postimg
Feb 2012 28

Aisline Suicide in Birds Nest

  • INTO: Girls, movies, night time, awkwardness, saying inappropriate things, the beach, sunsets and sunrises, dancing, dancing around in my underwear, laughing at my own jokes, being the only one laughing at my own jokes, boobs, ruining everything I try to cook and making people pretend they enjoyed eating it, heavily tattooed girls and boys.
  • NOT INTO: Big crowds, people I don’t know touching me, mirrors, drugs, being cold.
  • MAKES ME HAPPY: Warm weather, music, driving around aimlessly, late nights, early mornings.
  • MAKES ME SAD: People with no morals, people with no common sense, people who can’t act in public, disrespect, greed, poverty and John Mayer.
  • 5 THINGS I CAN’T LIVE WITHOUT: IPod, Blackberry, laptop, a steady internet connection, and my family/cats.
  • VICES: Sour candies.
  • I SPEND MOST OF MY FREE TIME: Trying to take over the world.

Get to know Aisline better over at SuicideGirls.com!


postimg
Feb 2012 27

by Damon Martin

The decision Hollywood made a few months ago to remake Buffy the Vampire Slayer without series creator Joss Whedon was met with more than just a little venom from the fans that followed and supported the series for seven seasons and a continuing run into the comic book world.

It appears that some of those voices were heard after first time writer Whit Anderson was hired to write a script, and upon further review, the producers behind the project were thoroughly unimpressed with what he came up with; The Los Angeles Times reports the script was “was rejected completely.”

The project is now on hold awaiting a new writer, but it may end up getting shelved all together after the fans of the Buffy-verse revolted against the idea of a movie remake without its creator’s involvement.

Some of the actors who made up a big part of the Buffy the Vampire Slayer series for seven years were also soundly against the idea of a movie remake sans Whedon. Especially considering most of them are still young enough to reprise roles in some kind of movie, if Whedon ever decided to make a go of it.

“Without Joss’s participation it is likely to be almost as good as the original film,” said James Marsters, who portrayed Spike during the hit series’ run when speaking to SuicideGirls. “Cause at least Joss wrote that one.”

The original Buffy the Vampire Slayer film –– which starred Kristy Swanson, Luke Perry, Rutger Hauer, and Paul ‘Pee-Wee Herman’ Reubens –– was released in 1992 and was a critical disaster. However, it became a bit of a cult hit among science fiction fans.

Whedon wrote the original film and created all the characters, but the Hollywood machine twisted, turned, and trounced on his ideas throughout the making of it, and the result is what ended up being released.

The film’s ultimate failure is what put Whedon back into creative mode to bring Buffy and her cohorts back, this time to the small screen. The show ran for seven years and has continued to be one of the most popular and talked about shows in the science fiction fan realm, and even hit syndication.

“I don’t think it’s Buffy without Joss Whedon,” said Mark Metcalf, who portrayed ‘The Master’ throughout the first season and several other appearances during the show’s seven season run. “He was the source of it, originally, even before the movie. It was his idea and the series came about because he wasn’t happy with what they did with the movie.”

Marsters and Metcalf are just two of the players from the Buffy TV universe that didn’t seem to be on board for a remade movie, and despite their best efforts Hollywood seems to have come to that realization as well.

Metcalf may have summed it up best when speaking about the potential project, if it ever does get completed.

“I won’t go see it,” Metcalf stated.

Buffy or no Buffy, Whedon has obviously kept busy. He wrote and directed the big budget superhero film The Avengers which hits theaters this summer and is expected to be one of the year’s biggest films.

postimg
Feb 2012 27

by SG’s Team Agony feat. Dalila

Let us answer life’s questions – because great advice is even better when it comes from SuicideGirls.


[Dalila in Psycho Holidays]

Q. I am in a relationship with a woman whom I love dearly and generally we are very happy. My only complaint is that she has a secret social life. For instance, she doesn’t work on Tuesday, but she will be gone all day and come home after I get home. If I ask what she’s doing, she says I am out of line, even if I am just trying to make conversation. She has a group of friends that she does happy hour with and I am not allowed to meet them and I know nothing about them – not even their names. Asking about them has caused a couple of fights so I have let it go. I am also not allowed to know where they meet for happy hour.

Normally I just get a text after work that says, “Going out be home late.” She has other friends that I am allowed to join for happy hour. I know these friends well and get invited, or rather told I am going to those happy hours. In contrast, when I go out I always invite her and she almost always comes with me. If she doesn’t, I am okay with that, and she always asks me about who I was with, if we had a good time, what we talked about, and so on.

These are the same questions that make her very upset when I have asked them. I am not concerned that she might be cheating on me. I trust her. What really bothers me is that she feels like she needs to keep secrets from me. I really do not have any secrets and, except when she asks about my time in Iraq, I will tell her anything. I think people that keep secrets have something to hide. What do you think?

A: I don’t think that a person who keeps secrets necessarily has something to hide. People can decide to tell or not to tell, and sometimes they choose not to because they simply prefer to keep stuff to themselves. And there’s no clear evidence of seediness here.

Just think: what happened last time you had a relationship and you and your significant other had common friends? Usually, when couples split, friends are split too. There are the ones who stay with the girl, others who stick with the boy: but the original gang is often, sadly, no more. Your girlfriend might have experienced this kind of thing before, and, as a result, prefers to keep her closest slice of friends strictly to herself. Then again, she lets you join her and other mates, so perhaps she just wants to be herself with one particular set of friends. Maybe she wants to vent a bit in a safe space, with friends she really trusts. I’m sure there are things you’d prefer not to tell your parents, or you workmates, or your mates, even your girlfriend. Think about those. You wouldn’t go for sex advice to your grandma, would you?

It’s also true that sharing every single moment of the day brings most relationships to an end, so you should cherish the fact that your girlfriend is not the super sticky type. It’s actually a healthy sign that she has her own friends and interests; you’ve gotten yourself a woman, congrats! And a little mystery can be a good thing. Not sharing every little, tiny, weenie thingy is the best way to keep your companion awake and interested. Don’t sweat, it’s a good sign!

Cheers,

Dalila

***

Got Problems? Let SuicideGirls’ team of Agony Aunts provide solutions. Email questions to: gotproblems@suicidegirls.com

postimg
Feb 2012 27

by Daniel Robert Epstein

“Making movies is the best film school for me.” – Ang Lee

Few filmmakers can make a movie about two cowboys falling in love in 1963, like Brokeback Mountain, and have it be considered Academy Award material. But certainly Ang Lee is in a class by himself.

He first gained notice in America with his “Father Knows Best” trilogy of The Wedding Banquet, Pushing Hands, and Eat Drink Man Woman. Later he gained monstrous international acclaim with Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, which was nominated for ten Academy Awards and won four. After that he ventured into big budget studio films with The Hulk.

After that film didn’’t do as well as anticipated, Lee went back to lower budgeted filmmaking with Brokeback Mountain. It stars Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger (see SG interview) as two ranchhands who have a passionate love affair over 20 years to the detriment of their families.

Read our exclusive interview with Ang Lee on SuicideGirls.com.

postimg
Feb 2012 27

Nahp Suicide in Wii

  • INTO: Animals, photography, tattoos, body piercings, natural beauty, porn, love and eternal love, sex, chocolate, sushi, movies, skirts, dresses, black hair, black color, snickers, pin up style, ‘50s, ‘60s, ‘70s, ‘90s, socks, nature.
  • NOT INTO: Dead animals, lies, cigarettes, taking the trash out, flat shoes, fashion, divorce, ‘80s, drama, celebrities, irresponsibility.
  • MAKES ME HAPPY: Getting a new tattoo, cute animals, love, kisses, 100% sincerity, sushi, weekends, tattoos, sex, my music, underwear, chocolate, good job, Mac.
  • MAKES ME SAD: Lies, cheating, suffering animals, quarreling, working late or on weekends, banks, negativity, PCs, silence, bad weather.
  • HOBBIES: Sleeping, movies, making rag dolls (muniequitos), internet, photography.
  • 5 THINGS I CAN’T LIVE WITHOUT: Animals, fruit juice, my music, love, my iPhone.

Get to know Nahp better over at SuicideGirls.com!


postimg
Feb 2012 25

by David Seaman

SG Political Contributor David Seaman sits down with investigative journalist and author Greg Palast to find out what’s not so super about the unprecedented amount of funding being poured into politics by corporations and private individuals via the new breed of political action committees (PACs) created following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling. Palast has made it his raison d’être to expose the vultures who prey on our political system for their own gain at the expense of the masses it’s supposed to serve. Here he explains why talk of corporate personhood is taking the focus off an aspect of campaign finance that could potentially be even more troubling. – Nicole Powers, SG Ed.

Check back here for Parts 2 and 3 of David’s interview with Greg tomorrow and Monday.

Producer: Lindsey Miller

[..]

postimg
Feb 2012 24

by Brad Warner

A guy called Mister C asked the following question via Twitter: “Doesn’t Buddhism count homosexuals as sexual deviants?” I’ve already addressed this issue at length in my most recent book Sex, Sin, and Zen: A Buddhist Exploration of Sex from Celibacy to Polyamory and Everything in Between and even right here on SuicideGirls. But I’ll address it again, because clearly there is a need to since the idea persists that Buddhism believes gays are deviants.

There is no Buddhist Bible somewhere out there in which it is written that a man shall not lie with another man as with a woman or anything like that. That’s the short answer. And now the long one.

The main reason so many people believe that Buddhists consider homosexuality to be deviant is because of statements made by the 14th Dalai Lama. In 1997 in an interview with Dennis Conkin of the Bay Area Reporter, the Dalai Lama is reported to have said, “Buddhist sexual proscriptions ban homosexual activity and heterosexual sex through orifices other than the vagina, including masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand. From a Buddhist point of view, lesbian and gay sex is generally considered sexual misconduct.”

One thing that needs to be clarified right from the outset is that the Dalai Lama is not the Pope of Buddhism whose decries form the official position that Buddhists everywhere must follow. He is, in fact, merely the head of one particular sect of Tibetan Buddhism, the Gelungpa lineage. So he’s not even the Pope of Tibetan Buddhism, let alone all of Buddhism. Other Buddhist lineages like Zen, Theravada, Pure Land, Nichiren and so on don’t recognize him as their spokesman or leader. I, personally, rarely pay him much attention.

I’m guessing that the “Buddhist sexual proscriptions” he refers to are the ancient rules for monks (both male and female). The first Buddhist monastic order was expected to practice celibacy. Apparently some of Buddha’s monks thought this meant only that men were forbidden to have sex with women. They figured it was permissible for men to have sex with each other and that hot girl-on-girl action was also fine and dandy. So Buddha had to educate them by specifying that “no sex” meant no sex at all by clearly stipulating homosexual acts as also being no-no’s for monks.

But that was meant only for monks. As far as laypeople were concerned there were only four types of sexual acts that were specified as wrong. In an ancient sutra about Right Action the Buddha is quoted as saying that a Buddhist, “avoids unlawful sexual intercourse, abstains from it. He has no intercourse with girls who are still under the protection of father or mother, brother, sister, or relative; nor with married women, nor female convicts; nor lastly with betrothed girls.” Although this statement is made from the male perspective, it is understood the same applies to Buddhist laywomen.

As for lesbian and gay sex being “generally considered sexual misconduct” by Buddhists, that really depends on who you ask. For example, the San Francisco Zen Center, one of America’s largest contemporary Buddhist organizations, is extremely gay friendly. They run a lot of workshops and retreats specifically geared toward the LGBT community. Many other Buddhist communities both in the West and in Asia are similarly open-minded.

There are ancient scriptures that do specify certain acts we consider to be homosexual as being misconduct for monks. And I think this is what the Dalai Lama was referring to.

But when looking back at ancient scriptures, one has to be careful not to read contemporary definitions into them. The word “homosexual” is of very recent origin. Its first known appearance in print occurred in 1869. It wasn’t clearly defined until about a decade later. See here for further details. The Indian, Chinese, Japanese and even Tibetan Buddhists of pre-modern times had no concept of homosexuals or homosexuality as we understand those terms today. Neither did Biblical era Jews or Christians for that matter. But we’ll leave that aside.

For Buddhists, sexual behavior was not really an issue in and of itself. It only became an issue when it interfered with Buddhist practice. Thus, monks both male and female were forbidden to have sex not because sex was considered evil or wrong, but because it interfered with the single-minded pursuit of Buddhist meditation to which they had committed their lives. They were also forbidden to eat after noon, to sleep in luxurious beds, to listen to music, to go dancing and so on for the same reason.

These days the rules are usually far less strict. In Japan, monks are even allowed to get married. The more severe rules are observed during training periods and then dropped when monks leave to go to their own temples. When it comes to lay people there really are no rules at all.

However, there is a set of precepts that all Buddhists adhere to across the board. And the third of these is generally given as, “Do not misuse sexuality.” But there are many interpretations as to what constitutes misuse of sexuality. It is generally left up to the individual to determine for himself or herself what is and what is not a misuse of sexuality. Even the Dalai Lama seems to agree with this. In a 1994 interview with OUT magazine he is quoted as saying, “If someone comes to me and asks whether homosexuality is okay or not, I will ask ‘What is your companion’s opinion?’. If you both agree, then I think I would say ‘if two males or two females voluntarily agree to have mutual satisfaction without further implication of harming others, then it is okay.'”

When Buddhists live communally it is sometimes necessary to agree on a specific definition of sexual misconduct. Some Buddhist communities opt for strict celibacy. Others do not. The San Francisco Zen Center, for example, encourages its residents to engage only in committed monogamous sexual relationships. You can get kicked out of their residential communities for violating this rule. But you won’t get kicked out for being gay. That’s for certain. Though you might get the boot for being too slutty in your gay-ness.

So, no, Mister C, Buddhism does not count homosexuals as sexual deviants. Though certain prominent Buddhists, like the 14th Dalai Lama, do.

***

Brad Warner is the author of Sex, Sin and Zen: A Buddhist Exploration of Sex from Celibacy to Polyamory and Everything in Between as well as Hardcore Zen, Sit Down and Shut Up! and Zen Wrapped in Karma Dipped in Chocolate. He maintains a blog about Buddhist stuff that you can click here to see.

Brad Warner will be speaking in Los Angeles soon.

March 10, 2012
10 AM – 3:30 PM
Hill Street Center
237 Hill St.
Santa Monica, CA 90405

March 15, 2012
7:30 PM – 9:00 PM
Against the Stream
4300 Melrose Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90029

You can also buy T-shirts and hoodies based on his books, and the new CD by his band Zero Defex now!

[..]