Category Archives: Jack Fisher’s Insights

December 21, 2016 · 6:01 am

Man’s Best Advice To Women (According To Sam Kinison)

Before I say anything on this post that’s going to put undue pressure on my balls, let me make one thing clear. I am not a therapist. I am not psychiatrist. I may write a lot about sex, love, intimacy, and society, but I am not an expert. I’m as much an expert on this issues as I am a brain surgeon.

I’m an erotica/romance writer. What I know about these issues is strictly limited to my own personal experience, my own unique observations, and my ability to do rudimentary research on Google and Wikipedia. With that in mind, please don’t take what I say as the words of an expert or specialist. I am an aspiring erotica/romance writer. That is the extent of my qualifications.

Why do I make this disclaimer? Well, part of it is to cover my ass legally and to protect my balls metaphorically because I’m about to do something I try not to do unless asked. I’m going to give advice.

Please keep this advice in context though. I am a single man whose success in erotica/romance is still a work-in-progress wherein said progress is very little. I understand that gives me a credibility problem. Then again, this is a world where men like Glenn Beck still has credibility somehow so that’s another context to consider.

All that being said, I’d like to share this advice to everyone, but specifically I want to share it with women. It can just as easily apply to same-sex couples, but being a straight male, it’ll apply most directly to women.

This advice actually comes from specific source and no, that source isn’t a certified therapist either. That source is Sam Kinison. Who is Sam Kinison? Well, his Wikipedia page will only tell you so much. Pretty much everything you need to know about him and his style comes from a clip in the Rodney Dangerfield movie, “Back to School.”

Are your ears still ringing? Don’t worry. That’s normal. That’s what tends to happen with Sam Kinison. He’s legendary in comedy circles for his style and the unique noise his makes when he yells. Some find it frustrating. Some find it magical. I think it’s just a damn good way to get a point across.

Sam Kinison had may points to make during his brief, but eventful life. A lot of those points had to do with sex and women. Having been divorced twice, he had plenty of material. In fact, much of his comedy involves him yelling at and railing on women, marriage, and everything in between.

That’s not to say he only ever complained. If he did, that would just make him an overly loud whiner. That was not Sam Kinison’s style. He did offer plenty of insightful tidbits, but none were more direct than this one.

Listen to it again. Wait for your ears to stop ringing and then listen to it another time. Listen to it as many times as you need to. Then, let it sink in. Let this amazing insight from a dead comedy legend really resonate in your brains.

To all the women, gay, straight, or bisexual, heed this simple advice. You want your lovers to satisfy you? You want them to do something you know will get you off and earn you beach-front property in O-town? Well, you can do that. You just have to do what Mr. Kinison advises. I’ll even repeat it since he’s no longer with us to belabor it.

“TELL US!”

I’ll omit the profanity, but if it gets the point across, please heed this fucking advice. Why is it so important? Well, here’s another little secret about men that I’d like to share. It may get me in trouble with the grand male conspiracy, but I’ll take that risk.

Ladies, men want to satisfy you. Men want you to enjoy sex with them. They want to be the awesome lovers you fantasize about.

I know this doesn’t always seem to be the case. There’s this popular, but dead wrong, perception that men care mostly about humping until they blow their load. A woman’s pleasure ranks somewhere below the condition of their car in terms of importance.

I don’t know where this perception came from, but it’s wrong. It’s dead, fucking wrong. If I had Sam Kinison’s voice, I’d yell it as only he could.

Think of it with a little basic logic for a second. Use the logic even Homer Simpson would understand. Men want sex. Men enjoy sex. If we have sex with our lovers in a way that they enjoy, then they’ll want to have more sex too. It’s the most perfect of cycles. The problem is we can’t kick-start that cycle until our partners tell us what they want.

Now I know there’s this other dead wrong perception that women have to be coy about what they want. They have to be subtle, devious, and mysterious about their sexual proclivities. I understand that some of that has to do with our puritanical, yet schizophrenic attitudes towards sex, but this takes priority over those attitudes.

We want to satisfy you. We want to make you crazy with love, lust, and everything in between. We can’t do that if we’re fumbling around in the dark, trying to figure out what gets your motor humming. So please, for the good of your sex lives and ours, tell us what you want. The world will be a much better place if men know how to please their lovers and their lovers are regularly pleased.

1 Comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 20, 2016 · 6:37 am

Do We Expect Too Much Of Our Lovers?

When it comes to our ideal lover, most of us know what we want. In fact, what we want should be pretty damn clear, given that it’s laid out perfectly in every song ever made by Taylor Swift, the Beatles, and the Backstreet Boys.

We want our lover to be our everything. We want them to always be there for us. We want them to be 100 percent dedicated to us so we can be 100 percent dedicated to them. We want them to be the center of our world and everything orbiting around it. We want them to give us all the love, passion, and sex we want from now until the end of time. Is that really so much to ask?

Try and look at those demands without the aid of music or screaming fans. Read over them carefully. Think about them without imagining someone like Taylor Swift or Paul McCartney making them sound so sweet and appealing. Is that really a reasonable expectation to put on any human being, no matter how much you love them?

That’s a serious question that too few want to ask, let alone answer. Most people would rather listen to more sappy love songs and entertain fantasies of that perfect, ideal, completely devoted lover. Then, we’re somehow shocked and disappointed when we can’t find someone to be that devoted.

Setting aside, for a moment, that we don’t live in one big One Direction music video, this feels like one of those things where it’s impossible to see the forest from the trees and vice versa. It’s not just that popular culture has established so many unrealistic expectations about love, sex, marriage, and everything in between. There’s a certain disconnect in these expectations that seem to undermine the very concept of love.

This is one of the few disconnects that is pretty much the same for men, women, and those of unspecified gender. Men want a woman who is as devoted as Mother Teresa, but fucks like Jenna Jameson. Women want a man with status of a French aristocrat, but with the sexual prowess of Wilt Chamberlin. We may as well be asking for rich schizophrenic supermodel Olympian and there are only so many of those in the world.

This wholly unreasonable criteria also undermines some fundamental components of what love is and how it’s actually practiced in the real world. Wanting someone who is that devoted and that endowed doesn’t fit the profile of a mutual lover. It fits the profile of a super-powered butler/fuck buddy.

I know this may sound like the pot calling the kettle black because I write erotica/romance novels where some of those unreasonable expectations are explored. Some of my books deal with lovers who seem to check all the right boxes for each other. Some even involve actual superhuman abilities in matters of sex and love. I fully acknowledge that disconnect.

The difference is that my novels, as with most works of fiction, are molded in a fantasy world. These are worlds where it is possible for a princess to kiss a frog and have that frog turn into Hugh Jackman. Like pop songs, porn, and the lottery, they give others a means of entertaining this fantasy world, if only to escape from the frustrating realities of the real world.

That still doesn’t make the real world any less real. It doesn’t make our expectations surrounding sex and love less reasonable. So what’s the solution? How do we revise our expectations? Moreover, what exactly should we expect from our lovers?

To answer that, we need both caveman logic and a bit of context. In terms of context, we need to remember that up until the 18th century, most marriages and sexual partnerships were arranged and not chosen. In the same way we didn’t get to choose our parents, we didn’t get to choose our spouses either. Two family just got together, signed a contract, and that was as romantic as it ever got.

This worked fairly well for the many centuries wherein most of the human population lived on farms, barely knew anyone outside their small town or village, and were ruled by regional kings or despots. Then, we collectively decided that people should be able to choose who they marry, love, and spend their lives with. It’s actually more radical than it sounds and not in the Ninja Turtles sort of way.

Before this shift, the expectations were as low as the quality of an old Roger Corman movie. Your family picked your spouse. You’re then legally allowed to have sex with that spouse. If you’re lucky, you’ll enjoy it, but you kind of have to do it because the farm needs new workers and the local army needs new soldiers. The orgasms, if they come, are just a very nice bonus.

These being the expectations, it wasn’t hard to exceed them. Sometimes, arranged marriages do result in love. However, like orgasms, that’s a bonus and not an expectation. These days, we don’t just expect love and orgasms. We expect a goddamn superhero as our lover.

This gets even more ridiculous when you inject a little caveman logic into the mix. Out of necessity, our caveman ancestors operated in hunter/gatherer societies. One of the many key components of this society is that there could be no one superhero, white knight, or alpha male. Small bands of humans had to cooperate, share, and help each other.

This means two people and their children aren’t going to survive as well as a few dozen closely-knit groups. That two-person unit is just one stray bear attack away from being wiped out. With a tribe and a group, they’re better able to adapt and protect each other.

Why is that important? For one, it establishes a different set of expectations and those expectations extend to lovers, spouses, and children. Hunter/gatherer societies are fairly egalitarian in that one gender can’t treat another like a glorified pet and expect to survive. They need everyone to contribute. They need to be equals so they can share both resources and responsibilities.

This also means that strict monogamy isn’t always the best way to go. That’s not to say that these hunter/gatherer societies are some sort of hippie love fest that make for bad pornos and eccentric cults. It’s more likely that there’s a mix of polygamy and monogamy, but in either case, there’s a shared commitment to each other and the group.

This kind of balanced sharing doesn’t exactly jive with the “You Are My Everything” narrative that every Barry White song loves to convey. In fact, outside of an occasional X-men comic, a relationship of equals wherein neither partner does anything and everything for the other just isn’t seen as sexy enough.

I beg to differ. I believe this is the sexiest way that love and intimacy can manifest between partners. Whether they’re gay, straight, monogamous, or polygamous, a relationship of equals can accomplish more than any song, movie, or sitcom. If anything, those narratives only skew our expectations.

Look at any TV show or movie, be it animated or live-action, and the “happy” couple involved have the same problems. They can’t always deal with each other’s shit. They struggle to satisfy one another. In some cases, as in one particular sitcom, the differences are so toxic that the relationship would be downright unhealthy in the real world.

I know media tends to skew reality horribly, but it also creates the perceptions on which we build our expectations. If those expectations continue to fail us, then what are we to do? Are we setting ourselves up for romantic and sexual disappointment?

I try to take a more optimistic outlook on human affairs, even in matters of love and sex. I do think our expectations are changing, albeit slowly, and there’s only so much that music, TV, and movies can do to add luster to these lofty expectations.

The fact that there is a market for a relationships of equals, even if it is just an X-men comic, gives me hope that we as a species will find a way to improve our ability to love and be intimate in all the right ways and, most importantly, for all the right reasons.

2 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 17, 2016 · 7:56 am

Why Women (And Men) Need More Sex-Positive Role Models

There was a time when we just didn’t talk about the sex lives of role models and superheroes. To talk about what Superman, Wonder Woman, or Captain America did in private with lingerie, bottle of lube, and a willing partner wasn’t just obscene. It was akin to hearing your parents talk about the night we were conceived, right down to the color of the nipple clamps our moms used.

While we still shudder at the thought of our parents describing their sex lives to us, we’re a bit more comfortable with our heroes and role models filling us in on their intimate lives. In some respects, we’ve come a long way. We’ve gone from joking about how Superman can have a baby with a human woman to big (not so) shocking reveal earlier this year that Wonder Woman is bisexual.

The topic of superhero sex lives has always been somewhat taboo, except for perverse fan fiction, some of which I actually write. There’s an even greater taboo about the sex lives of our real-life role models and that can be very damaging, especially if the private sex lives of those role models become scandalous. Just ask Tiger Woods.

As an aspiring erotica/romance writer, who often navigates taboos and favors more sex-positive superheroes like Starfire, I feel like we’re vampires working in a blood bank. We’re putting ourselves in stressful, self-destructive circumstances that will only lead to disappointment and heartache with respect to our role models.

I get it. We want our role models to embody ideals. We hold them to a higher standard. We want Superman to not be concerned with whether his wife can bear his child. We want Tiger Woods to be a faithful, upstanding pillar of virtue. The problem with having such high standards isn’t that it puts undue pressure on the role models. The problem is that it makes it way too easy for us to hate ourselves for being human.

The problem with ideals is in the very definition. According to Dictionary.com, the core meaning of the word is:

  • A conception of something in its perfection

  • A standard of perfection or excellence

  • Something that exists only in the imagination

We expect our role models to embody these ideals, whether they’re real or fictional characters. The fact that we can’t even get our fictional characters to live up to those ideals, as evidenced by Superman’s role in a porno tape with Big Barda, is pretty damn telling. So why should anyone expect Tiger Woods to live up to that ideal?

What we need now isn’t an ideal for a role model. We don’t even need a flawed role model either. We already have plenty of that with Batman, Wolverine, and Mick Jagger, who just had his eight kid at 73. What we need, in my humble opinion, is a true sex positive role model.

By “sex positive,” I don’t mean a role model who isn’t afraid to talk about their sex lives. We already have plenty of celebrities and superheroes who do that. We have Cortney Love, Tony Stark, and pretty much every hair metal band from the 1980s. By sex positive, I mean someone who both embraces sexuality and subverts the stigma.

It’s that last part that’s the challenge here. It’s one thing for a hero or an icon to have sex and be casual about it. It’s quite another to do it in a way that undermines the stigma that still surrounds sex.

Make no mistake. That stigma is still there. We expect rich and successful men to have a lot of sex with a lot of random women, but when a woman does it, we think there’s something wrong with her. There’s still this frustrating taboo surrounding female sexuality and it’s ruining our sex lives, among other things.

It goes beyond the rich and powerful too. Even among youth and adults, there’s still this strange disconnect with our sexuality. It’s legal for two consenting adults to have sex for whatever reason they want, but we still shame and stigmatize it. We still have this arbitrary standard that if you have too much sex, then something’s wrong with you.

How much is too much? Well, that’s the tricky part. Nobody knows. One person’s slut is another person’s free spirit. One person’s stud is another person’s beta male. We just don’t know because we don’t talk about it. We don’t discuss it. We can’t even agree on what constitutes consent in sex anymore.

Enter a sex-positive role model. Enter someone who will approach sexuality the same way most people approach a hot cup of cocoa on a cold winter day. They don’t just embrace the crude elements of it. They embrace the beauty as well. They shatter the awkwardness. They spit on the taboos. They don’t need to flaunt their sexuality. To them, it’s just normal.

Sadly, there aren’t a lot of role models like that right now. In fact, I could only come up with two: Starfire and Deadpool. I’ve already made it abundantly clear why Starfire is the perfect sex-positive superhero. The fact she looks like this only helps.

With Deadpool, it’s a little trickier. He’s not much of a hero. He even says as such in his hit movie. However, while he’s crude in pretty much everything he does, he’s not crude when it comes to sex. It’s not this dirty, forbidden act. It’s just this basic thing that people do.

Sometimes it’s for love. Sometimes it’s for fun. Sometimes it’s how you celebrate the holidays with your lover. In that sense, Deadpool perfectly captures that spirit.

As much as I love Starfire and Deadpool, I don’t think they’re nearly enough. I think we need more sex positive role models and heroes. Some, like Amber Rose, are making an effort. I think we’ll need to make an even greater effort because all taboos and stigmas, be they sexual or not, don’t fade easily.

We human beings are anxious and uptight about things that make us uncomfortable. Our culture, going all the way back to the Puritans, the Vatican, and the Mullahs, has done too good a job at making us uncomfortable about sex. We’ve made progress over the centuries in breaking that discomfort. More sex-positive role models and heroes can only help.

2 Comments

Filed under Comic Books, Jack Fisher, Superheroes, Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 15, 2016 · 6:21 am

United Nations Ditches Wonder Woman Because She’s Too Sexy

Growing up, I’ve learned to see excuses the same way I see zits and hangovers. I hate that they’re there. They’re often unavoidable. There are very few good ones, if any, and the best we can do is make a concerted effort to avoid them.

That said, there are a few particular excuses that make me want to punch the nearest brick wall and throw a brick through the nearest window. Within the top five of those excuses, and there are times when it’s at the very top, is the one that amounts to something like this:

“She’s just too sexy to take seriously.”

Read that sentence again. Try to read it with a straight face, as hard a task at that might be. Under what circumstances does that excuse make sense? Under what circumstances does it not warrant punching someone in the dick? It’s hard to come up with one off the top of my head.

Unfortunately, the fine folks at the United Nations, as in the same organization that has failed miserably to stop massacres, genocides, and child sex trafficking, decided to use that infuriating excuse when they dropped Wonder Woman as their ambassador for women and girls.

I wish this were a joke. I wish this were one of my crazy thought experiments. This is really happening. The United Nations and in all their inept, prudish wisdom, responded to a petition that made this argument:

“A large-breasted white woman of impossible proportions, scantily clad in a shimmery, thigh-baring body suit with an American flag motif and knee-high boots” is not an appropriate spokeswoman for gender equity at the United Nations.

Yes, they really said that. Apparently, a woman who has large breasts and doesn’t dress like a nun on Christmas is not appropriate. A woman who is beautiful and sexy is somehow disqualified from being a symbol of freedom and empowerment to women and girls. I guess it would be just too traumatic for women and girls to be inspired by someone that might actually look good naked.

Since this is probably too much for certain folks at the United Nations, or those who put together this bullshit petition, to understand, let me address a few of their concerns.

Has Wonder Woman ever told girls that they have to look as good as her? Hell no!

Has Wonder Woman ever told girls they have to be sexual in a certain way? Hell no!

Has Wonder Woman ever told girls they have to dress in sexy clothes to be empowered? Hell no!

With this in mind, how the hell is a badass warrior women who protects the innocent and fights injustice not worthy of being a role model to girls everywhere?

I’m trying to wrap my head around this. I’m trying to be polite about it. I can only try so hard, I’m afraid.

Now I understand there are some repressive, overtly patriarchal cultures in the world where women have just a few additional rights over dogs and pets. In those cultures, a woman showing her ankles is akin to Madonna shaving her pubic hair during the Super Bowl halftime show.

I’ve even tried to put this kind of repression into a context when I revealed the inner-workings of a misogynistic man. There are some powerful, non-political forces driving misogyny in this world and they don’t need some vast, patriarchal conspiracy to support. A lot of this sentiment comes down to economics, health, and social norms that govern how men seek sex from women and how women respond to those efforts.

However, none of those forces factored into this decision. None even showed up in the petition, which around 45,000 people signed. To put that into context, over 60,000 people bought the November 2016 issue of Wonder Woman. Even if you suck at math, you know the difference between those two numbers is not trivial.

The primary argument in this petition is that Wonder Woman is too much of a pin-up girl. Too many men want to have sex with her. Too many men fantasize about her. How can she possibly be a role model to young women and girls all over the world?

There’s a very simple answer to that question. I’ll try to frame it in the least vulgar way possible. It goes something like this:

“WHAT THE FUCK DOES BEING SEXY HAVE TO DO WITH BEING A GODDAMN ROLE MODEL?”

I’m sorry. That really was the least vulgar way I could’ve said that. Anything else would’ve risked a fine from the FCC.

I don’t doubt that Wonder Woman is beautiful. By almost every objective standard, she wields above-average beauty. Given her origin, which involves Greek Gods and divine forces, that makes perfect sense. Even in ancient mythology, beauty is kind of a big deal. Just ask Helen of Troy.

Beyond her origins though, Wonder Woman’s beauty is rarely an issue in terms of what she does and how she carries herself. She doesn’t flaunt her sexuality. She doesn’t distract her enemies by flashing her tits or something. She’s a warrior. She comes from a culture of warriors. That’s how she fights injustice and she’s been doing it since 1942.

To call Wonder Woman just another pin-up girl isn’t just insulting to her. It’s insulting to the actual pin-up girls within the comic book world. I’m not just talking about Starfire either, a character whose sex-positive persona would probably make the UN faint in horror.

Ladies, gentlemen, and those of unspecified gender, I give you Power Girl.

Notice anything distinct about her appearance? Maybe a couple of things?

If that’s not enough, here’s Emma Frost of the X-men.

Still not convinced? Well here’s another female hero named Vixen. Seriously, that’s her actual name.

See the pattern here? Do I really need to explain why these women qualify as pin-up girls? Hell, Emma Frost was an actual stripper at one point. Power Girl has actually used her big boobs to her advantage at times. These are female characters that channel their sexuality for justice and it’s a beautiful thing. Apparently, the UN just doesn’t appreciate such beauty.

Even so, that’s still a bullshit excuse to lump Wonder Woman in the same category. There are characters who do use their sexuality as a tactic of sorts. Wonder Woman does not. She is a warrior. She’ll fight an army of Nazis, zombies, and aliens before she even pretends to show a nipple.

Women who use their sexuality as a weapon have been part of our society for centuries. Just ask Cleopatra. However, even in the 21st century, our asses still clench at the thought of a woman just having the potential to use such a weapon. What’s that say about the state of women and how we approach women’s issues?

Regardless of United Nation’s bullshit excuses, Wonder Woman is still an icon. She’s still a role model. She still embodies so many of the traits we associate with the strengths of women and femininity. If that’s not enough for the United Nations, then that’s their problem.

6 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 13, 2016 · 5:58 am

How I Would Spend A Million Dollars (And NOT Go Broke)

We’ve all dreamed about it. We’ve all fantasized about it. In fact, other than having an army of naked bikini models or an army of Ryan Gosling clones, it’s probably one of our most frequent fantasies. What would we do if we suddenly became rich?

I know I’ve fantasized about it. Then again, I fantasize about a lot of things. It’s kind of necessary when you’re trying to be an erotica/romance writer. You need to be able to conjure the kinds of potent fantasies that make women need to change their panties and men wish they hadn’t worn such tight jeans. It’s a skill I’m developing and one from which I hope to gain greater success in the future.

Now I know the odds aren’t exactly in my favor right now. The odds of any writer of any genre, regardless of sex appeal, becoming as wealthy as Stephen King or Stephanie Meyer is right up there with scoring a date with Taylor Swift. However, with the recent interest I’ve attracted from publishers, those odds are improving. It’s not much, but any improvement is better than no improvement at this stage of my publishing career.

Even with the odds still not in my favor, I often find myself entertaining various scenarios on what I would do if one of my books became a best seller. Specifically, I often wonder what I would do with the money I make.

First off, I would not immediately get on the first flight to Las Vegas and spend three nights in a hot tub with five strippers, a keg of beer, a buffet of deep-fried Twinkies. Unless you’re a billionaire, that sort of thing is best left to pornos and low-budget skin flicks on Cinemax.

Second, it’s worth pointing out that a whopping 70 percent of lottery winners end up going bankrupt. On top of that, according to Sports Illustrated, over 60 percent of professional athletes go bankrupt after their careers are over. Even if you suck at math, you should know that those are not trivial figures.

Here’s a good way to illustrate that point: imagine you ordered your favorite pizza, but over two-thirds of it was eaten before it got delivered. That’s a lot of pizza you’re missing out on. Now imagine you were supposed to live off of that pizza. Losing over half of it now feels a lot more serious, doesn’t it?

So why does this happen? Who do people who strike it rich go broke? Well, it isn’t just a matter of owning pet Tigers, owing child support to multiple women for multiple children, investing in failed business ventures, or buying one too many cars, although that’s part of it. There’s a psychological component to it.

Unless you’re born rich or become rich through skilled business savvy, which only applies to a fraction of the population, you don’t know how to be rich. Yes, there is a certain amount of skill to being rich. Like any great talent, not everyone has it. As such, not everyone knows how to deal with it.

There’s even a psychological term for it. It’s called Sudden Wealth Syndrome and it’s pretty prevalent among lotto winners and professional athletes. When someone gets a sudden influx of wealth, it causes a great deal of stress because their brains aren’t wired to handle it. They’re so used to being not rich that it just feels off.

This is why it’s so easy for lotto winners and professional athletes to go broke. Their brains aren’t wired to see all this money the same way Bill Gates of Warren Buffet sees it. In some respects, they look at money the same way they look at milk. They need to spend it or it’ll expire.

That’s what leads them to just throw it away, giving it to friends or investing it in businesses that have the organization of a 6th grade science fair project. They don’t realize until it’s too late that money doesn’t go bad. It’s okay to actually save it and it’s possible to invest it in a way that’ll ensure you don’t need to dine on Ramen noodles and hot pockets.

Now to be fair, most people don’t know squat about finance or investing. It’s not a class public school teaches to kids at a young age. I get the sense that administrators understand that most kids in public schools aren’t going to strike it rich so it’s not worth the effort. It’s cynical, but understandable.

Given these odds and the tendency for non-rich people to piss their money away like an incontinent monkey, I’ve already crafted a plan on how I would invest a million dollars if I ever achieved that kind of success. This isn’t a fantasy. This is a plan. I may never get a chance to implement this plan, but like a condom, it’s better to have one and not need one rather than need one and not have one.

For this plan, I start with about a million ($1,000,000) dollars. I know Bill Gates can probably find that much money in his couch cushion, but it’s a nice even amount to work with. Since the human brain is terrible at dealing with large numbers, it helps to keep things even.

With this million, here are the simple steps of my plan. Any future lotto winners or professional athletes who want to follow this plan are welcome to do so. It’s free, it’s easy, and anyone who knows how to work a cell phone can do it.

Step 1: Pay off ALL the taxes first, if possible

This is, by far, the most important step anyone with money can take. The IRS is, in many respects, the ultimate dominatrix in that she’ll hurt you in ways you didn’t know were possible. You do not want to defy her.

Step 2: Set up an investing account with a reputable bank and pick one with the lowest fees

This is fairly easy for someone with money. If you have a million dollars, most banks will roll out the red carpet for you. Some will even waive certain fees if you have a lot of money in the account. Depositing a million dollars will usually get you a lot of leeway in that respect.

Step 3: Buy either an index fund (VFINX) or buy a blue-chip stock with a healthy dividend like Verizon, Exxon, or GE

The key here is not to buy a stock you’re going to sell for a quick turn around. The key here is to buy the stock and just basically forget about it. From here, you focus entirely on the dividends. They’re basically Wall Street’s version of masturbation. They’re the gift that keeps on giving.

Step 4: Build a budget around the dividends

From here on out, I focus on the monthly or quarterly dividends that the stock or index fund pays. With a million dollars, it’s usually not enough to just live in a mansion and never have to work again. You usually need several million for that. However, it’s still pretty considerable.

For example, let’s look at how $1,000,000 pays with buying Verizon. As of this posting, the dividend yield is %4.49. Do a little basic math and that comes out to $44,900 a year, which is paid out quarterly with four payments of $11,225 over the course of a year.

Take a breath now. That’s the most math you’ll need to do with this strategy. With this means is that you’ll have a yearly income of over $40,000 for doing absolutely nothing. It’s basically a slacker’s wet dream.

Now unless you want to dine on caviar and snort cocaine off a supermodel’s ass every week, you can budget $44,900 a year to live fairly comfortably. For me, this means taking that $11,225 quarterly dividend and budgeting it for three months at a time.

In most areas that aren’t New York City or San Francisco, you can find a decent home with decent amenities for that sum, plus utilities. That’s the ultimate endgame for this plan of mine. I invest the money in a way that gives me a passive income I can use to pay for the essentials, ensuring that any money I make beyond that is just icing on the cake.

There is one more step though and it’s also quite essential. If you followed the first step, then it should be easy to figure out.

Step 5: Pay all the necessary taxes associated with your investment and dividends

Again, it’s worth re-emphasizing how much you do not want to mess with the IRS. They don’t care if you take your money and throw it at a flock of pigeons. If you don’t give them their cut, they’re going to come after you and you will be in a world of legal trouble that no amount of money can make easier.

There you have it. That’s my plan if and when I ever become rich from either my publishing efforts, by winning the lottery, or by marrying Jennifer Lawrence, whichever comes first. I hope I get a chance to implement it one day. Until then, I hope others take the wise advice of Warren Buffet.

When it comes to money and investing, nobody can beat the market. The best you can do is not lose to it, but unlike gambling or sports, not losing can still be pretty damn profitable.

2 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 12, 2016 · 6:01 am

Success, How To Get It, And What Nobody Tells You About It

We all want it. We all work our asses off to get it. We all go to great lengths, learning whatever we can and doing whatever we must, to achieve it. For many of us, it’s a lifelong obsession that can be both agonizing and exhilarating.

No, I’m not talking about sex for once. I’m talking about something that is often associated with sex, albeit indirectly. I’m talking about success. It’s a relevant thing to talk about for me. I’ve got my first non-self published book coming out this month and another in the works for next year. Sure, it’s not the kind of success that’ll have me swimming in a pool full of champagne, but it’s a start.

I write erotica/romance novels because I want to make a living doing this. I want this to be my career. Naturally, I want it to be a successful career. I want to be able to pay a mortgage and an electric bill with this career. I’m not there yet, but I’m hoping I’m on the right path. However, in pursuing this career, I’ve realized something about success that often gets overlooked.

Nobody has any goddamn clue how to achieve it.

Sure, there are self-help gurus, scam artists, and Gwyneth Paltrows out there claiming they have some sort of secret. They claim they know how to find success, seize it, and hold onto it. They make it sound so easy. They make it sound like the lottery winners who lose all their money have no excuses.

Well, as much as I despise excuses, there are exceptions when it comes to success. If you’re lucky, you don’t have to learn the hard way. For most people, they don’t even have to learn it. It’s just something you tend to realize through experience, but even when we realize it, we don’t want to put it into to words and for good reason. When you break down the components of success, it’s kind of depressing to say the least.

Now I don’t claim to know squat about success. If I did, I’d be sending signed copies of my novels to Jennifer Lawrence and Natalie Portman on a weekly basis. I only know what everybody knows to some extent, but refuses to acknowledge.

In that knowledge, we understand that success has three vital components.

  1. Having talent, which not everybody has
  2. Being willing to work, which not everybody is
  3. Having a certain amount of luck, which not everybody gets

It’s the giant caveat that grade school teachers and “Back To The Future” left out. We’re all told as kids that we can do anything we set our minds to. Doc Brown gave that advice to Marty McFly on more than one occasion. That works great in the movies. In real life, it has the same effect as rubbing goat piss on your feet.

Maybe it’s because we want to protect our children from the harsh realities of the world and I can understand that to some extent, but that doesn’t make those realities any less harsh. When it comes to success, we’re often at the mercy of forces beyond our control.

I’m not just talking about the luck aspect either. For some people, it doesn’t matter how determined or dedicated you are. You could wake up every morning at 4 a.m. and practice throwing a football until 3 a.m. You’ll still never be as good a quarterback as Tom Brady because he just has a unique talent for it.

The same goes for skills beyond throwing a football. You can be the most charismatic actor or actress in the world. You could have all the talent you need. However, if you don’t have the body of Jennifer Lawrence or the sex appeal of George Clooney, you’re not going to get the same chances. That talent just isn’t enough. It isn’t fair, but the real world has a knack for kicking fairness in the ass on a daily basis.

There are even people who do have immense talent, but they’re just not willing to work at it. We never hear about these people, but we probably know someone in our lives who has uncanny talent in something, but just chooses to do nothing with it. It’s tragic, but it’s another one of those forces that are beyond our control.

Even if we do have the sex appeal of George Clooney, the talent of Tom Brady, and the body of Jennifer Lawrence, there’s still that nasty thing called luck. This is, by far, the most frustrating component of success because it’s “kind of” random to some extent.

I say “kind of” because I’m not talking about the luck that involves lottery tickets, Las Vegas, or the NFL draft. Luck can be guided to some extent, but only to a point. Tom Brady was a 6th round draft pick that nobody thought could play as more than a backup. There were 31 other teams who had a chance to draft him, but didn’t. Instead, he ended up going to New England.

Whether by luck or toil, Brady ended up on a team with a coach and a system that perfectly complemented his talents. Would he have succeeded as much as he did if he went to another team? That’s hard to say, but most can’t see him doing what he did with the Cleveland Browns.

Sometimes we have to put ourselves in a position for luck to find us. Sometimes we have to gamble that the luck will be there if we seek it. It doesn’t always pay off, but again, it’s not like the lottery or Las Vegas.

This is where the advice of someone like Scott Adams, the Dilbert guy, comes into play again. He often says in his books that success likes to hide in the ashes of failure. When you take into account the three ingredients I mentioned earlier, that makes perfect sense.

The thing about the lottery is that you have to pay to play the game. As such, it’s set up so that the odds are so remote that the math is just never on your side. It’s how Las Vegas makes its money and how the lottery is a $70 billion industry. With most other forms of success, there’s no ticket to buy. It’s free to keep playing.

That’s the key to some extent. If something is free to play, then the math is suddenly on your side, no matter how remote the odds are. Play an unlimited amount of times and eventually, the most unlikely outcome will occur. This isn’t always possible for fields like acting, modeling, or basket weaving. However, it does help balance out the depressing outlook.

With publishing, the odds are against me. I don’t deny that. However, it’s another one of those games that’s free to play. Sure, it comes with a lot of rejection, but you can make the law of averages work for you.

Other writers have done just that. The book, Twilight, was rejected by 14 publishers before it got picked up. The hit show “Breaking Bad” was rejected by multiple networks, including HBO and FX, before getting picked up by AMC. Ironically, it seems as though there’s a lot of failure that goes into success.

I didn’t keep track of how many times I got rejected. I’d rather not sift through that many emails. However, I don’t use this as an excuse to get discouraged. I use this as an incentive to get better. That’s something else that teachers and after school specials never taught us as kids. We have to keep improving.

It kind of clashes with the whole message that, “You’re so great, no matter what anyone else says!” The truth is that we are all a work-in-progress. If we don’t keep improving at whatever we do, be it writing erotica/romance or learning to deep-fry a turkey, we’re not going to find success. We’re only going to fall into the same pit as those who think they have a chance at winning the lottery.

For the record, though, I do buy lottery tickets. I don’t buy many. I never spend more than pocket change on them, but again, the odds of playing are better than zero, which are the only odds you get if you don’t play.

Success is an unpredictable force and one that not everybody achieves in life. However, it is possible to put yourself in a position to experience it. It often takes more than your teachers and favorite movie stars ever told you, but it’s something worth pursuing. We only have one life to live, after all. Why not make the most of it?

4 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 8, 2016 · 6:07 am

Cheating And Other Flaws In The Standard Model Of Romance

Why is it that stories of cheating, infidelity, and affairs get us feeling giddier than a kid in a room full of puppies? What is it about these stories that fascinate/disgust/arouse us so much? We can’t ignore our reaction to it. There’s a very good reason why Jerry Springer had so much success and it wasn’t just because he’d bring out the occasional midget.

Cheating, infidelity, or whatever you want to call it has always been an obsession of sorts, both in today’s culture and throughout history. Go all the way back to Greek mythology and you’ll get philandering cheats like Zeus, whose track record of infidelity would shock even Jerry Springer.

Fast forward 2,000 years and we still have things link Brangelina, which ended recently in divorce, but for a time was its own cottage industry of sorts, having been built on a foundation of alleged infidelity. Whether we’re in ancient Athens or Newark, New Jersey, we as a society are fascinated by cheating.

That leaves us with an uncomfortable, but sexually suggestive question. Why? This is actually one of those things that can’t be explained solely within the context of caveman logic. The concept of infidelity, as well as the very concept of marriage, takes on a very different context in the caveman mind. The vastly different courtship practices of hunter/gatherer societies are proof enough of that.

As with so many other complex human traits, our caveman brains can’t be precise, accurate, or even logical. They can only do what they must to help us survive and reproduce. It is, as I’ve said before, a blunt instrument that’s prone to error. That error is compounded with infidelity, which is why there are so many theories as to why people cheat.

Our brains still don’t know that we’re not cavemen living in hunter/gatherer societies anymore. Humans, like every other species, are at the mercy of the slow pace of evolution. To be fair to evolution though, humans have been subject to some major upheavals in recent times.

According to most estimates not made by update Texas pastors, the human species has been on this planet for about 200,000 years. It’s only in the last 10,000 years or so that the agricultural revolution laid the foundation for our civilization.

It’s this major shift that laid the foundation for our current concept infidelity. It’s this system of society that helped establish the marriage, child-rearing, and gender roles of civilization that have persisted for most of human history. It’s also this system that made infidelity such a big freakin’ deal to begin with.

I bring this up because last month, I talked about a new book I had been reading called “Sex At Dawn” by Christopher Ryan, Cacilda Jetha, Allyson Johnson, and Jonathan Davis. This book attempts to break down the standard model of romance and expose the flaws within.

I touched on some of those flaws before I even read the book, but it has been very insightful (and very sexy) in fleshing out those flaws in ways I never could. Recently, I got to the part of the book where cheating is discussed and it put the whole concept into a new context, one that can really inspire an aspiring erotica/romance writer.

First, the book lays out the standard model of romance. Anyone who ever watched a sitcom in the 1950s knows what that model looks like. It’s basically one man, one woman, one house with a white picket fence, and exceedingly rigid roles for everyone involved.

The man works to provide money for the family. The woman stays home to raise the kids. The kids get into trouble every now and then, requiring a lecture from their wise father to fix everything. Everybody goes to bed having learned a lesson. It’s basically the exact opposite of the Simpsons.

The Rick Santorums of the world praise this model. At times, they deify it the same way the entire state of Massachusetts deifies Tom Brady. They see it as the perfect ideal that must be pursued, protected, and championed, even if it means bashing homosexuals and screwing over single parents.

There are many problems with this model and even more with the uptight people who champion it, but “Sex At Dawn” singles one in particular out when it comes to infidelity. Don’t worry though. It’s the sexy kind of problem.

The book sets up a fairly standard scenario not much different from the 50s sitcom model. Picture a man and a woman together. They’re married. They’re fairly normal. They’re as typical as typical can be in a country that makes bacon-flavored lube.

The man provides a stable, comfortable home for the woman. He works a job that pays the bills, allowing the woman to stay at home to keep it in one piece. He’s not an overly exciting man. She’s not an overly exciting woman. Their sex life is the antithesis of an old Motley Crue music video. It may as well be as routine as doing the laundry.

So why is this a problem? Well, “Sex At Dawn” makes it a point to note that evolution creates numerous incentives that we don’t already recognize, let alone understand. Remember, our brains and bodies are built for survival and reproduction. The standard model does provide some of that, but it’s not entirely a safe bet.

In that model, the man and the woman are gambling with their evolutionary imperatives. The man is only impregnating one woman in this model. What if that woman has health issues that render her infertile? What if the children she has suffer birth defects? What if she’s only able to have one or two kids at the most?

The are just as many risks for the woman. What if the man’s genes aren’t that good? What if the man’s fertility is limited at best? What if the children she bears aren’t particularly talented or advantaged in any way?

That’s a lot of gambling in the game of evolution. Like immature children who try to cheat at monopoly, we humans will try to bend the rules when we can. This leads to the kind of sexy scenarios that makes “Sex At Dawn” one of the most colorful and insightful books an erotica/romance writer can reference.

For the man, evolution provides an incentive not to hedge his bets. That means the inclination to spend some extra time with their hot young secretary is pretty strong. Unlike a woman, a man can hump multiple women and has a chance at impregnating them all. Sure, those kids will be at a disadvantage if their father is not involved, but the law of averages said at least one of those kids will survive to carry on his genes.

Like I said, evolution has the maturity of a 13-year-old watching Game of Thrones. It’s basically a recipe for extra-marital humping.

For the woman, there are other incentives, but they’re just as powerful and just as sexy. A woman with a boring, but faithful husband will likely have children who share that trait. The boys she bears will be boring and faithful, still having to rely on one woman to propagate their lineage.

Enter the bad boy rebel who will hump anything with legs and a pulse. He’s James Dean. He’s Wolverine. He’s Johnny Cash. This man, for perverse reasons that evolution fuels, gets the woman horny enough to do some extra humping on the side. Sure, it requires that she go behind her hubby’s back, but as women and men alike know all too well, we do crazy things when we’re really horny.

On top of the toe-curling pleasure that comes with exciting, bad-boy sex, she may now bear a child who can hump more women and make more stud babies. Those stud babies have a much better chance at passing on the woman’s genes so she has a powerful evolutionary incentive to make sure all her sons are Wilt Chamberlin and all her daughters are Kardashians.

In light of these evolutionary incentives, coupled with the rigid social order imposed by the “Leave It To Beaver” crowd, it makes perfect evolutionary sense. Evolution forged our basic drives and imperatives. Evolution, being the imperfect process it is, doesn’t give a two whiffs of a skunks ass what laws, taboos, and Jerry Springer says. If it propagates a species, then that’s all it needs.

It’s because of these evolutionary forces and powerful incentives that infidelity makes a perverse kind of sense. For years, I struggled to understand why women wanted to sleep with the bad boys, knowing they weren’t going to stick around or be faithful. Now, when I think about it from the “stud baby” perspective, it does make sense.

It also reveals how imperfect our current assumptions about relationships and romance are, even in the 21st century. Granted, there have been improvements since the Victorian Era, but I think we, as a society, can do better. I don’t claim to have a solution, but I will definitely explore a few sexy possibilities on this blog and in my novels.

3 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 6, 2016 · 7:41 am

Romance And Reason: Can They Co-Exist?

God gave us a penis and a brain, but only enough blood to run one at a time. It’s a running joke among men, but it’s no laughing matter. We need our brains to function. We need our genitals to propagate. These are two important functions of life and they aren’t always on the same page.

Women aren’t immune from it either. Sure, they don’t need to worry about their pants getting too tight when they walk by a Victoria’s Secret, but they’re just as prone to other functions overriding their capacity for reason. That’s not a joke about periods either. Women, like men, have a nasty habit of not thinking things through while in an emotional state.

It happens all the time. It’s one of the bugs in the 1.0 beta version of nature that we’re all stuck in (for now). When we’re in an emotional and/or agitated state of mind, we don’t think clearly.

We’ve all been there. Ever go grocery shopping when you’re really hungry? It really does screw with your mind and your wallet. If you’re hungry enough, everything from stale cookies to expired milk seems appetizing.

I’ve certainly been there. Back when I was in college, there was this one winter where I was just really, really depressed for reasons that are too pathetic to describe. Then, some guy came around my dorm selling magazines and, because I was in a such a pathetic state of mind, I bought a subscript to Maxim magazine that I didn’t want, need, or care for.

My point is that we humans inherently suck at balancing reason with emotion. It’s the reason why Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock clashed so many times on Star Trek. Coincidentally, that’s also why there’s this huge fandom of them as gay lovers, but that’s a story for another post.

For me, an aspiring romance/erotica writer, I need to use both. I need to use reason when crafting a story, less my novels turn into one long incoherent string of rants, babble, and whining. I’ll leave that sort of thing to 4chan and Twilight message boards. For my brand of romance/erotica, I want to strike some kind of balance between heavy thoughts and hot loins.

That raises a fundamental question. Is it possible for romance and reason to co-exist? Are they even on the same length? Can they even exist isn’t the same universe? That’s an argument some would passionately debate. There’s an inherent irony in that debate, but it’s not entirely misguided. There is some science behind it even.

Anyone who has been on the wrong end of road rage or eaten an entire bucket of ice cream after a bad breakup understands the clash. On some levels, we know we do dumb shit when we’re in an emotional state. We even know how dumb it is. We still do it anyways. I’m sure there are times when my brain wanted to kick my ass.

However, I’m of the belief that since our passions and our higher thoughts both come from the same organ, namely our brain, they can coexist. That’s not to say it’s a perfect coexistence. That’s not even to say it’s all that peaceful. I’m just saying they can occupy the same space without the universe exploding.

Once again, this conflict is a byproduct of our caveman brains, which still don’t realize that we’re not living in caves and fighting off hungry tigers anymore. Those brains are wired in a way to prioritize certain things more than others. Survival and sex is at the top of that list. The capacity for reason isn’t even top five. Hell, for some it isn’t even top ten.

It’s still there though. Our capacity for reason is a vital tool. Some would argue it’s the most vital tool in our species’ arsenal. It allowed us to do more than just avoid tigers, make tools, and set up nicer caves for humping. It allowed us to understand our world, build cities, and forge assault rifles that ensure no hungry tigers dare mess with us.

There’s a lot of value with respect to reason. Unfortunately, not a lot of that value plays out in sex and romance. That seems to be a massive blind spot of sorts, one that leads to many wrecked relationships/marriages/drunken hook-ups.

It doesn’t help that using logic and reason in a relationship isn’t considered sexy. It doesn’t matter how skilled you are in the philosophy, engineering, or science. Brad Pitt is still going to get laid more than you. From an evolutionary standpoint, he wins big time.

From a logical stand point though, his recent divorce and past breakups show that even Brad Pitt has room for improvement. Could he have saved those relationships by employing more brain power and less sex appeal? It’s hard to say, but I’m of the belief that hindsight tends to remind us of just how many opportunities we tend to miss.

I’m also of the belief that we all need to step back and give a little extra scrutiny to how we organize our relationships. We’re still going to act erratically. We’re still going to make foolish decisions. I’ve had that play out in my novels, from “Skin Deep” to “Holiday Heat.” In those same novels, though, I also allow for moments of clarity.

This is where I think romance and reason can find some common ground. Clarity is something that both value. Reason values the clarity of facts and the logical paths around them. Romance values the clarity that comes with knowing how you feel about someone and how they feel about you. It is, in essence, the scotch tape that links these two forces.

Clarity is what sobers us up when we find out we’ve made a dumb decision while in an emotional state. If that decision takes place in a town like Las Vegas, it can have some major legal implications. Hell, there are entire movies built around that premise.

That same clarity also reveals to us when we know we’ve found someone we want to love with all our hearts and without reservation. It removes any uncertainty and hesitation when we feel the urge to make love to one another. In that sense, clarity is a damn good aphrodisiac.

This isn’t just something I believe. This is something I hope to demonstrate in my upcoming book, “Passion Relapse.” Since this is the book that finally got the attention of a publisher, I feel like now is as good a time as any to start building some hype around it. I’m no Don King, but I feel like I should get people excited/horny about it.

There are a lot of aspects to “Passion Relapse” that are built primarily on overwhelming emotions and a serious lack of forethought. The characters involved in this story struggle more than most to balance their reason with their loins, even more so than Brad Pitt. However, it’s only when clarity enters the equation that things get really heated.

By the end of this book, I hope to give readers a new appreciation for the value of clarity and just how much it can improve your love life. I’m not saying it’ll be scientific proof that reason and romance can form a harmonious union that leads to passionate lovemaking and a greater appreciation of higher thought. It will be damn sexy though. That much I can promise.

1 Comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 6, 2016 · 6:16 am

How NOT To Talk About Marriage

Picture a scenario with a man and a woman. No, it’s not one of those scenarios. They’re both fully clothed, in public, and otherwise normal. Then, imagine the kind of outrage/public shaming that would occur if this took place in front of one too many cameras.

Woman: I’m so sad! I’m so lonely! Why does the world so cruel?

Man: Maybe it’s because you’re really fat. Were you abused as a kid or something? Just exercise more or get some surgery.

You feel that? That’s the inescapable urge to roll your eyes because you know what kind of outcry this is going to cause. You know the kind of arguments, insults, rants, and raves that’ll emerge from this topic. Human can be pretty crazy and unpredictable when it comes to certain topics. Topics that involve marriage or gender issues, though, are annoyingly consistent.

So why do I bring up this scenario and the predictable outcry it tends to cause? Well, it was inspired, in large part, by a video I came across recently. It involves a small talk show discussing recent trends in marriage, namely why men are more and more reluctant to get married.

I’ve talked about this issue before, namely the part where the legal system gives men and women one too many tools to screw each other over and not in the way they enjoy. I generally avoid talking about it because it tends to make people less horny, which isn’t good for any erotica/romance writer. However, sometimes I do feel compelled to comment on something that feels overly relevant.

With that in mind, here is the clip in question. To get to the part that really annoyed me, fast forward to the 2:20 mark. I should warn you though. You may feel the urge to punch your computer screen.

Did you see it? Is your computer screen still intact? Are you confused as to why someone who is single, in his 30s, and worried about his romantic future would feel uneasy with this exchange? Well, let me break it down in a way that I hope won’t cost anyone a new computer screen.

The argument the man in the clip makes is not a new one. They’ve been made before, the pitfalls of marriage and the reasons men aren’t too eager to participate. In fact, Fox built one of its most successful sitcoms about the ills of marriage and what it does to men. These are not new issues is what I’m saying.

Even so, there’s still this imbalance of sorts between men and women when it comes to the decline of marriage. There’s still a stigma against those who are reluctant to join an institution that has become exceedingly unjust for legal, political, and social reasons that are too complicated and unsexy to get into.

That stigma, however, doesn’t apply to both genders equally. I know this because I’ve actually felt this inequality to some extent. It plays out like this:

  • You’re a woman and you don’t want to get married? You go girl! You don’t need a man! You just need to be you! Girl power!

  • You’re a man and you don’t want to get married? What the hell is wrong with you? Are you gay or something? What kind of creep stays single all his life?

See the difference? The clip itself doesn’t do justice to the extent of this difference, but the man does get crap for making these arguments. When he calmly and reasonably lays out his arguments, the first response isn’t to take them seriously or ask more questions. The response is, “Were you hurt?”

To the man’s credit, he laughs it off. That shows he has more maturity and self-awareness than 95 percent of the people I see on talk shows these days. It’s still a very telling assessment though, assuming outright that the man is criticizing marriage was somehow hurt in the past.

Even as a man who does want to find love and does want to marry someone, I find that pretty insulting. I get that marriage has rarely, if ever, been an equal institution. I get that for most of human civilization, women had it pretty rough with respect to marriage. I’m not denying that.

However, if I’ve learned anything from all the superhero comics I’ve read over the years, it’s that you can’t fight injustice with more injustice. That’s like trying to fight a wildfire with napalm. It’s only going to make the situation worse.

At the moment, marriage is not a good deal for men. At the moment, women have more legal and social protections with respect to marriage then men. Women can divorce their husbands whenever they want for whatever reason and, in many states, get half their husband’s assets by default. They can get custody of kids, get favorable treatment by courts, and are more readily believed with accusations of spousal abuse.

Now I’m not Al Bundy in that I see marriage as its own circle of hell for a man. I believe marriage, love, and all the passion that comes with it is a beautiful thing. The problem is that our assumptions, legal traditions, and social constructs are horribly imbalanced at the moment. It’s only when marriage becomes a relationship of true equals that its beauty can be appreciated.

4 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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

December 5, 2016 · 6:28 am

Why People Sext (According To Dilbert)

Every generation does something unusually kinky that horrifies the older, more uptight generation that has spent considerable energy hiding from their kids that they once wore bell-bottoms and danced to disco music. I don’t deny my generation did some kinky things, many of which still play out in music videos, but I try to keep things in context.

For that very reason, a context for “sexting,” also known as the sending of dick pics and tit shots, still baffles me to some degree. Maybe it’s a sign I’m getting older. I’m in my 30s now. I can’t claim to be young, dumb, and inexperienced anymore. Being on this planet for 30 years gives me too much experience to have excuses.

Regardless of whether or not I’m becoming and old fart, sexting is a thing. According to a 2012 study in “Computers and Human Behavior,” over half of a sample size of young college-age students had engaged in sexting in some forms. Over half of any population means it’s not a fringe behavior. This is happening and it’s becoming common to a degree that’s dangerously close to what bell-bottoms were in the 70s.

So why do people do it? Why is exchanging sexy pictures a thing? Granted, there have been some legal issues involving sexting, but most of those cases involve individuals who are underage. Some involve exploitation and coercion. That’s an actual crime, right up there with forcing someone to wear bunny pajamas to a Rob Zombie concert.

This isn’t like smoking crack. As far as the law is concerned, it is legal to willingly exchange naked pictures of yourself. Just make damn sure the participants have been on this planet long enough to exceed the arbitrary threshold of adulthood that society imposes.

So why do we do it? What’s the appeal? To me, a guy in his 30s with an internet connection and a love of writing erotica/romance, it just doesn’t make sense to me. The internet has an almost infinite number of boobs and dicks on it. It’s really not necessary to persuade someone else to send you pictures of their bodies. A simple Google search is really all you need.

I liken it to being at a fancy restaurant and ordering a steak. However, instead of bringing you a stake, the waiter brings you a picture of a steak. It still looks good. It still looks appetizing. It’s still a fucking picture though. It’s not going to fill the same need.

I personally have never sent someone a picture of my penis. Instead, I just show them how long my ring finger is, which is a more subtle way of letting someone know you have a generous endowment. If I find a lover who is into sexting, I’ll probably feel different. For now though, I’m still confused.

Thankfully, others have thought about this so I don’t have to. Scott Adams, the creator of the famed comic strip, Dilbert, has a knack for making sense of absurdities that have little to no rational explanation. His wry sense of humor has inspired me a great deal in recent years. It has also helped me shape the course of this blog.

The writings of Scott Adams, as well as his hilarious Dilbert cartoons, have helped inspire the phenomenon of “caveman logic” that I’m so fond of citing. Most recently, I read his book, “How to Fail at Everything and Still Win Big.” It was the most fun I’ve had reading a book that didn’t involve graphic depictions of female anatomy.

As such, when Scott Adams has something to say about sexting, I tend to listen. Last week, he did an article called, “D*ck Pics Explained.” Naturally, it got my interest and not just because it made me think about my own penis. Here’s the main crux of his interpretation:

Our sex drive is so strong that it largely eliminates the option for rational behavior. And as you know, the hornier you get, the stupider you are. Once a guy reaches a critical level of horniness, his rational brain shuts off and he becomes primal. And when he’s primal, he sometimes signals his availability for mating in the most basic way possible: He displays his junk in full preparedness.

If you think the men doing this behavior are extra-dumb, or extra-rude, that might be true. But it is just as likely that such men are extra-horny. That gets you to the same decision no matter your IQ because the rational brain is shut down during maximum arousal.

It is also true – as far as I can tell from discussions with women over the years – that sometimes a dick pic actually results in dating and sex. I realize how hard that is to believe. But sometimes (maybe one time in 500) it actually works. You would think those odds would be enough to discourage even a man with a temporarily suspended intellect, but that view ignores the basic nature of men: We’re risk takers when it comes to reproduction.

Okay, now I can understand it to some extent. I understand why sexting is still a thing. I’m a fairly healthy man and I can say without reservation or shame that I’ve been at that critical level of horniess before. It has led me to do or contemplate things that makes my brain want to kick my ass. It’s never gotten me into too much trouble, but it has led to some awkward situations that I prefer not to describe.

This interpretation is part of what Scott Adams calls the “Moist Robot Hypothesis.” It’s basically the idea that human brains are like robots, but they’re moist and fungible. Granted, they can’t be programmed as easily as a non-moist robot, but it can be hacked to some degree. In fact, the internet is full of brain hacks to exploit, which says a lot about the sub-par programming of our brains.

Flawed or not, the hypothesis is similar to caveman logic. It emphasizes the fact that we humans have two biological imperatives: survival and reproduction. Rational thought and a clear understanding of reality don’t always jive with those imperatives. That’s why critically horny men and women are prone to doing stupid things.

I’m not nearly as smart or as successful as Scott Adams, but I am working on that success. As such, I hope he’ll forgive me if I tack something onto his assessment. I agree in large part with his explanation for sexting. However, I would add another layer to it and it’s an extension of both caveman logic and the Moist Robot Hypothesis.

Due to our biological imperatives, which are at the forefront of our brain’s programming, there’s also a powerful need to adapt. Adaptation is a basic part of evolution for all creatures, be they human or pond scum. Think of it this way:

  • Does wearing tie-dye T-shirts and listening to Bob Dylan increase your chances of having sex? Then chances are, you’ll adapt accordingly.
  • Does wearing bell-bottoms and listening to disco music increase your chances of having sex? Then chances are, you’ll adapt accordingly.
  • Does sending naked pictures of yourself to a lover increase your chances of having sex? Then chances are, you’ll adapt accordingly.

See a pattern here? Notice how I didn’t mention the degree to which your chances of having sex will increase. It can be exceedingly small, but so long as it’s more than zero, that’s enough reason to adapt your behavior and conduct accordingly.

There’s another factor in play that inspires adaptation. That involves distance and technology. Thanks to the growth and prevalence of instant communication, long-distance relationships are a bit more viable.

I know this from personal experience because I met one of my ex-girlfriends online and a lot of our relationship was long-distance. Were it not for Skype and email, we never would’ve found each other and she never would’ve taken me on a memorable trip to Victoria’s Secret.

In this context, sexting can be seen as an adaptation of sorts and one that’s become more necessary to some extent. According to the Journal of Applied Communications Research, between a quarter and half of all relationships among college students are long distance. Naturally, college students are still going to get horny, regardless of distance. Their caveman brains/moist robot brains will require them to adapt.

This capacity for adaptation shows just how creative we humans can be when it comes to fulfilling our biological imperatives. In evolutionary terms, we’re no different from our caveman ancestors. We’re still wired to eat, hump, and survive. We just change our tactics in accord to our circumstances and adapt accordingly.

At the moment, some are adapting to new technology and distant connections by sending naked pictures of themselves. It’s not necessarily a logical adaptation, but since when does logic apply when you’re horny?

9 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

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