i am doing my best to reach as many media figures, diversity advocates, gay newspapers, feminist magazines, etc - because i would like wake people up enough to prevent something like what happened in aurora from happening again. there are so many things to blame for this tragedy, more than just a gun and a deranged honors student. there are so many points arising from a society that wants to prevent bad things from happening to large groups of people, there are so many points arising from a society of lemmings who rush to the latest batman movie as if it were the "second coming". that's probably why this letter is so many pages. put on your seatbelt, this is going to be a bumpy ride. i am afraid that society is getting the wrong picture regarding the recent tragedy at a movie theater, and i would like to make my opinions known. should we ban guns or should we ban endless strings of sequels and prequels, because doing either would have prevented what happened in colorado. i guess that the latter would strike people as a childish remedy for violence that wouldn't stop violence...but that's how the former strikes me. "how can we prevent this tragedy from happening again" isn't even the right question. take the "how" off of it and janet jackson has already answered the question in her remix video for "miss you much," in a response to an audible question of "that's the end?". i believe that the question "CAN we prevent this tragedy from happening again" will leave the nasty miss jackson quite affirmatively stating the answer: "NO" nobody could have prevented so many gay people from having sex and from having killed so many others via a big disease with a little name that gays turned into a GIGANTIC epidemic., nobody can prevent muslims from obeying their "religion" and murdering everyone they disagree with, nobody can prevent anyone from walking up to a feminist and raping her while severing her breasts from her body with a pair of scissors like muslims use knives to sever the heads off of "infidels". repercussions may be able to dissuade people from being violent, but nobody can prevent it. in other words, no matter if murder comes about through gay sex or through islam, or just through an animosity of members of the shorter gender who use props like high-heeled shoes and shoulder-pads and gender-based military requirements to justify their "anything a man can do" mantra, nobody can prevent people from harming other people. well, maybe being under constant supervision would prevent it, but there are murders committed even in jail. and not only though gay sex (though i'm sure aids is rampant in jail). nobody would be able to prevent people from killing people, even if there was a ban on guns. who was andrew breitbart with just before he died, have those democrats ever murdered anyone before, and what was in the food that breitbart ate - aren't there other ways to kill people than with guns? nobody is going to stop violence by banning guns. that makes as much sense as banning a movie just because there have already been too many prequels and sequels in the franchise. yes, i'll admit that if there was a law limiting the number of prequels and sequels that can follow a movie, the batman movies would've stopped in the 90s - and the 2012 tragedy in colorado would not have happened. it's just that banning guns makes as much sense as banning the "midnight movie," because whether or not there is a midnight showing of the latest feature in an endless string of prequels/sequels, it's not like a disgruntled college grad isn't going to go to the 5:00 showing if he wants to transform a movie into something more violent than it already is. and it isn't like a murderer is going to follow the law that bans guns. newsflash: murder is illegal, murderers are criminals, criminals break laws. criminals break laws, and if i'd add a "stupid" to that then i'd be reminded of "it's the economy, stupid," which would bring me to my next point. if we are going to tell ourselves that the availability of guns is what's to blame for the batman tragedy, why don't we blame the white house-negro for the tragedy? after all, it is obama's economy that is to blame for the frustration behind the inability of james holmes, a "brilliant science scholar" (and honors student) to find a job. why don't we blame hollywood for churning out violent movie after violent movie? after all, movies may not kill people...but maybe we can remember the classic anti-drug ad which ended with "you, alright? i learned it by watching you". why don't we blame society's inability to wean themselves from sucking off of the teat of the entertainment world? there are so many things to blame for the deaths caused by this brilliant honors student, let's not focus on blaming guns in an effort to ban guns so that nobody but criminals would have them. maybe james holmes was angry because a female out-pressed him on the bench press. would that be a legitimate reason for banning weightlifting competitions? if "curves fitness" had anything to say about it, they'd end up basing all weightlifting competitions on gender. oh, i guess weightlifting competitions are already based on gender...but not because it's females' weightlifting abilities that make a mockery of everyone else's. banning weightlifting competitions in an effort to stop people from thinking of masculinity as the stronger gender, well that's as crazy as banning guns in an effort to stop violence. both make as much sense as banning tampons and maxi-pads in an effort to stop people from regarding femininity as being designed for motherhood. don't people realize that whether or not these products are banned, something still needs to absorb the blood when the female lays an egg? banning maxi-pads won't change reality, regardless of what their absence has done to the public's perception of females, because the bloody egg-leak will still happen every month. newsflash: females' jugs are there to provide milk for the baby, females' eggs are there to be fertilized by a man, there is no getting around the reality that names femininity as the gender to be used as a tool by men and babies. likewise, there is no getting around the reality of bad people - if muslims wanna kill, they're gonna obey their religion. if gays wanna have kill, they're gonna have sex. now, far be it from me to infringe on anyone's time-of-mourning and criticize the colorado batman crowd for being a bunch of media-leeches, given that i realize that "american reunion" turned me into quite the zombie: "...must see this movie...must see this movie..." - but, really. people rely on moving pictures far too much - i was so disgusted by the multitude of media-zombies that i saw when i first attempted to watch "american reunion," that i didn't even go into the theater - i went home and did a parody of prince's "the morning papers" as "the moving pictures" prince's song starts with "he realized" and i've always heard it as "he relies," and i did the parody because i heard "he relies" in the back of my mind every time i saw a young man walking into the theater. how i get so angry at the idiots looking for something else to get them through their semi-charmed kinds of lives...and finding it at a movie theater. "WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU," i want to yell - they make me feel like cher in moonstruck, "snap out of it". i went to the woods because i wanted to live deliberately, but i left the big multiplex instead of going to the only movie that interested me in years because i was angry. there is a quote from the cosby show that i like to belittle people with.. rudy is annoying vanessa, who says: "you have been pestering me all day, now i want you to stop," followed by rudy: "i can't help it, i'm bored," followed by vanessa: "well, of course you're bored, rudy, you're a boring PERSON". do you know how many people are apt to say "bored and horny" in response to a simple "how are you" on the online gay-chat sites? i left the multiplex the first night "american reunion" was there, but i went to watch it at a different multiplex in the middle of the day, mainly to get away from all of those media-zombies at go at night. it was the only movie that had interested me in years...it was the first movie i had watched in a while. i don't care about movies like i did when i was a teenager, they only take me away from myself - i don't like being taken away from myself because i am not a boring person, i am more interesting and entertaining than anything hollywood can put out...save for american pies 1 and 3, i guess. right now, i'm here to semi-satirically introduce a question: "was the aurora massacre just god's way of telling a society of media-zombies that the life they are living is not the right way to live?" i can even be so bold and outrageous to ask myself if the aurora massacre was a modern-day sodom and gomorrah. getting back on-track...if we want to stop movie-theater massacres, the answer is not to ban guns. the answer is for people to become self-sufficient and satisfied enough with their lives so that they don't want to waste two hours of their time staring up at a screen as if they are enthusiastic pupils sitting in a classroom, all too happy to listen to their ever-so manipulative teacher who's spewing left-wing and gay-affirming propaganda as a way to brainwash them into thinking that there is nothing wrong with one being wide-eyed and curious around other members of one's own gender. wow, that was one whole sentence. sometimes i amaze myself. being wide-eyed and curious around other members of one's own gender reeks of a lack of gender-identity. it reeks of a lack of self-esteem. referring to a parody of a sheryl crow song that i have written, let me say that i like to ridicule gay "men" by asking a certain question: "are you man enough to be your man". referring to a line in a screenplay i have written, i will say "if you wanna believe there's nothing detrimental to a masculine soul about finding security, fulfillment and something excitably taboo in another one, it's your loss". anyway, if people were satisfied with their lives enough not to look for an escape every friday/saturday night, how many people would have even been at the new batman movie? people are leeches who rely on everything but themselves to stay pacified and satisfied. now, i'll admit that i was once an avid movie-goer...well, i was young and i needed to be "out and about" with others because i wasn't happy being alone. it's true that i did not go to the premiere of the first batman movie (though i may have bought prince's batman record the very first day it was available - i was such a prince fanatic), but the movie wasn't as huge a deal as it is today. actually, the only movie-premiere i went to was a year later, when i went to a midnight showing of madonna's "dick tracy" on my birthday, june 15th. oh, i won tickets to her "truth or dare" movie the year after that - i guess that was also a premiere. it was in new york city. hmn, maybe philadelphia. philadelphia is where i saw the actual concert tour that "truth or dare" was documenting. the concert i saw was at the now-defunct spectrum - it was the june 17th portion of her "blond ambition" tour. and it was "blond" on the program and t-shirts...not "blonde". anyway, people rely on movies as they rely on sex. movies give people a rush, albeit not as blatant a rush as sex or drugs, i guess the rush feeds on how movies (batman, in particular) are built-up in peoples' minds as the end-all, be-all of human existence. it's kind of pathetic, that kind of thinking - that kind of importance placed on a movie. alright, that "end-all, be-all" line is from the first movie that gave me a rush: ferris bueller's day off. oh, i guess "grease" was the first movie that gave me a rush - imagine a little 5 or 6 year-old doing the "greased lightning" dance whenever he could. i guess the rush that ferris bueller gave me was bigger, though, since i memorized the entire movie once it came onto cable. i was 13 when i memorized it, though, cut me some slack. i needed to amaze my friends in some other way than blowing spit-bubbles off of the tip of my tongue. anyway, batman fans or not, people are somewhat incompetent if they're "out" every weekend. sure, i went "out" every weekend when i was a teenager, but teens are supposed to be looking for something else to get them through their semi-charmed kinds of lives. few teens i've known were content being alone, i didn't become content staying at home 24/7 until my mid-30s ...though being "traumatically brain-injured" at 16 left me en eternal adolescent. ooh, let me share a relevant quote: "Cognitive maturity associated with adulthood is marked by related maturation of cerebral fibers in the frontal lobes between late teenager years and early adult years." people are somewhat incompetent if they're "out" every weekend and on a quest for entertainment. as madonna sung in a song from the record inspired by one of the aforementioned comic-strip movies, i'll say "all you need is your own imagination". gosh, records - i am "dating myself" in more ways than being my own boyfriend. ha. anyway, it shouldn't be too hard to entertain oneself by using one's imagination - gosh, it's not hard, even the "muppet babies" could do it...right in their nursery! and how old were they? well, they were too young to get into the pg-13 batman movie, that's for sure., so it's not like the ability to know self-contentment relies on age. though it still can rely on maturity, i guess, if one is thinking of the goons in the theaters who react with "oooh!" and "ohhhhhhhh!" like they're trying to make every movie into "rocky horror" with their audience partici-(say it)-pation. my nursery is my room, my brain is as occupied in my nursery as the muppet babies were in their nursery. i am in my room more often than i am not in my room - see for yourself at my website, www.dylanswebcam.com. i'm usually typing on my keyboard when i am in my room, creating more content for the website. if i'm not in my room, i'm swimming less than 100 feet away. i don't need to leave the house much, this is because i interest myself. to continue, i'd like to say that i was disappointed with "american reunion" because the movie had sold-out to gay activists, but the reason i don't go to movies isn't only because movies are overtly gay or gay-affirming. i do have a problem with homosexuality being legitimized, though. you see, i am physically attracted to members of my own gender, but i have a problem with homosexuality being legitimized because of the self-compromise involved in homosexuality. three self-compromising things that homosexuality says to me are "you're not man enough to be your man" and "you're not all the man you need" and "you are a clueless masculivoid, inspecting and playing with the masculine gender like you just bought it at a curiosity-shop". getting back to the public's reliance on movies, i'd like to say that i did not ever see "titanic" or "avatar" - i'm not interested in things just because everyone else is. i am not spontaneously interested in any movie...even if there are multitudes of people at the midnight premiere. now, i may have been a quitter playing soccer, playing basketball, playing guitar, playing trumpet...i may have been a copycat to take those things up, but i have never been a copycat regarding any movie that i wanted to see. "ooh, i have to see this movie because EVERYBODY'S DOING IT," well that's something i have never said. i didn't see 1999's "american pie" until 2006, but it became my favorite movie...though i couldn't recite it to anyone like i used to recite "ferris bueller's day off" to everyone. speaking of which, someone actually wrote "don't memorize 'dirty dancing'" in my 8th grade yearbook, regarding the obsession i had with jennifer grey's "bitchy sister" role in "ferris bueller's day off"...and regarding the fact that "dirty dancing" starred jennifer grey and premiered on cable during the last month of my 8th grade year. getting back to all of the "everybody's watching it" movies, i'd like to say that have never seen "titanic" or "avatar". titanic came out when i was in a place i like to call the "retard home," which was a live-in rehabilitation facility for "traumatically brain injured" individuals - it was like "the roach motel," because i checked in and i couldn't check out. you can read about that misadventure at another one of my pages, which is 21stcenturylivingservices.com. that was the name of the "rehab" facility, 21st century living services. they didn't have a .com domain, so i registered one and am using it to document my experiences at the "retard home". i hope they don't try to take it away from me like madonna took madonna.com away from the madonna hospital. what a selfish twat, she doesn't own the name MADONNA - i even have trouble believing that her parents didn't name her "louise veronica ciccone," though she maintains it's "madonna louise veronica ciccone". who gives their kid four names? anyway...i probably wouldn't have seen "titanic," even if i wasn't a prisoner in the "retard home," because i had no friends to see it with. i WAS wanting a social life in 1997, though, as i was wanting someone else to get me through my semi-charmed kind of life. i can honestly say that, way back then, i was wanting sex and friends - i admit it. i was only 23, though, still trying out my wings that i got when i moved out af my parents' house at 21...so don't fault me too much. i didn't know anything about "avatar," at least not until a year after it came out and i had to ask my friend about the picture on the front of a christmas card i got from my dad. "it's from avatar," he said. wrapping up, i'll say that if people did not strive to be "keeping up with the joneses" and if people were not obsessed with sucking at the teat of the entertainment world, then nobody would have died...simply because self-reliant people don't need babysitters (or moving images) to entertain them. if people didn't have to constantly be "plugged in" to the latest movie or the latest fashion or the latest gossip, or facebook or their cell phones, people wouldn't be singing the aforementioned third eye blind song ("i want something else to get me through this semi-charmed kind of life"). people say that they are comfortable with themselves, that they "love themselves," but they really can only tolerate themselves because the one who is always "going out" or is always "plugged in" can only be saying that it's such a despair for them to be ALONE and without anyone else. actually, that's a common thing i hear in the gay chat rooms: "you're going to be ALONE for the rest of your life," as if they think it is a bad thing. i guess they don't like to be around themselves as much as they like to be around other people. so, what'd mr. t say? "i pity the poor fool" mr. dylan terreri, i hey, I'M mr. t. ha. well, i also pity the poor fools in gay chatrooms. "When I'm hungry, I eat. When I'm thirsty, I drink. When I feel like saying something, I say it." - Madonna www.jaggedlittledyl.com/essays