Paint a vulgar picture.

Faceless and unknown, she creeps across the dark room. She lies down upon the bed made of roses and drinks the wine made of blood. Sympathy. It's this she has wanted, and she always gets what. You are powerless, your efforts are futile as you fall victim to her seductive charm (and powerful legs). You find yourself wanting to run, yet at the same time you are confused; the decision to take what she offers or to flee that which she offers, is a decision which will plague your conscious for the rest of your days. On one hand, you are nearly being raped. You are powerless, and she has the control-- which is what it's all about anyways. Yet on the other hand, you can't rape the willing. What is that that one shall choose, as this black widow of a woman struts her stuff, making her way towards you ever so violently as your heart beats through your chest? You feel a rush more powerful than 1000 orgasm's magnified by 100, and find yourself in a cold sweat while she will cut of you and take of you what she will. She takes your heart, and everything else you've got. She will consume you with delight and move on to her next victim. She will commit these acts in the dead of night, lest you find out what it is that she truly does; her true nature. In any case, she will do what most women will do to men: eat your heart and drink your soul, and then toss you to the side. You are faceless, you are unknown. In fact, she doesn't think about you anymore. Her hands now caress the body of another man, another number, a nameless person in the abundant sea of men she has had her way with. She knows what she wants , and manipulates her prey so cleverly that one cannot help but fall victim to her. This is true. Everybody knows it is true. You know this is true, also; and there is nothing you can do to help the situation. Yet it is something one fails to admit to even themselves. Let us wander on in our own personal darkness, in the shadows of the ones we once loved. Let us wander on in solitude, looking for the same thrill we once had with our former lovers. Let us wander on, and aimlessly search for that original rush. More sweeter than heroin, and cheaper than it too; but equally harmful on a person's psyche.

Marx once said, "Religion is the Opium of the masses". For everyone else, there is love. If Marx was right, then love must be the heroin of the masses. It intoxicates us like nothing else could. It clouds our judgement more than any filthy combination of chemicals one can put into the human body. To add to it's dangerous nature, it's flaunted everywhere; on television, in movies, in magazines, in newspapers, in glossy ads where women are air-brushed to perfection; the perfect female image which every young girl strives to be.

She strives to be the perfect woman, who does the very best she can. To care, to love, to honor, to obey, to fuck her faceless man. And while he is out cruising the high streets in his endless search for cunt, she has already began her process of sucking you in, sucking you off, sucking you dry, and leaving you. This is true. I know this is true. You know this is true also.

A woman's heart is made of stone, while my heart is made of glass. A pretty porcelin doll made right and fit for just one. Only one. I like you, I love you, I will marry you, It's not working, I'm fucking the postman, I'm leaving you but not before I take your money. Her words are mere cacaphony; A symphony of vulgarity fit for my ears only. C'est la vie, but not for me.

lol, wtf?

This is deep.

This is deep-er.

yeah wtf

Excellent writing

A bit depressing in your message, but then again isn't most of what it is deep and true?

Good descriptive writing... conveys emotion and symbolism... and I'm going to go out on a limb and say you need to get layed and move on from this failed relationship.

Empire--

Thanks for your comments. They're much appreciated. I've been trying to develop my own style of writing, a style which i feel is blatantly honest. It's not supposed to bring you up. It's supposed to convey a message, so profoundly that you will understand it's meaning when you are finished reading it. Like you said, it's a bit depressing. This is the intended effect. I've modeled this off of the rhetorical style, if you know what I mean by that. It's supposed to paint a picture of what is happening--of what I am seeing in my mind--or more importantly, of what I am feeling.

The book Le Maitre de Chasse inspired me in developing this piece of writing. Mohammad Dib wrote this book in French, and he has a very good way at describing what is happening. It was a treat to read this novel in the original French. Even though I didn't understand everything, I still got the message.

Gray Matter, thanks as well for your compliments and speculation. Bad news: I really DO need to get laid :( Good news: It should happen in the near future! Horray for smoking cannabis with girls who haven't had sex in as long as I have!!!!! yay.:D

So sex is the drug in play. A powerful drug that is. Don't get laid and keep writing, and you'll write brilliantly.

I have a suggestion for you. Only a vague suggestion . . . I would take what you have . . . the feeling, the writing, the mood, and the message . . . and write it into a short story. Add some short semblance of plot, changing yourself and a supposed "woman" into two characters. You could have a winner on your hands.

I love the title too

Holy fuck! Excellent writing skills, man! :thumbsup:

Much of this rings true, but I'd avoid grouping 'all' woman, bro. (Or did I mis-read?) I think some are actually pretty damn wonderful! Matter of fact, I 'know' it. ;)

Still, a very thought provoking piece, and very true for more than many....

The world is full of 'vampires' like that,

taht was very good but depressing... i had an image in my head taht was sorta like these

empire-i'm going to take your suggestion, and possibly further develop this piece in my spare time. thanks for your suggestions :D btw, the title was taken directly from a song by the Smiths called Paint a Vulgar Picture--a song which I like alot. No harm in that though, since there are many people who look to music for writing inspiration. I may change the title, but right now this is a work in progress.

junkyard--it's not referring to all women. of course we can't make generalizations like this. that's like saying every muslim is a jihading terrorist, every christian is a bible-thumping intolerant ass, every kid who works at mcdonalds is a fat idiot with acne... but thanks for your compliments bro.

shoi- that's a nice picture. :)

Before I start to critique I think it's only fair to just tell you a little bit about myself so you know where the criticism is coming from. I'm a college student and am close to getting my bachelors in English and Psychology (I have never gotten less than an A in any of my English classes in college). I do creative writing on my own, mostly poetry, pros and journaling. I had to read that over at least 4 times. The first time I honestly didn't like it and found it amateur. By my third time or so, I was able to see the effort you put into your writing style.
--At first I didn't like how you started with the female as faceless and then in the middle of it said the victim male was faceless also. It almost seemed like it was a slip and only one should have been. Now I see that she could have made him faceless. But why was she faceless and uknown to him and vice versa?
--The over generalizing really got to me. If you worked on this writing and developed a plot, and a greater depth to your narrator, the overgeneralizing and woman-hating theme may have been more understandable and less of a turn off.
--I think you should elaborate more on the Sympathy part. It seemed out of place and I don't connect it to the rest of your writing. Why did this woman desire sympathy, is that really the root of it all?
--This line: "Marx once said, 'Religion is the Opium of the masses'. For everyone else, there is love. If Marx was right, then love must be the heroin of the masses." That doesn't make sense and it seems you tried too damn hard to try to connect that Marx quote somehow to love. You're now saying there is either religion or love for people.

I agree with others who say you should pursue writing and you definetly have talent. The criticisms I made are all just my humble opinions and I hope you take them with an open mind and aren't offended. I didn't know what kind of responses you wanted from people since this is in a Sexuality Forum.
Good luck to you!

i wrote this entire piece of writing off the top of my head. it's not woman-hating at all. it's supposed to convey a message of bitterness. it's not woman-hating. in this story, it could very well be labled as "man-hating" if I were to replace the man with the woman , and the woman with the man.

In using the term faceless, it's supposed to give a sense of depersonalization. in my observation, many relationships are somewhat depersonalized--meaning that neither person is very comitted to eachother. in other words, just "going through the motions" of a relationship. the words "i love you' are meaningless in many cases. In this respect, it's used more as a way to convey the tone of this piece.

in response to your comments where you said I was trying too damned hard to connect Marx's quote to love, I'm not really sure I see your point when you say I tried "too hard". This was the first thing that came to mind. Mind you, my educational background is being just out of high school with no college experience. This was the first thing that came to mind. In my personal opinion, religion is very similar to love. we look to our religions for support, in much the same way that we look towards our significant others for support. when god doesn't give us what we want, we might blasphamize him. when our partner's don't give us what we want, we might cheat on them. Secondly, religion, much like love, blinds people in the sense that it might otherwise affect our judgement. When couples are "in love", they might feel that the only thing they need to survive is their significant other. When people practice extreme blind-faith religion, they might resort to praying for a person's recovery ; abandoning modern medicine in favor of their blind faith. However , when it comes down to it, couples might realize that there is more to a relationship than just burning passion--like living together, sharing chores, etc. In return, many relationshps fall apart because of people's inability to live with one another--the flame has died out. In this context, we can also see where people have abandoned modern medical practice in favor of "faith healing"--which most always results in a loss of life. What is the point? the point is that , like religion, love also has certain "blinding" qualities to it. I can attribute this directly to the psychology of love. in my own personal opinion, love and the opposite sex are very much like a drug to us. some people compulsively seek "love", or affection from other people. once they have a taste for it, they can't get enough of it--the rush of intense emotions, raging hormones--the very reason why we seek out and crave "love". In any case, it's all a result of chemistry in the brain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanCurtisWishlist

it's not woman-hating at all. it's supposed to convey a message of bitterness. it's not woman-hating. in this story, it could very well be labled as "man-hating" if I were to replace the man with the woman , and the woman with the man.

in response to your comments where you said I was trying too damned hard to connect Marx's quote to love... In my personal opinion, religion is very similar to love. we look to our religions for support, in much the same way that we look towards our significant others for support. when god doesn't give us what we want, we might blasphamize him. when our partner's don't give us what we want, we might cheat on them. Secondly, religion, much like love, blinds people in the sense that it might otherwise affect our judgement. When couples are "in love", they might feel that the only thing they need to survive is their significant other. When people practice extreme blind-faith religion, they might resort to praying for a person's recovery ; abandoning modern medicine in favor of their blind faith. However , when it comes down to it, couples might realize that there is more to a relationship than just burning passion--like living together, sharing chores, etc. In return, many relationshps fall apart because of people's inability to live with one another--the flame has died out. In this context, we can also see where people have abandoned modern medical practice in favor of "faith healing"--which most always results in a loss of life. What is the point? the point is that , like religion, love also has certain "blinding" qualities to it. I can attribute this directly to the psychology of love. in my own personal opinion, love and the opposite sex are very much like a drug to us. some people compulsively seek "love", or affection from other people. once they have a taste for it, they can't get enough of it--the rush of intense emotions, raging hormones--the very reason why we seek out and crave "love". In any case, it's all a result of chemistry in the brain.

---

My point about you using the Marx quote was that it wasn't worded right. If it isn't clear to the reader but you can explain it well with your above response to me, then that just means you need to clarify and elaborate or re-word that part.
Also, as for the incorporation of the Marx quote, you didn't say that religion is much like love; they weren't being similarily compared although that may have been your intentions. You said, "Marx once said, 'Religion is the Opium of the masses'. For everyone else, there is love. If Marx was right, then love must be the heroin of the masses." "for everyone else, there is love." <--You put the two (religion and love) in an either/or, one or the other position. Maybe if you said instead something like: "Marx once said, 'Religion is the Opium of the masses'. If Marx was right, love, like religion, must be the heroin of the masses". Do you get what i'm saying now? You just need to clarify that it is a comparison based on similarity and not a "one or the other" statement. Saying, "for everyone else", reads as: for those who don't have religion, they have love.

You never addressed what I said about sympathy:

"--I think you should elaborate more on the Sympathy part. It seemed out of place and I don't connect it to the rest of your writing. Why did this woman desire sympathy, is that really the root of it all?"

Yes, you're right, if you switched the male to the female, it could be then be deemed a "man-hating" tone, that just means that there is a gender hating component and you saying that is admitting to it. The fact is you decided to make the victim male, and so it is "woman-hating" in tone, especially with the overgeneralizations. You said you were going for bitter, and that is how it read.

WeedFaerie, do you have any ambitions toward ever teaching writing? I see in your discussions with Ian very good critical thinking skills and an ability to take good writing and make it better. That's a rare gift, my dear, and one you need to be aware you have. I'll be eager to hear where you hope to go with both your verbal and critical skills because I think you'll get a lot of mileage out of one or both of them.

Ian, I hope you'll keep writing more and more. It's such good therapy, I think, and you clearly have a knack for it.

It's been 20 years since I taught writing/English but only a couple of weeks since I left a job as a writer. I hope y'all don't mind my butting in with comments to both of you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdgirl73

WeedFaerie, do you have any ambitions toward ever teaching writing? I see in your discussions with Ian very good critical thinking skills and an ability to take good writing and make it better. That's a rare gift, my dear, and one you need to be aware you have. I'll be eager to hear where you hope to go with both your verbal and critical skills because I think you'll get a lot of mileage out of one or both of them.

Ian, I hope you'll keep writing more and more. It's such good therapy, I think, and you clearly have a knack for it.

It's been 20 years since I taught writing/English but only a couple of weeks since I left a job as a writer. I hope y'all don't mind my butting in with comments to both of you!

---

i agree with bird abt ur criticisms and such.... even tho im not the person writing they seemed helpful and very write :stoned:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeedFaerie420

My point about you using the Marx quote was that it wasn't worded right. If it isn't clear to the reader but you can explain it well with your above response to me, then that just means you need to clarify and elaborate or re-word that part.
Also, as for the incorporation of the Marx quote, you didn't say that religion is much like love; they weren't being similarily compared although that may have been your intentions. You said, "Marx once said, 'Religion is the Opium of the masses'. For everyone else, there is love. If Marx was right, then love must be the heroin of the masses." "for everyone else, there is love." <--You put the two (religion and love) in an either/or, one or the other position. Maybe if you said instead something like: "Marx once said, 'Religion is the Opium of the masses'. If Marx was right, love, like religion, must be the heroin of the masses". Do you get what i'm saying now? You just need to clarify that it is a comparison based on similarity and not a "one or the other" statement. Saying, "for everyone else", reads as: for those who don't have religion, they have love.

You never addressed what I said about sympathy:

"--I think you should elaborate more on the Sympathy part. It seemed out of place and I don't connect it to the rest of your writing. Why did this woman desire sympathy, is that really the root of it all?"

Yes, you're right, if you switched the male to the female, it could be then be deemed a "man-hating" tone, that just means that there is a gender hating component and you saying that is admitting to it. The fact is you decided to make the victim male, and so it is "woman-hating" in tone, especially with the overgeneralizations. You said you were going for bitter, and that is how it read.

---

okay fair enough. i'll elaborate on the sympathy part.

when i was writing this, i was bitterly reflecting on a broken relationship. when i was first becoming involved with this girl, it seemed like her world was shattered, and she was very ... eh, how should i say it.. "needy", i guess the word is. I felt as if she was reaching out to someone; the someone being myself. It's just a personal reference. she was looking for sympathy, and that is what I gave her. If I were writing a short story, or fiction, then I would see it fit to elaborate more , as it would become necessary plot details. However in this piece of writing, I was just calming my nerves. a writing exercise, I suppose. but i do see your point.

In response to the marx issue, I can see your point here also. when I wrote "for everybody else, there is love", i was making reference to people who aren't religious. I like your rendition better though; it's more clear, and it conveys my intent.

i appreciate the constructive criticism. it's better than people flaming my work :) had i taken the time to try to make this a masterpiece, i would have probably re-worded some of it. mind you , this was written in less than 15 minutes... if that sounds unbelievable, you should see me on a keyboard typing at well over 110 WPM :D

Birdgirl--your comments are welcome also. i dont mind at all!

on a final thought, one could see this piece as a personal inner monologue. I typed this as I thought it. That is to say, I didn't spend much time correcting anything. I just typed as it flowed from my thoughts. you know what i mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanCurtisWishlist

okay fair enough. i'll elaborate on the sympathy part.

when i was writing this, i was bitterly reflecting on a broken relationship. when i was first becoming involved with this girl, it seemed like her world was shattered, and she was very ... eh, how should i say it.. "needy", i guess the word is. I felt as if she was reaching out to someone; the someone being myself. It's just a personal reference. she was looking for sympathy, and that is what I gave her. If I were writing a short story, or fiction, then I would see it fit to elaborate more , as it would become necessary plot details. However in this piece of writing, I was just calming my nerves. a writing exercise, I suppose. but i do see your point.

In response to the marx issue, I can see your point here also. when I wrote "for everybody else, there is love", i was making reference to people who aren't religious. I like your rendition better though; it's more clear, and it conveys my intent.

i appreciate the constructive criticism. it's better than people flaming my work :) had i taken the time to try to make this a masterpiece, i would have probably re-worded some of it. mind you , this was written in less than 15 minutes... if that sounds unbelievable, you should see me on a keyboard typing at well over 110 WPM :D

Birdgirl--your comments are welcome also. i dont mind at all!

on a final thought, one could see this piece as a personal inner monologue. I typed this as I thought it. That is to say, I didn't spend much time correcting anything. I just typed as it flowed from my thoughts. you know what i mean?

---

i usally write as a flow of thoughts and it comes out making little to no sence :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoi

i usally write as a flow of thoughts and it comes out making little to no sence :p

---

hahaha yeah :) i guess that's why some people need clarification hehe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdgirl73

WeedFaerie, do you have any ambitions toward ever teaching writing? I see in your discussions with Ian very good critical thinking skills and an ability to take good writing and make it better. That's a rare gift, my dear, and one you need to be aware you have. I'll be eager to hear where you hope to go with both your verbal and critical skills because I think you'll get a lot of mileage out of one or both of them.

Ian, I hope you'll keep writing more and more. It's such good therapy, I think, and you clearly have a knack for it.

It's been 20 years since I taught writing/English but only a couple of weeks since I left a job as a writer. I hope y'all don't mind my butting in with comments to both of you!

---

Thank you so much for the compliment, that means a lot to me. After getting my associates degree in general studies I transferred to a University majoring in English Education for the Secondary Level (8th-12th grade). I came to the realization that standing in front of a class and working at the very place I hated so much as a child-teen wasn't for me. I changed my major before having to student teach. I'm now an English and Psychology major and have about one and half years before getting my bachelors in both. I'll be continuing on in clinical and counseling psychology (you're right, I am very analytical and critical lol). All my english teachers told me I should stick with it and by now my essay writing skills are developed enough that I expect an A with every essay I hand in (and thankfully I haven't been disappointed yet). I trained myself to question every sentence I write and read. I was thinking of working in a publishing house while I go to grad school for psychology. Maybe someday I'll get into education again, if I get a doctorate and can teach at the college level I wouldn't mind that at all.
Any other ideas or advice of what you think I could do with a bachelors in English would be much appreciated? What kind of writing do you do now? Thanks for your observations and comments Birdgirl! xo

Hi again! You're welcome on the comments and observations! I'm always full of those (many would say too full!).

I got a triple-major undergrad degree in English, journalism and pre-med when I finished college and segued directly into a master's program that gave me a combo M.A. in English and education. So when I came out, I had the undergrad and master's degree and a teaching certificate. I taught high school English for two years before I got the brilliant idea I needed to go to law school. I should never have done that because I never cared a whit about law, but it was competitive and I got in, and so I did it. I've never once used that degree professionally. The real burning desire I had was always to go to med school like my husband, who I married between the teaching and law school years. I worked during those teaching and law school summers as a paramedic for my hometown fire department, and I always knew medicine was really what called me and interested me.

Anyway, with all that verbal training and an extra degree I didn't plan to use, I went to work as a reporter/writer for a big newspaper here in Dallas where I live. Did that a couple of years. Then a desire for more money drove me to a job with a big high tech corporation as a writer, and I've done marketing communications writing and speechwriting for them for 17 years, only stopping two weeks ago today. People who can write can do so much in the business world. Speechwriting and marketing copy were fun because they had the human, salesy touch. But there's also tech writing, business writing, editing. You name it. English definitely doesn't necessarily mean we have to teach. Corporations are always needing Web writers, editors, and the like. Newspapers need reporters. Non-profits need PR people who can write. Educational institutions need people who can write curriculum. The list is endless. My mom and dad are both college English professors (now retired), and while academia is great, it is very hard to get into that because there are so few jobs available. And they pay miserably compared to the business world.

So there was my life story, which I should never have bored you with, but that at least covered my job history with words. I finally got my nerve up a year and a half ago to get the ball rolling on my medical ambitions again. Our son is grown and in college now, and so I took the MCAT prep review courses, applied and was accepted. I have my first day of medical school on Monday, and today was my first-year-student orientation. I'm scared to death, but I figure I can probably do it since they accepted me. So, at almost 45, I'm basically just now finally embarking on my lifelong dream. I don't mean to imply that I haven't loved my career in writing or that I haven't fulfilled a dream by simply being married and having a family. I have. But now that that dream is well underway, I'm ready for another adventure!!

Too much information, I know. Sorry about that!