when they don’t have enough of it.

Like snake oil and diet pills, self-esteem is basically seen as this cure-all for every mental shortcoming. Chief among those shortcomings involves how we look. We shouldn’t shame each other for looking different, right? We should love ourselves and embrace our inner beauty, right? It’s the lesson that Lady Gaga has taught an entire generation.

First off, this lesson is bogus. Second, it’s extremely easy for Lady Gaga to love herself. Why? She looks like this.

It’s very easy to love yourself when you’re beautiful. Beauty like this is beauty you actually have to work at. You think Lady Gaga looks this way because she just loves herself? Hell no! She has to fucking work at it. She has to actually earn the right to look this good.

This is an important concept and one that more people need to learn. Beauty and health aren’t things that we can gain just by loving ourselves. Self-esteem does not help you lose weight, nor does it make your acne go away. A lack of self-esteem can make it even worse. I would know.

This is how my story played out. For most of my life, I wasn’t very attractive. That’s not to say I was ugly. I wasn’t short, fat, or deformed in any way. I was basically just average at best or below average at worst. I also wore dorky glasses and had a horrible acne problem that plagued me for most of my teenage years. I never felt attractive. I never felt sexy. I basically went out of my way to make myself more miserable for not looking good.

I admit I was probably much harsher on myself than I should’ve been. While I was in school, I knew people who actually did have health issues, be it their weight or their appearance. Harsh or not, it did mess me up. It didn’t make me very pleasant to be around, that’s for sure.

I certainly didn’t get a lot of attention from women either. Believe it or not, girls don’t find pudgy, pale, self-loathing guys with an acne problem attractive. This certainly did plenty to undermine my self-esteem even more, but looking back on it, I can hardly blame them. I can’t imagine I would’ve been a good partner for any woman during that time.

So what changed? It had to have changed. I wouldn’t have the energy or the self-esteem to share this story if I had remained this sad, dorky, overly-emo kid with an acne problem. So how exactly did I respond to all that self-shaming and self-loathing?

Well, for one thing, it ensured I didn’t ignore it. When my acne got really bad, I made it a point to go to a doctor and get actual medication to help treat it. Believe it or not, modern medicine does work. I was able to find a treatment for my acne that more-or-less solved the problem. So thanks modern medicine! That’s one issue solved.

Modern medicine helped me out again down the line. Remember those dorky glasses I mentioned? Well, they’re gone now. I don’t wear them because I got Lasik surgery on my eyes to fix them. I now see perfectly. I now have a face that is unhindered by acne or glasses. I like to think it’s a cute face. I’m not Ryan Gosling, but I’m no George Costanza either.

However, modern medicine could only do so much. Sometimes, you need a good kick in the ass to get yourself to change. I definitely got that when a close relative of mine suffered a serious heart attack. He didn’t die, but it was serious.

The fact that he was only in his 50s really concerned me because after that incident, I found out that there is a history of heart disease and cancer in my family. On top of that, I didn’t take care of myself. My meals consisted primarily of sugary cereal, cookies, greasy burgers, and pizza. My exercise regiment was restricted to walking up to the store to buy more junk food. I was playing a risky game of poker with the deck stacked against me.

Despite this very disconcerting knowledge, I was still reluctant to get off my ass. The caveman part of my brain just didn’t want to change. It was just too easy to keep doing what I was doing. Plus, I really like the taste of cookies and junk food.

In the end, I feel the shaming gave me the extra push that I needed. Seeing myself in the mirror every day and not liking what I saw motivated me to do something about it. On top of that, I love comic books, as I’ve made clear on this blog many times before. In case you’ve forgotten, Superman looks like this.

Look at those muscles. Look at those abs. Look at that raw masculine power. Is it an unrealistic ideal for men? Absolutely. Superman is, by his own nature, the embodiment of an ideal. However, just because something is unattainable doesn’t mean it’s worth striving for. That’s a lesson Superman himself preaches.

I finally got that message loud and clear. One day, I finally dragged my pudgy ass out of bed and to a gym at the local rec center. I convinced myself to go there by promising myself that I would soak in the hot tub after getting in a workout. It wasn’t much of a workout to begin with, but it was a start and that hot tub felt dam good.

From there, a new habit formed. I started going to the gym more regularly, once a week to start. I soon felt the urge to do more so I started going twice. I bought workout clothes. I looked up fitness tips online. I didn’t buy into any gimmicky weight-loss crap from late-night infomercials. I just ran, lifted, and sweated.

Flash forward a bit more and now I’m an avid runner. I go out running for at least 30 minutes a day or four miles, whichever comes first. I do weight-training twice a week and I don’t go light either. I grunt, I sweat, and I toil. After every workout, I look like I just swam in a pool of my own sweat loved every second of it. I’m not going to lie either. It makes me feel damn sexy.

On top of the exercise, I did tweak my diet. This was, by far, the hardest. I had to cut a lot of sugar out of my diet. That meant cutting soda completely and saving cookies for special occasions only. That was painful. It meant eating more protein, such as eggs and chicken. It meant eating less red meat. These changes were tough, but worth it.

Now I’m not saying I look like Superman. I don’t. I’m not saying I have Brad Pitt’s abs or Hugh Jackman’s ass. I don’t. However, I can say that I look a lot healthier and a lot more attractive than I did before I started working out. I don’t have as much body fat anymore. I can actually see my abs. I actually have good bicep now. It does work, people. You can work out, eat better, get healthier, and become more attractive.

None of this would’ve happened if I hadn’t shamed myself into action. If I had just done what Lady Gaga said and loved myself, I would be 25 pounds heavier and far less healthy than I am now. Working out and becoming more attractive gave me more confidence and energy. It made me better to be around. It also made me more attractive to women, which is certainly a nice bonus.

I get that there are still problems with body shaming. There are people whose biology simply doesn’t allow them to look the way they want. It’s a difficult issue. Hell, it was the primary topic of my book, “Skin Deep.”

Until science advances to a point where it can make everybody look like Hugh Jackman and Jennifer Lawrence, we need to push ourselves. We need to actually work at it if we want to be beautiful, healthy, and attractive. Just being content with who we are isn’t enough sometimes.

We need to shame each other to some extent to get our asses in gear and get healthier. It can be hard and downright demoralizing at times, but it’s worth doing. You feel better, happier, and sexier as a result.

29 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 26, 2016 · 6:02 am

Re-framing Body Shaming

Shame on you. Shame on me. Shame on us for not being exactly how others want us to be. We should all be appalled with ourselves. How dare we not conform to societies expectations?

That last paragraph was pure sarcasm, by the way. It’s also an overly simplistic summation of shaming, that inglorious facet of society where we collectively decide to denigrate or denounce someone in a way that’ll make them feel terrible about themselves. It’s one of nature’s crudest instruments for shaping a social species. Being so crude, it’s absurdly easy to misuse.

There’s all sorts of shaming. There’s slut-shaming, fat-shaming, food-shaming, culture-shaming, gender-shaming, and probably some other form of shaming that’s being invented as we speak. Even in the era of the Internet, it’s hard to keep up with all these types of shaming. So for the purposes of keeping this post simple, I’m going to focus on one particular type of shaming: body shaming.

This type of shaming is relevant to me because, being an erotica/romance writer, I deal with a lot of bodies. In my stories, I have to describe bodies. I have to describe how they look and what they’re doing in a way that’s compelling, interesting, and sexy. If I can’t do that, then I can’t tell much of a story. Nobody’s panties will get wet if the story just involves two amorphous blobs rubbing together.

According Urban Dictionary, body shaming is simply defined as:

Shaming someone for their body type.

Pretty obvious, isn’t it? This is one of those concepts that really explains itself. It really shouldn’t be that complex, but like so many things in this world, we love to fuck it up in a way that completely skews the concept.

Body shaming is a big deal these days for reasons that have nothing to do with health and beauty. It, like other forms of shaming, have become tied into the anti-bullying movement that has grown rapidly in recent years. We no longer live in a world ripped from a bad 80s teen movie. It’s not cool to be a bully anymore. Bullies are now right up there with dead skunks and cow shit in terms of things we don’t want in our society anymore.

The stereotypical bully is often the first to laugh at someone’s body, be they fat, skinny, ugly, or deformed. They loudly proclaim that there must be something wrong with a person who allows themselves to get that fat or that ugly. They make someone feel guilty, depressed, or sad for being who they are and that’s just not cool.

Okay, now this is the part where I piss off the politically correct, overly emotional, obscenely sensitive crowd because I’m going to look at this issue in an unusual, unpopular way. Brace yourselves, prepare to send the hate mail, and hide in your safe space because I’m probably going to offend some people here. I’m not going to apologize ahead of time either. I’m just going to say what I feel needs to be said about this issue.

My problem with the current approach to bullying and body-shaming is that my brain just can’t work in such simplistic terms. The simple idea of, “All bullying is bad! All body-shaming is bad! Shame on all those who justify it!” just doesn’t work for me. My brain has a problem with accepting overly simple things that sound too good to be true. Maybe I’ve had one too many bad experiences with infomercials and Nigerian princes, but I just can’t look at this issue in the context of “always bad and always evil.”

Human beings just aren’t that simple. Humanity, in all its inglorious grandeur, is full of all sorts of complexities, both as individuals and as societies. These complexities are a big part of what makes us so interesting and entertaining. If aliens landed tomorrow, I’m sure they’d find something about humanity to laugh at.

With respect to body-shaming, I do think there is a context that sets it apart from traditional shaming. First and foremost, we have to understand that the very concept of shaming is important to our society. We can’t do a way with it, nor should we.

Shame, as ugly as it may be, serves an important purpose for social creatures like humans. You see, for most of human history, we didn’t have laws or message boards to punish or denigrate others for doing something socially unacceptable. We lived in small bands of tribes that roamed the land, looking for food and safe places to hump. Failure to do so means that both the individual and the tribe would suffer.

Fortunately (or unfortunately, for the politically correct crowd), humans come with some built-in biological wiring to keep people in line. If someone did something wrong, they would feel guilt about it and have an incentive not to do it again.

Shaming emerged as an extension of guilt, creating a system for an entire tribe to use to let someone know that they need to get their shit together. It was a way to motivate or incentivize them to do the right thing for themselves and others. It can be harsh, but it can work too. It can even be funny, as Family Guy regularly proves.

It’s a fact of life as a social species. We need shame because it’s built in. It’s hard-wired. It can’t be bribed, corrupted, or bought off. It’s a force that can affect the poorest among us and the richest among us. It is effectively the glue that incentivizes us to function in society. When laws and internet message boards fail, shame can pick up the slack.

So where does this leave body-shaming? First, let me make clear that there are degrees of shaming that have no excuse. If someone’s body is big, small, or misshapen in ways they cannot control, either by genetics or poverty, then that’s a gross misuse of shame. It’s true that human bodies have many variations and some are more prone to be fat, thin, or something in between. However, there is one little detail here that skews the context.

That detail is called obesity.

When I say obesity, I’m not just referring to fat people. I’m also referring to overly skinny people as well. They aren’t shamed quite as often, but it’s the same blunt instrument. It’s the same unjustified use of shame. It’s just being used in a way that isn’t consistent with the biological purpose of shame.

Here’s the issue that I know anti-shamers and obesity activists try to avoid. Obesity, like smoking, does have serious health risks. While it’s not nearly as bad as smoking, it does carry with it some health issues that aren’t exactly attractive. According to WebMD, these issues include:

It’s true that not everyone who is obese will have these problems, but the chances are greater and not everybody is willing to play those odds. Eating too much, having too much body-fat, and not getting enough exercise can be damaging, both to individuals and the society that incurs the cost of these health issues.

As a result, our crude biological wiring is going to step in whether we like it or not. When we see something unhealthy in society, we tend to do whatever we can to stop it, even if it means bullying and shaming. It’s true we go overboard at times. We’re human. We’re blunt instruments, not surgical tools. However, there often is some level of logic behind our actions.

It’s just not the kind of logic that will ever show up in an 80s teen movie. This is caveman logic, a term I use so often on this blog that I should probably trademark it. In the old hunter/gatherer days, the biological programming of which is still with us, the fat and unhealthy bodies incurred a burden on the tribe. If the person couldn’t see that, then shaming them was a way of getting them to shape up and get their ass in gear.

We’re not cavemen anymore, but we’re still stuck with their wiring. We need to accept that and there are some politically correct types who can’t seem to wrap their heads around it. They seem to think that human biology can be ignored or circumvented.

It’s the same faulty belief that has effectively doomed the Catholic Church’s crusade on premarital sex and masturbation. You can’t stop people from masturbating. You can’t stop them from shaming bodies either.

By the logic of our faulty human wiring, a tribe of healthy, fit men and women is a good thing. Being fit doesn’t necessarily mean that all the men have to look like Brad Pitt and all the women have to look like Kate Upton. The human body has all sorts of glorious variations, colors, and traits. Being healthy enhances every one of them.

Some people aren’t going to be motivated to pursue that level of health. Shaming is a way of getting their asses off the couch. Again, we do tend to go overboard with it, but it’s one of those unpleasant facets of society that has a legitimate biological function. So those who want to live in a world where nobody is shamed for how they look may as well wish that carrots taste like chocolate. It’s not going to happen.

7 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 25, 2016 · 8:22 am

“Embers of Eros” Edits Have Arrived!

5596869_orig

Well, it took a little extra patience and some coaxing (as well as repeated emails), but I finally got the edits of “Embers of Eros” back from Crimson Frost. This is somewhat of a relief because it means they’re still putting time and energy into releasing this book, which would still mark my first ever book that wasn’t self-published. I don’t expect it to be a best seller, but you have to start somewhere.

According to the editor (who has not exactly been punctual, mind you), “Embers of Eros” will be released in time for the holidays if I can get these edits back within two weeks. It’s a deadline I gladly intend to meet. After that, I have to play the waiting game again and hope they release it in the time-frame they promise. That’ll require more than just hope, I imagine, but if it goes through, it’ll be something worth celebrating.

Given my current status as an aspiring erotica/romance writer, the bar for success is somewhat low. I didn’t get into this with the expectation that I would be the next Tolken or Rowling overnight. I understand that publishing is a tough business to break into. However, it’s one of those industries that is basically like a lottery that’s free the play. The odds are against you, but so long as you keep rolling the dice, the law of averages will eventually turn out in your favor.

I really do hope that Crimson Frost at least cracks the door or even a window into the romance/erotica market. I just need a little bit to get some attention for my work. From there, I hope I can get more publishers and/or agents to take note of my work.

As I’ve said before, I’m currently sitting on several manuscripts that I haven’t published yet. I have sent some to prospective publishers and agents, but so far only Crimson Frost has responded. With one publication under my belt, I hope this gives my submissions a bit more weight.

So for now, my main focus will be to complete these edits and get them back to Crimson Frost. Once I know more about the release schedule, I’ll be sure to announce it. Until then, I intend to explore other sexy topics on this blog. I haven’t decided which I’ll focus on, but I’ll figure it out once I’m in the mood. That’s exactly as dirty as it sounds.

1 Comment

Filed under Book Announcement

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

September 24, 2016 · 7:50 am

Funny Divorce Stories (Seriously)

It’s important to find humor in all things, even things that are objectively horrible. I’m talking about topics like war, poverty, and reality TV. These are all serious subjects that evoke the worst in humanity. Some of them are bad enough to make you wish you were born a monkey, especially a Bonobo. Among the top 10 of those terrible subjects is the ultimate D-word: divorce.

The late Robin Williams described divorce as follows:

Ah yes divorce…from the Latin word meaning to rip a man’s genitals through his wallet.

I’d say that’s an apt description and those who have endured divorce would probably agree. Some may even claim it’s too generous. Having spent most of the week talking about the legal horrors of divorce that make romance and intimacy an emotional minefield, which happened to coincide (albeit unintentionally) with the recent high-profile divorce of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, I think I’ve belabored these horrors enough.

As such, I’d like to lighten the tone a bit. That means finding the funny side of divorce. I know. That’s probably horribly insensitive to those who endured the legal, emotional, and financial gut punch that divorce incurs. For those people, I’m sorry. However, that makes finding humor in such a solemn topic all the more vital.

So, with help from an article I found on the Huffington Post, here are 9 little anecdotes documenting the funny side of divorce. It may be crude and it may dent your faith in the human race, assuming you have much to begin with. At the very least, it’ll make you laugh and sometimes that’s the healthiest way to deal with such a distressing topic.

Huffington Post: 9 Divorce Stories Too Ridiculous To Make Up

“I had a couple arguing for three hours over who got the kids on Christmas day, only to discover at the end that they were both Jewish.”

Not sure if this is petty or blasphemous, but it’s funny so it doesn’t really matter.

“Our case fell apart over a massage chair. They had two kids, but they couldn’t let go of the damn chair.

I know people can have misplaced priorities, but that must have been a damn good massage chair.

“Took the couple two hours to decide who would get the groceries left in the fridge. Estimated value of the groceries was around $40. Two hours of my time, opposing counsel time, and mediator time added up to about $1,000. It all came down to a Costco/Sam’s Club-sized jar of peanut butter. (Who keeps peanut butter in the fridge?!)”

As someone who loves peanut butter, I can understand this to some extent. That said, even I don’t love peanut butter that much.

“I was in a mediation where it took the couple an hour and a half to split their personal property, retirement accounts, real property, and custody of their six-month-old son. The rest of the day, about four hours, was spent arguing about how to split the time with the dog. For the kid they just put, ‘as agreed upon by the parties’ but the dog had a strict calendered schedule working out holidays and strict pickup/drop-off times. I was ashamed to be a part of that unbelievable display.”

Misplaced priorities can be tragic, but when dogs and kids are involved, it just becomes downright ridiculous. In cases like this, I actually sympathize with the lawyer. How sad is that?

“My dad was a divorce attorney for some time. He said people would argue over $150 patio furniture for hours on end at a $300/hour rate (each side). It’s not about the patio furniture, it’s about sending a message to your b*tch of an ex-husband/wife.”

I know you can’t put a price on love, but you can put a price on a lawyer’s time. Sometimes you get what you pay for and you have no right to be offended when others laugh at you.

“I had a case where the estranged wife was calling my client’s employer repeatedly, accusing him of theft and other white-collar crimes, [in an attempt] to get my client fired. The thing is, the children were with her, and she was also demanding child support. Which is based on his income. For the job from which she was trying to get him fired. (Fortunately, the employer was onto her BS and my client wasn’t let go.)”

It’s all too common to not think things through when heavy passions are involved, but when it costs you money and destroys your family? That’s just pushing it.

“Marriage proposal from wife’s new boyfriend while he was being questioned during her divorce proceedings. Classy.”

There’s a time and a place for everything. A proposal in a divorce proceeding is not it. That’s like strangling someone’s puppy and then asking them out on a date.

“I dated a divorce lawyer and my favorite story from his work was the man who was super pissed that the division of assets was 50/50 and that his wife’s lawyer had a forensic accountant who found his multiple offshore money stashes. In retaliation, he demanded half the dog. Not joint custody. Half of the dog, who was his wife’s much beloved, very spoiled little buddy. He burned through thousands of dollars of legal fees just to make her cry, by demanding that the dog be put to sleep and its ashes split, 50/50. People are delightful!”

Divorce is ugly enough. Let’s not make it worse by mixing it with animal cruelty. Can we all agree on that?

“I had a client completely sandpaper/key the finish off a brand new Maserati that was given to the wife pursuant to settlement agreement because he hated his ex so much. He also took off the tires. I also had a guy who funneled money over to his girlfriend, thinking he was slick hiding it from his wife. Girlfriend broke up with him and kept it.”

As with animal cruelty, I think we should leave cars out of the horrors of divorce as well. A significant chunk of the population was conceived in them. Let’s show some respect.

There you have it! Those are nine hilariously fucked up stories about the unmitigated horror that is divorce. Got any other horrifically funny divorce stories to share? Please share them! Divorce wounds us all in some ways. Laughter is good for the heart and the soul. Let it be the medicine that helps us heal do we can love again.

1 Comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

September 23, 2016 · 6:52 am

Thoughts on the End of Brangelina

I’m not a fan of celebrity culture. I never got the appeal of tying my identity so closely to a public figure that I get emotionally attached to the course of their life. That can be dangerous. There are too many Mel Gibsons, Charlie Sheens, and Gary Buseys in this world. You’re basically putting a big target on your identity and giving a squad of snipers a loaded bazooka.

That’s why if I’m going to tie my identity to anyone, it’s going to be a fictional character, such as superheroes in comics. As anyone who has followed this blog knows, I’m a big fan of superheroes and often use them to make important points about romance and pop culture. At least with fictional characters, they can’t be caught fucking the babysitter outside a bad porn parody.

All that said, I’m inclined to comment on the recent news surrounding the divorce of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. I know. I can sense your eyes rolling and your heads banging against the wall. This is not why you come to this blog. You come here to be entertained and updated by the twisted thoughts of an aspiring romance/erotica writer. Then again, it’s not like a lot of people come to this blog anyways so I don’t think it makes a difference.

I don’t know if it’s a cosmic coincidence or lousy timing on my part, but this monumental celebrity split happened in the same week where I’ve been discussing/ranting on our collective failings when it comes to divorce and commitment. It’s kind of spooky that I bring this topic up and then a famous couple splits. Maybe that means I should bet more money in my fantasy football pool this weekend or maybe my timing just sucks that much.

Whatever the case, let’s get this over with. Let’s talk about this latest celebrity heartbreak that we all knew as Brangelina. What happened? They were so in love. Their story was like a movie in and of itself. They meet on the set of Mr. and Ms. Smith, hit it off, and fall so madly in love that it causes Brad Pitt to leave Jennifer Anniston, who looks like this.

There had to be a hell of a love to draw them together like that. It had to be a pretty powerful love for them to stay together for over a decade, having children and even adopting a few along the way. Were they the typical Hollywood couple? Hell no, but then again there’s no such thing as a “typical couple” in Hollywood. That’s a flawed concept, sort of like “well-adjusted former child star.”

Every relationship is different. Every relationship has its quirks and proclivities. As I pointed out in an earlier post, every relationship has expectations as well and most of the time, these expectations aren’t reasonable to say the least.

Men want to be married to multiple supermodels who spend their days making sandwiches. Woman want to be married to a rich prince who spends his days massaging their feet and carrying her bags while she’s shopping with his credit card. These are the laughable expectations that we’ve all been fed by movies, TV, and bad love songs for decades. The difference with a couple like Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt is that in their world, these expectations aren’t that ridiculous.

When you look at the details, Brad and Angelina had a lot more going for them than most celebrity couples. They were both very successful in their own right. Angelina Jolie has an Oscar. Brad Pitt is one of the most bankable movie stars in all of Hollywood. They each found success in their own way and their success was not dependent on one another. They were very much equals, which is rare in a place like Hollywood, so much so that you have to look to X-men comics for examples.

On paper, these two had everything they needed to make it work. If one of them hadn’t been successful, then that would’ve created some unhealthy dynamics to say the least. Speaking in terms of history and economics, when someone is overly dependent on someone else, it tends to leave a bit too much room for abuse and neglect. That’s just a sad fact of human nature.

When we’re among those we consider subordinates, we don’t treat them as equals. It’s not necessarily evil. It’s kind of a holdover from our evolutionary past. Remember, humans are evolved from predators. Predators, like wolves and bears, have to see their prey as subordinate. It makes them easier to hunt. Since our brains are so poorly wired by the blunt instrument that is nature, we tend to do a bad job of differentiating between survival and romance. Not saying Mother Nature is incompetent, but she can be pretty crude.

Since this wasn’t the case with Brad and Angelina, this must mean other forces were at work. Plenty of news outlets and gossip sites are speculating what those forces are. It may be infidelity. It may be drug use. It may upheavals in their careers. Who knows? I’m not going to speculate. I’m not going to contribute to that shit storm. If Brad and Angelina want to get a divorce, they can and it’s none of our god-damn business.

With this in mind, I’m going to say something that’s probably going to offend a certain crowd of people, especially those who got emotionally attached to their romance. Put the pitchforks down. Unclench your fists. I feel like this has to be said so here goes.

It’s perfectly fine for Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie to divorce because they can manage it better than you or I ever will. As such, they do not deserve sympathy.

Am I assuming more than I should about the intricacies of their personal lives? Maybe I am. I don’t deny that. However, I think there’s a point to be made by this split and it ties right into my arguments about our flawed approach to marriage and commitment.

It’s because that Brad and Angelina are a relationship of equals, as I described earlier, that they’re able to deal with this in a much better way than most. This isn’t a case of Tiger Woods’ ex-wife asking for $750 million. These are two people who don’t need to gouge one another for money.

They’re both rich and successful on their own terms. The only issue they need to resolve is custody of their six kids, which can be emotionally frustrating, but not nearly as much when money is involved.

Make no mistake. Keeping money out of the equation makes anything easier, especially divorce. Remove the money and you just have two people trying to find a way to move out of the same house and agree on the assets. That just involves legally binding negotiations, which is something people have been doing for centuries. We don’t need to subvert our evolutionary wiring to make that work.

I understand that there are still those upset by this split. I understand I’ve probably made a few enemies by commenting on this issue. That’s the chance you take when you share your thoughts on the internet and I gladly take that chance.

It’s impossible to know for sure what drove Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie to divorce. Citing the laughably obscure legal term, “irreconcilable differences,” leaves many blanks for our perverse imaginations to fill in. Our imaginations rarely line up with reality because our imaginations rarely stay tied to the real world.

The only assumption I feel comfortable making about this relationship is that, as is so often the case, they went into this relationship with expectations. Despite all the money and resources they had, they were disappointed when those expectations weren’t met. Once they realized that they couldn’t be met, they ended it. Sometimes the best we can hope for us that, within a relationship of equals, the end is beneficial for both sides.

7 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

September 22, 2016 · 6:04 am

Of Commitments and Disappointments

A big part of every meaningful romance is commitment. Without commitment, a romance has no more depth and meaning than a dentist appointment. It’s a big part of the process that comes with loving someone enough to want to sacrifice for them. Being willing to sacrifice, share, and understand is part of the foundation that makes a romance work.

I say all this because we, as a society, do a piss-poor job of fostering commitment. The fact that I’m saying this shortly after my rant on marriage and divorce is not a coincidence. This is an important issue that involves major expectations (some of them flawed) and important life lessons (that are difficult to heed).

I discuss this issue with the full admission that I have a difficult history with commitment. It’s been a long time since I’ve had a steady girlfriend and, without getting overly personal, none of these relationships progressed beyond a certain point. We never lived together. We never shared a bathroom. We never shared a toothbrush. We never really got the chance.

So please don’t think of me as an expert on this issue. I’m not. I’m just someone who deals with commitment out of necessity. As a romance/erotica writer, I have to understand and explore it on some levels. Even without relationship experience, this is surprisingly hard.

There are all sorts of jokes we can make about commitment these days, but there are a few common themes. Like many flawed concepts, these jokes have a clear gender disparity. Commitment joke for men are very different compared to women and it shows in our assumptions about each other.

Most of these jokes and flawed assumptions can be boiled down to a few simple stereotypes. Women want commitment from men. Men want to avoid commitment at every turn. Women want someone to provide for them and cater to their every waking need without question. Men want to be able to put their penis in whoever they want with as little effort as possible.

Are these jokes funny? Hell yeah! I laugh at them all the time. Are these assumptions flawed? Definitely. No man or woman fits perfectly into the stereotype that manifests in every sitcom, Beatles song, and Hugh Grant movie. We are a diverse and varied species, both in appearance and in thought. It’s just too damn hard sifting through all that variety. We just try to make it easier on ourselves by making assumptions.

However, making assumptions is not the problem. It’s when those assumptions turn into expectations that we get problems. We’ve raised an entire generation of children to believe that the world operates by the same rules as Disney movies. Then, they find out how much we lied to them and wonder why they’re so jaded and bitter. What else explains the rise of hippies, hipsters, and reality TV?

For women, the expectations place a heavy burden on men. As young girls, movies and TV give the impression that they’re all princesses and one day they’re dutiful prince will come along. He’ll be big, strong, handsome, and understanding in every way. Most importantly, he’ll be 100-percent dedicated to them and only them. He’s basically a pet who owns a castle and pays for their shit.

For men, it’s just as bad, but in a different context. Growing up, boys (at least those without personality disorders) don’t see themselves as the Prince Charming that the girls want. They see themselves as the heroic underdog, fighting against the odds and overcoming them so they can get the glory, the fame, and the pretty girl that comes with it.

They think that the dynamics of every Rocky and Karate Kid movie ever made are accurate representations of how the world works. They’re destined to be just as disappointed as the girls who think they’re princesses waiting for a Prince Charming.

They think that just being the underdog and having the drive to overcome the odds is enough. Things like talent, chemistry, and understanding are all secondary. They just need to stick to the script, wait for the pretty girl to fall into their arms, and let the credits role.

Given these laughable expectations, is it any wonder that we suck at commitment these days? By we, I don’t just mean me. I’m referring to society as a whole when it comes to romance. Men and women place all these ridiculous expectations on their relationships and how they approach themselves. Then, they get upset when those wholly ridiculous expectations aren’t set.

This is akin to lighting a fire-cracker, holding it in your hand, and getting upset that your hand got burned. We set ourselves up for disappointment, get upset when that disappointment hits, and blame others for it, which in turn gives us more reasons to not commit to one another.

It’s a sad and brutal cycle. It’s a self-inflicted wound that manifests slowly and subtly, torturing us like death by a thousand paper-cuts. It’s at a point where women don’t just expect a Prince Charming and men don’t just expect a pretty girl. They think they’re entitled to it and will gut punch anyone who may deny them.

This is a dangerous mentality that plagues both genders, but being the optimist I am, I see glimmers of hope. I even highlighted one this past summer when an X-men comic showed that the relationship between Cyclops and Jean Grey didn’t have to stick to overplayed Disney tropes. I think an emerging generation is realizing that these old expectations are bullshit and we, as a people, need to refine our understanding of commitment.

There are still extremes. The contract Christian Grey wanted Anastasia Steele to sign in “50 Shades of Grey” shows that we can go overboard with our expectations. At least in Christian Grey’s case, he presented a legally binding document that limited the ambiguity. I don’t think we need to be that legalistic in the real world, but the concept is sound.

First, we acknowledge our expectations. Second, we share them with others and do our best to ensure they’re understood. Finally, we recognize that sometimes we’re the asshole when our expectations aren’t met.

At the end of the day, commitment is a two-way street. Sometimes the lanes in that street are uneven, as I pointed out in my divorce post. That just means we have to navigate that street more carefully. There are going to be differences and not just between the genders. Those differences are bound to change as time goes on. The key, in the end, is to find someone whose differences and expectations match your own. That’s what makes for meaningful commitment and more meaningful romance.

Leave a comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

September 20, 2016 · 9:19 am

ANOTHER Rejection and “Embers of Eros” Update

I’m trying not to make too much a habit of this. I don’t want this blog to become one long stream of me bitching and complaining about how hard it is to become a successful writer. There’s enough bitching and complaining on the internet as it stands. Just look at the comment section of any movie message board and watch your faith in humanity shrivel.

That said, I do want to provide continuous updates on my various writing endeavors, as fruitless they may be. I mentioned a few days ago how I finally heard from Crimson Frost Publishing that “Embers of Eros” just needed my approval on the edits. They said they would send those edits to me on Monday. It’s Tuesday now and I’ve heard nothing. I can’t say I’m surprised, but I am ready to bang my head on the wall again.

On top of that, I received yet another rejection letter from a publisher on my latest project, “The Big Game.” Perhaps I was expecting too much from this book. It’s much shorter and far less ambitious than my previous works. Even so, it makes me that much more inclined to bang my head against the wall. This is actually the extent of their response:

Thank you for your submission. However, it is not a good fit for us.

I know. It’s not exactly specific. I can’t really expect it to be specific. These people probably get so many submissions on a daily basis that they’ve suffered irreparable brain damage from banging their heads against the wall in frustration. I can appreciate that, albeit begrudgingly.

It’s starting to look more and more likely that I’ll have to go the self-publishing route with “The Big Game.” I’ll try to make a decision on that by the end of the year. I’ll probably have to do the same with “Embers of Eros” if Crimson Frost Publishing starts ignoring me again. It’ll be a disheartening way to end the year, but I hope that sets things up for improvement in 2017.

4 Comments

Filed under Book Announcement

Tagged as , , , , ,