The First Installment of a 2, 3 or 4 Part Series (I’m Not Sure Which) of: I’m Pissed!

By P. Getty

In their most recent article, DeWall, Deckman, Gailliot and Bushman (2010), present evidence indicating that glucose levels in the brain are related to violent and aggressive behavior. Across four studies they found that the consumption of sugar is related to alleviating aggressive and violent outbursts.  Well, if that’s true, I need to eat some ice cream or drink a large soda because I’m pissed and not in the British sense!

There are a number of reasons why I find myself in a foul disposition this cold, winter evening in this weird Pennsylvania town were Jesus was born. It’s not because of the Whoville-like quality of the place driving me mad. It’s not the drivers. Its not even the lack of large displays of beer and wine in the supermarkets where such things belong. No. I’m pissed off because some yo-yo ripped-off my last post (see Sexy Anxiety Relief or New Anti-Terrorism Measures: TSA promises to “Love you longtime” this Holiday Season.).  Some dude name Balaji copied my last article into an anxiety-relief Web site without asking me first, and then preceded to make some of the worst editing mistakes that I’ve ever seen. A three-year-old could do better. I even commented on it on the Web page (follow link below to see). Honestly, I wouldn’t be so pissed about it if he/she had left the writing alone.

Pause for consumption of mass quantities of sugary beverage….Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh! Red dye #40 (i.e., Pennsylvania Butch Beer) is very tasty, addictive, and sugary—Starting to feel better.

Okay. Where was I? Oh, yes. So, the dude (I’m assume the a-hole is a guy) made all these changes and now it reads like shit. I couldn’t believe it. Is this normal? Do people really do this? Steal work just to F it up? I even noticed that the blog has paid advertising on it. Does this mean this a-hole is making money off my work that he screwed up? If so, shouldn’t I get a cut? What a prick!

Consuming more Red #40….

If there is anyone reading this post who has a couple of minutes to spare, please follow the link to the plagiarizing Web site and join me in criticizing the a-hole for stealing and ruining my post. It’s easy to do, just post a comment on their blog in support of, well, me. If you can, I thank you in advance. I really appreciate it. I don’t think this a-hole is going to learn that you shouldn’t steel other people’s work on his own—obviously. What he did is downright un-American and we need to let him know it!

Until next time, stay tuned for my next installment, when I go-off about the bullshit my wife and I are going through with the insurance people as we expect the arrival of our first-born. I’m filled with more hate and rage just thinking about it!

The plagiarizing Web site

DeWall and Friends (2010)

Sexy Anxiety Relief or New Anti-Terrorism Measures: TSA promises to “Love you longtime” this Holiday Season.

By P. Getty

For those not in the know, the rumors are true, they’re giving away free erotic rub-downs at 69—um, gigity—of the US’s largest airports. Unluckily for me, traveling yesterday from Pennsylvania to Oregon via a small airport, where TSA’s new-and-improved “customer services” were not yet implemented, my fantasies of being felt-up by a uniformed guard with large hands remains unsatiated  (i.e., no lovin’ for me).

I was so jealous making my way through Chicago O’Hare to my connecting flight. I saw a number of my fellow American being felt-up, groped and otherwise subjected to blatantly erotic, though mild, sexual favor. Even a lady who had to be at least 110 years old was getting in on the fun—so unfair. That’s right, as long as you depart from the right airport, anyone can get in on the action. Seriously. It doesn’t matter if you’ve gay, straight, both, or having survived some hellish bout of bladder cancer and are now forced to live-out your days with a urine-filled sack strapped to your waste. Whether you like it or not, they’re taking you, too!

As great as that sounds, you have to be careful and practice safe security. Some of these sessions, as arousing as they must be, can get a little rough. I mean some of these folks dishing out the lovin’ are novice domineers and dominatrices; one guy had his urine sack ripped and had to spend his trip soaked in his own urine. And as any self-respecting appreciator of extreme pornography knows, you’re suppose to get pissed on, not piss on yourself–that’s just gross.  So let that be a lesson. If you need or like it gentle, don’t be afraid to let them know ahead of time. I’m sure they’ll accommodate every reasonable request…other than refusal of services, of course.

You must at this point be asking yourself “Self, how can we get in on the action?” Well, kids, sorry to say, not everyone is guaranteed a groping; there’s just not enough time for everyone. You have to first be one of the lucky customers selected for the new full-body radioactive scanning treatment that allows you and a friend to show off your junk to the attending—questionably back-grounded—TSA employee. If you are one of those lucky few, just tell them you’d rather take what’s behind door#2; unfortunately, you can’t do both. Soon you’ll be whisked away to a not-so-private session with your very own minimally trained professional ass-grabber and groin-fondler. As good as this all may sound, like with every great experience, there is, of course, a catch: no kissing, no cuddling, no whispers of sweet nothings in you ear and certainly no dinner and movie or second date after. In other words, don’t get attached.

You might now be asking yourself “Self, how is it that we Americans are so lucky and fortunate to have this type of service in our larger airports?” Well, it has been reported that these new practices are meant to prevent terrorism (apparently terrorist don’t like old-fashions, if you catch my meaning). This might be true, but I think there is an added intention less reported that is far more good-natured: the health benefits of anxiety relief.

You see, McIntosh and friends (2006) did a study looking into anxiety related episodes in regards to air travel.  Apparently, people in general are very anxious about air travel. To reduce this anxiety, most people turn to drugs, alcohol and tobacco—a limited number use distraction and relaxation techniques.  When I saw this, I realized the true reason for the love-ups in security: The government is taking the necessary steps to ease our anxiety about air travel. It has to be. Anxiety, as you probably know, is related to a number of health risks. It was like a light bulb broke in my head. Some high-ranking official must have read this study and took its findings to heart. They probably thought to themselves What’s better for relieving anxiety than a little public lovin’? Nothing, right? Why not at the airport, too? Really, if you don’t think about it, it’s a great idea that makes perfect sense!

In closing, let me leave you with a thought appropriate for the holidays. If you’re feeling anxious about your upcoming flight, don’t worry.  When you get to the line at security, just keep your fingers crossed. You might be that next lucky someone standing there with your hands raised high, legs spread wide with a large hand cupping your giggle-berries or breasticles. If that is indeed your fate, remember to take a moment to give thanks for our good ol’ Uncle Sam being a paranoid and perverted, dirty ol’ man doing his part to relieve our national anxiety. Unfortunately, you might still need that cigarette….

Happy travels!

McIntosh & friends (2006)

CNN coverage of airport security changes

The Squares Win: An Obituary to California’s Prop 19 and Oregon’s Measure 74

By, P. Getty

According to Kemberg (2010), completing the process of mourning can take up to two years, but when we are done, our reality could be permanently altered, sometimes for the worse. This may become reality for many of us. You see, many good people lost dear friends late November 2^nd, 2010, when California’s Prop 19 and Oregon’s Measure 74, two bills proposed to further the legalization of the tweed, failed. Our good friends, who represented hope for the start of a more rational public attitude about smokin’ the reefer, went the way of the dodo.

Unfortunately, squares make up some 54% of the voters in California and 57% of voters in Oregon who put pen to ballot to crush the dreams of those who, with joint in hand, wish to live within the law and generate some legitimate cash for their respective states. Unfortunately, in California, lead by a hypocritical Governator whose past is full of joints and steroids, the majority of  voters expressed their willingness to adhere to old taboo rather than to do what Jesus would have done  (it’s his dad’s plant after all). The same goes for Oregon, but we have no hypocritical leader to blame.

I will not continue this tearful obituary notice long for three reasons. First, I’m sick and don’t have the energy to do it. Second, it’s my wife’s birthday and I need to cook a chicken. Third, there’s nothing left to say that hasn’t already been said. Squares in both California and Oregon had the chance to do the right thing, but as usual, they were far too high on Metamucil to realize it. Hopefully, in the near future, before these states go completely bankrupt, monetarily and spiritually, the squares will loosen up, take a hit, and get on board…or at least move to Texas, were they can do little to add to the collective crazy. Until then, may the Lord bless thee and keep thee, Prop 19 and Measure 74. May they rest in peace for now, but be resurrected soon. Amen.

Kemberg (2010)

LA Times Coverage of Prop 19

examiner.com Coverage of Measure 17

More BS From The BCS: The Oregon Ducks Get Shafted Again!

By, P. Getty

Of course my wife would never agree with me—she’s less of a Notre Dame fan than she is an ardent despiser of the Ducks—but as the title of this little rant indicates, the big news this week is that the Oregon Ducks got screwed out of the #1 spot on the BCS rankings again. Three weeks in a row, the #1 team (Alabama, Ohio State and Oklahoma, respectively) was knocked off the top. After Alabama was defeated and Ohio State took their place, Oregon moved up to #2 spot, where they remain. Since Ohio States’ defeat the following week, a lower-ranked team has passed both Boise State (#3) and Oregon to steal the top spot! One would expect, as I do, that if the top ranked teams is defeated, then the #2 team should take their spot. Am I right?

Well not according to the BCS’ f’ing computer system! How can it be that a damn computer program rank the Ducks #11 when every human poll has them ranked at #1, where, in my not-so-humble opinion, they belong? I don’t understand it—though I do. I don’t want to understand it—though I must. The answer, of course: statistics.

Statistics, however, is not the reason why I’ve been cursing the BCS or #1 team and their fans, hoping that they will crash and burn during the next week’s game. The problem is that ever since I’ve become what I like to call a “pilgrim in an unholy land” (Pennsylvania), I’ve become strongly attached to all that is Oregon, the Ducks being especially salient in that they represent my alma mater (and my wife’s but she hates them). It’s as if they have somehow been incorporated into my social identity—my in-group—and their neglect in the rankings have made me prone to fits of rage! I wonder if this realization explains my hatred for the top team? I wonder if this hatred is unusual?

Well, according to Nicholas Dixon (2001), who has written on the ethics of sports fans, would probably say, yes, it is unusual. Dixon believes that loyalty to one’s team is ultimately a “good,” because fan loyalty does not equate to harshness towards other teams or their fans. I believe I challenge that notion. Still, I don’t think Dixon is familiar with the inter-group literature, because the majority of that literature would predict that a strong-identifier, like me, would do about anything, even derogating the other teams publicly, to insure my in-group’s superior status….

Thankfully, though, while my feelings are strong in the matter, the ethical side of my conscious is clear; I haven’t stooped to outgroup derogation that this literature suggests (see Branscombe & Wann, 1994, for a review) I would. Nope. I haven’t gone out of my way to publicly bash the undeserving numskulls at Auburn (the current #1 ranked team), or their idiot fans who probably bribed the programmers over at the BCS to move them up to the top spot from #4 when they clearly deserve to be rotting at the bottom of the rankings….

Did I just write that?

BCS Computers don’t like Oregon Much, by Larry Brown

Dixon (2001)

Branscombe & Wann (1994)

California’s Prop 19 Strikes Fear in the Hearts of Squares.

Alright you squares, what’s your beef? Why so scared with legalizing pot? Is it the smell? Is it the munchies? Is it that you really believe the “gateway” nonsense that if you smoke a joint or two or 10, the next thing you know is you’re on your knees working off a crack rock? Is your positive social identity hopelessly tied to the belief that only lazy hippies smoke the tweed (that’s what we like to call it back home)? Or, and more likely the case, is it simply a social convention that has been turned into a moral convention (See Turiel, 2007) by, well, you squares? I think so….

I’ve been searching the blogs and articles and the best argument I’ve found in opposition only apposes some of the rational behind Prop 19, but does little damage to the argument of legalization overall. I’m speaking, of course, about the notion that passing Prop 19 would somehow take money from the pockets of Mexican drug cartels. I’ll just tell you right now, that’s a bullshit argument. I can guarantee that no self-respecting pot smoker in California, or the Pacific Northwest for that matter, is going to be caught with a sack of Mexican schwag, otherwise known as dirt-weed. It is the equivalent of drinking a jug of Ernest and Julio Gallo Burgundy. We in the know would instead drink, say, a Broadly Estates Claudia’s Choice Pinot Noir. There is no comparing the two. One has flavor and elegance; the other gives you a headache—I digress. The only way to get the money from the cartels, as a contributor to Allay Bordis piece in the Daily Titan stated, is to legalize it everywhere. But to do that, we must change the social conventional beliefs about pot and realize that it is by far less a problem than alcohol, which by definition is a poison; if you drink enough of it, it will kill you. Smoke too much pot: you’ll eat everything in your fridge (which will force you to contribute to the economy by re-stocking it the next day) and then go to sleep on the couch fat and happy.

Like any law-enforcement-fearing Oregonian hopelessly stuck in a backward state like Pennsylvania, where the liquor laws are enough to make my eyes cross (I can’t buy a bottle of wine at the grocery store, but I can buy a six-pack, to go, from a bar; Is that nucking futs or what?), the thought of easy access to good, green ganja with little worry about police kicking in my door for puffing up while watching Saturday-morning cartoons makes me a little homesick. Sure, it wasn’t completely legal in Oregon, of course, but the authorities didn’t really care as long as your weren’t doing anything stupid. That’s why I don’t understand the opposition. Why don’t your squares stop worrying about those of us who have reached the age of reason, are productive members of society, and just worry about the dicks drinking and driving or otherwise disturbing the peace? In other words, keep your social and moral conventions—convictions—to yourself, and to quote Jack Nicholson in As Good As It Gets, “Go sell crazy somewhere else. We’re all stocked-up here.”

Please follow the links below to more useful information on the topic. Cheers!

Turiel (2007) on Morality

Ally Bordas Article (Very Interesting)

Psychology Today Article (Does Marijuana Impair Cognition. Implications for Prop 19. By Dr. Jann Gumbiner)

YouTube: A quick on Weed video (Very fun!)

McCaffrey, Liccardo Pacula, Han & Ellickson (2009)

Another Bishop Bites the Dust!

Am I the only one that loves to hear a story when a supposed “holy man” has allegedly been caught with his hands in the sacramental cookie jar? When I hear these types of stories, stories like that of Ted Haggard’s methamphetamines driven gay sexcapades or the standard pedophiliac priests and the Popes that cover for them, I always assume that they are guilty. Is that wrong, I wonder? Is it wrong that I enjoy seeing people who make a living telling other people how to run their lives gets caught in blatant hypocrisy? I think not.

The latest scandal comes from the Peach State (Georgia) where Eddie Long, the “Bishop”—I appreciate the irony of a protestant preachers adopting a Catholic title in this case—of a mega church has been accused of coercing four young men with cars, jewelry and vacations for sexual favors.  The Catholic Priesthood must love this. I bet they are saying to their selves “Damn. Thank Christ it wasn’t one of ours this time.”

After watching a video of Eddie addressing the accusations in front of his flock of sheep and a short interview of Jamal Parris, one of Eddie’s accusers, I couldn’t help but ask myself who I thought was really telling the truth. The gods know, Parris and the other accusers could potentially have a lot to gain monetarily from a civil lawsuit from a preacher worth millions. On the other hand, Eddie, “The Bishop” looked guilty. So I looked to the literature to see if my gut was on to something.

I first looked to work profiling sexual preditors and how they coerce their victims. It seems that “The Bishops” position of authority provides the idea opportunity for sexual predation and coercion. Furthermore, the interactions between the victims and “the Bishop (e.g., the vacations, gifts, etc) could be construed as his “grooming” his victims.  Moreover, the difficult family backgrounds of the accusers seem to make them ideal targets. In sum, the few details of this biblical mess, so far, jives with what one would expect from a classic case of sexual coercion (see Olson, Daggs, Ellevold & Rogers, 2007, for complete details).

Finally, my bullshit detector also jives with what seems to be suggestive and convicting—I mean convincing—correlations between the findings in the literature and the details of this story. Why does this matter? Well, considering that even normal adults have a 60% accuracy rate in detecting bullshit (see Vrij, Akehurst, Brown & Mann, 2006, for details about human lie detecting), a keen professional of human observation, such as myself, should be quite confident in his/her gut reactions. So by judging from the brief video of Parris and Long, I’m going to go out on a limb and say this guy is guilty. What do you think? Am I jumping the gun, or is this guy a fruity preditor is an expensive suit? The world wants to know….

CNN coverage of Parris and Long

Olson, Daggs, Ellevold & Rogers, 2007

Vrij, Akehurst, Brown & Mann, 2006

(Image from: http://citizenchris.typepad.com/citizenchris/2007/11/hillarys-donnie.html)

For thousands of years now, people from different religious persuasions have been at each other’s metaphorical and literal throats. With the 9^th anniversary of the 911 tragedy, religious nut-jobs have taken the opportunity to take up their old habits. The latest manifestation of this age-old tradition seems to be playing out . Apparently, “God” told some crazy reverend, Terry Jones, to burn the Qur’an and then, at the last minute, not to. I don’t get. I also don’t understand it. Nor do I understand the Muslim backlash: burning American flags, threatening Jihad, etc. I do believe, however that anyone has the right to commit these acts in addition to burning or pissing on any religious or science book that they please, which is in contrast to what Sadaf Syed wrote (see link below), who suggest that such acts are against American Values. I disagree. I believe being American gives us the license to be as offensive as we can get away with, as long we are willing to accept the consequences.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that I don’t care if religious people piss each other off, I just don’t want them burdening the rest of us with their bullshit. Whose of us who have reached the age of reason should not have to  suffer from their need to adhere to centuries old mythology. And lets be frank, the only difference between Greek, Christian and Muslim mythology is that Christian and Muslim mythology hasn’t been snuffed out by the next big mythological belief system. Personally, I’m hoping rationalism will take their place, but it probably won’t happen in my lifetime. But I digress….

I wonder, Should I really be all that surprised that religious people are pissing each other off? According to Preston, Ritter and Hernandez (2010) probably not.  It seems that religion, while having the potential for leading some people towards prosocial behavior; it also leads others to more antisocial ends.  It seem that the antisocial behavior stems from a need to protect their group. In other words, if they perceive threats to their beliefs they lash out. So maybe that means rationalism is on the rise…I can only hope….

Preston, Ritter and Hernandez (2010)

“Qur’an Burning Goes Against American Values” by Sadaf Syed

Ole Miss’s Masoli denied eligability for 2010. Say “bye bye” to your winning season suckers!

Some stories just keep on givin’….

This is my third installment on the developing story about the once honored Oregon Duck Jeremiah Masoli’s fall from grace. As you may recall, Masoli transferred to Ole Priss—I mean, Ole Miss—after being relieved of duty after a pathetic pot possession charge. Of course, being caught with pot was his second offense; he first pleaded guilty to robbery charges.

In my last report, I acknowledged his achievement and thought his move to a graduate program commendable, especially because it allowed him to continue playing football, a sport that has no doubt been a positive influence on his life, despite his law-breaking handicap. However, the latest news put a damper on his plan. Apparently, the NCAA didn’t find his move as honorable as I did; they have denied his request for a waiver, which makes him ineligible to play this upcoming season. Unless an appeal goes through, Masoli will not be able to play until the 2011 season.

The sports bloggers have been in frenzy ever since the word got out. There is a debate among them. Some agree with the NCAA who denied his appeal because they see his move to Ole Miss as a way of dodging the consequences of his actions rather than for purely academic purposes. In other words, they are attacking his intentions! They are presuming to know his mental states. They are doing almost the exact opposite of what Merrit, Effron and Monin (2010) found with regards to positive behavior. When people are seen as acting honorably in the past, they receive a “get out of jail free” card, so to speak, on future grievances. On the other hand, the NCAA, I believe, are letting the knowledge of Masoli’s previous grievance behavior cloud their judgment.

We can assume of course—as the NCAA does—that Masoli made the move only so he could play football again, which may be his true intentions. But are the NCAA or we the Thought Police? Are we going to punish Masoli for his intentions or his actions? Masoli completed his undergraduate degree and is pursuing a graduate degree in a field not offered by the U-of-O (that’s what we call the University of Oregon back home), which should be grounds for eligibility—period!  This is the cold hard fact of the case. And while the little devil in me wants Masoli to sit-out a year for screwing-over the Ducks, and because of my newfound hatred for Ole Miss fans, my reasonable side thinks it is unfair and that he should be allowed to play. What do you think? Should Masoli continue to be punished for his passed sins or should the NCAA look at the application alone and stop making inferences about the man’s true intentions or other mental states? What do you think?

NCAA wrong on Masoli rulling

NCAA denies Masoli’s waiver

Moral Self-Licensing: When Being Good Frees Us to Be Bad

Christian Hypocrisy Revealed in GOP Opposition to Ground-Zero Mosque

The proposed building of a mosque and community center near the World Trade Center seems to be the most recent fiasco prompting GOP hardliners to flaunt their hypocritical natures.  My favorite example so far was the zinger Newt Gingrich let rip on Fox News. Gingrich suggested that the Muslims proposing the center where “radical Islamists” and went on to compare their protected expression of religion to Nazi’s planting signs next to the Holocaust museum in D.C.

On his Web site, Gingrich has a page devoted to “Religious Liberty.” The page suggests that non-religious folk us academia and government to curtail religious expression. It also states that Newt is on the offensive, “mobilizing people of faith” to protect their religious freedoms.  This seems to be at odds with his stance against the mosque. Unless, of course, Gingrich is only interested in mobilizing people of the Christian faith, although “Christians” are never named specifically on the site. So why would Gingrich be so interested in curtailing Muslim rights while promoting Christian rights? My guess is he gets off on the misfortunes of those he sees as hailing from a rival group, a phenomenon known as schadenfreude.

Smith, Powell, Combs and Schurtz (2009) who study schadenfreude extensively, would probably agree with my observation.  They note that schadenfreude comes from at least three conditions. Gaining from the misfortunes of others is one. It is also evident when one’s in-group succeeds due to the failures of rival outgroup, especially for high-identifiers like Newt. Another applicable source is when misfortune befalls an envied person. I would guess that all three sources are at work here. It is hard to say if sadistic emotions or a political/religious agenda motivates Newt to hypocrisy. My guess is that Newt is simply a closet Sadomasochist whose mouth can’t seem to stay closed. Still, I really shouldn’t be surprised when politicians speak from both sides of their mouths. Actually, I don’t think I am surprised, just stunned when their hypocrisy is expressed so blatantly and transparently.

Washington Post: Newt Gingrich compares ‘Ground Zero mosque’ backers to Nazis

Newt on “Religious Liberty”

Disgraced Duck Scores at Ole Miss

On June 23^rd I reported on the devastating news about Jeremiah Masoli who was permanently relieved of duty as the Oregon Duck’s star quarterback after a string of stupid behavior. I reported that news from the perspective of a threatened Duck. I wrote that Masoli’s behavior “put our team’s standing for next year’s season in jeopardy,” and this was considered a “greater sacrilege,” worse than “back-washing into the Eucharist cup.” I admit that while writing the piece my concern was mostly centered on the team’s future standings. In my defense, research finding would predict that response. In fact, Okimoto and Wenzel (2009) reported that strong group identifiers respond more aggressively to perceived intragroup terrorism than intergroup terrorism. So it was only natural that I responded to Masoli’s behavior as if he committed a domestic attack of terrorism on the potential future success of the Duck’s football team, which, as you might recall, is a sacred institution for many Oregonians.

In light of the literature, I feel my biased in-group response was justifiable and warranted. However, be that as it may, I feel I owe Masoli an apology. I might have hastily lashed-out when I said that this last stunt would be the end of Masoli. I thought he was “pissing away” his chance to fully benefit from his talents. Well, he has proven me very wrong. He managed to finish his undergraduate degree while under the stress of public and legal scrutiny. On top of that, he applied and was accepted into a graduate program at Ole Miss. And the icing on the cake: he’s going to play football for them! That’s pretty impressive. I admire that he’s willing to take on the challenge of graduate school. But I’m most impressed that he was able to take a bad situation, turned it around, and make it a positive one. I think he should be applaud for that.

USA Today Reports on Masoli’s move

The symbolic identity implications of inter and intra-group transgressions