user since
Mon Aug 22 2005 at 02:17:28 (11.9 years ago )
last seen
Wed Aug 31 2005 at 23:22:21 (11.9 years ago )
number of write-ups
13 - View you'retheinspiration's writeups (feed)
level / experience
0 (Initiate) / -69
want to be judged for who i am
most recent writeup
August 31, 2005
Send private message to you'retheinspiration

Thank you all for your kindness and your upvotes. Thank you for letting me write daynodes.

could it be that one small voice doesn't count in the world. yellow like geisha dawn. deny it all the way.

i like my writing style. i wish you'd leave me alone. just let me write what i write. stop deleting it.

Let it be known that even a condemnation of censorship was censored.

8/22/05. Censored again.

8/23/05. Censored again.

Massage parlor

Note: this article does not apply to all massage parlors. With a modicum of experience, you will know the ones they apply to. Out of about twenty massage parlors that I have frequented, only one of them (the first one, describing itself as "therapeutic massage") failed to fall into this article's description. Understand that I was self-selecting.

Every male needs to know about massage parlors. Every major city has them. Most are Asian, and will have names like "Bangkok Massage." Their locations are sometimes visually evident, but many times you will need to look on Craigslist, the phone book, or the advertisements in the newspaper's sports section to find them.

So here's how it usually works. You walk in to a place that looks as a clean as a doctor's office. An older woman (the Mama San) will appear and ask, "You want massage?" You say yes. Typically you will need to pay $60-$100 at this point for one hour of massage.

Next you strip your clothes off, and a pretty (usually) girl will escort you to the showering room. There she will wash your entire body, starting with your back, then your butt and legs, moving to your chest and down. She will suggestively ask, "I wash you here?" Definitely say yes, and she will.

Next she'll escort you to a private massage room. Here's where things differ among massage parlors. Most massage parlors are not brothels. Generally the masseuse will have you lie face down on a table, and she will go to work on your back. When you have about ten to fifteen minutes left, she will roll you over and massage your front. Finally, usually without asking, she will begin the happy ending. Every masseuse has her own style of happy ending. Some use a lot of testicle play, others just jerk hard. Generally you can get her to take her top off. Sometimes you can even get the panties off and stroke her vagina and bottom while you get off. You need to find a masseuse you're compatible with--not all of them are worth the money.

When you release your load, she will clean you off. Then she will help you dress. It is expected that you give a tip of appreciation. After all, your original money only secured a massage, and she gave you a handjob.

Now some massage parlors are full-service sex shops. When you finish your shower, and if the masseuse feels comfortable that you're not a cop, she'll ask what you want to do. Typically, a blow job runs around $100, and intercourse runs around $200. Anal is not very common. You need to pay upfront here. Of course, you should also request a massage first--why not get the best experience your money can buy? I almost forgot to add...all sex, even oral sex, is done with a condom.

It's wise to get to know your masseuse. Form a relationship, like you would do with your doctor or therapist. You may want to make a point of trying new massage parlors every time you go to a new city. Don't miss out on Chinatown in San Francisco!

Note: of course paying for sex with a masseuse is illegal in almost all jurisdictions. The only places where I know it's legal are Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Costa Rica, the Netherlands, and Nevada. To the best of my knowledge, handjobs are illegal too. Of course, it's hard to dream up any reason that it should be against the law to pay for a hand job, but Republicans don't generally follow reason.

Tort reform

"Iraqi democracy will succeed -- and that success will send forth the news, from Damascus to Teheran -- that freedom can be the future of every nation. The establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic revolution."

That's our president, George W. Bush. George Bush is a big fan of democracy. Indeed, George Bush will kill tens of thousands of civilians and thousands of American troops, and alienate the rest of the world, for the sake of democracy (he says).

Yet George W. Bush is against the purest form of democracy in the world today--trial by jury. George W. Bush would like to step between jurors representing average America and wealthy stockholders, like himself. He does not believe a jury should have the right to decide just how much a corporation should pay for its misdeeds.

George W. Bush says "we must protect small business owners and workers from the explosion of frivolous lawsuits that threaten jobs across America." Well under our Constitution, these small businesses have the right to have every "frivolous lawsuit" tried by a jury. The democratic process decides whether the lawsuit is "frivolous," not Mr. Bush. By declaring lawsuits frivolous and seeking to forestall their adjudication by ordinary people, Mr. Bush shows how he really feels about democracy. (but nobody ever believed the Iraq War was about democracy anyway.)

Ironically, economic conservatives believe that the tort system is economically necessary. It is critical that businesses absorb the costs that they impose on society, so they have incentive to weigh the benefits, as judged by profits, against the costs. In economic parlance, this is known as internalization of externalities. Even punitive damages is widely believed among mainstream economists to be economically desirable, because businesses will not be held responsible for every cost they impose on society. But as I have written before, there is no such thing as an economic conservative in government.

So it's time for the American people to rise up. They should ask Mr. Bush if he's so fond of democracy, why does he want to disembowel civil trial by jury? If he's so enraptured by human life, why does he want to protect corporations who negligently destroy it?