New to here. Some pieces I made.

"Whore"
How could he call you such a thing?
"Show me some leg"
I know you could never do such a thing.
"Let me grab some some skin"
You'll find comforting words here to lean on,
for as long as I'm turned on.

eh screw it, thats all for now.

I take it you haven't been married before or you are what most married men would call the other guy.

Ummmm, yeeeeeaaaaah.....Good point

Actually, I rather liked this piece.

Its always funny to see how people draw upon societies views of whats supposed to be the norm in attempts to make a title and mirror themselves (rather than make a statement about me you've simply just shown me a side of yourself instead) off of a writing as if it displays any personal connection to me in anyway other way than the simple fact that I wrote it and considered it slightly artistic. Would a piece about murder make me a plausible murderer? Would it make me a plausible saint? Try again buddy. ;-)

You are getting heated when I am making a point about the viewpoint you expresed. I am not judgeing you - I'm just saying - boy I know two different guys that had that viewpoint and they cost me two different women in my life because of that very attitude. I am an established artist in the field of abstract and impressionist art so yes I very well understand an artistic view point doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Art should show expressionism with integrity and dignity. It should not celebrate moral immorality... James A Caspian...

Poetry is the ultimate expression of the human heart in it's feeble attempt to express that conceived emotionalism into words...

A published poem of mine copyright94.
entitled: As if it had been so always

When our gentle eyes,
First met,
Our soft hands,
First touched,
And our hearts,
Embraced,
One to each other,
They did so,
With love,
On the first day,
As if it had been so,
Always,
And forever...

Really? I think thats kinda subjective. For example a movie about a terrorist bombing army subjects just trying to create peace in a land may be blatantly seen as immoral. But say then the movie takes you on a ride to discover how the person came to do this, and you find maybe he was subject to various pains caused from the US, does this justify his action in killing, no, probably not, but do you understand it more so? Was it simply just immoral?

A whore nevertheless is a whore. A terrorist nevertheless is a terrorist. We can attempt to use reason and understanding of the why. Why do some turn left instead of right or right instead of left? Does that justify or negate the end result?
We have lost more troops since 9/11 than we lost people on 9/11. The amount of iraq or afhgan people lost in the first few days of this "war" surpassed the number of those lost on 9/11 and those killed in action.
Is there any art in this from either side or anything to celebrate through art? One of the greatest artists in the past - Picasso - is quoted as saying "All art is meaningless so long as just one child suffers hunger or death and those who have the power to change it, choose to change nothing... Art has always been subjective to objectivity. The objectivity to see from all sides. If you have not yet truly learned this basic fundamental of art then how can you truly express the sentiment you feel. Sentiment is the tool that makes use of objectivity through art...Without a sense or gauge of morality how can you make use of this tool. Art is a great tool to improve the human condition. Should it be used so flagrantly as to perpetuate the failings of mans inhumanity towards man? Or is it to be used to gain understanding of mans inhumanity towards humanity in the effort to make change? This is how you guage what is of art and what is self-absorbed indulgence...

You know, I hope you dont mind me jumping in on this one. I just wanted to say, this is a very concise argument you've presented here, and it's been interesting viewing this debate, but you have missed the point I believe.

Art is a matter of perception. The only gauge of art is truly only what one single entity would perceive it to be. In other words, one man's trash is another man's treasure. See what I mean? When it all comes down to it, it's really fairly simplistic, yes?

The guy who painted the Crucified Christ in a bottle of yuorn thinks that way too...

I would like to say that this is a public forum and you are both entitled to your opinions and interpretations of each others art form.

But I don't think that it is necessary to condemn each others thoughts and ideas in the Creative Writing forum.

I think were just bored and are stirring the pot. Doesn't anybody have passion about anything anymore? I love to agree that I can disagree and I am sure the other guy loves it to...

Ugh instead of hitting "Quote" I hit "Report" then wrote in my reply and hit submit like an idiot. So if you get a report or anything just report this post and it should clear it up. But anyway...

No I couldn't disagree more. Thats kind of ridiculous logic. The whole idea is the terrorist isn't a terrorist anymore because of how we would define him in society in one sense (heartless martyr whatever), and how he would define himself in another (being a warrior in a war). So "Whores" aren't "Whores", I mean cmon. Lets go back to 1800's, Slaves are black, therefore blacks are slaves. See how such logic isn't just wrong but can also become insulting to a whore nother era? Nothing is simply what it is because society says so. Society does not dominate what is reality, you need to learn where to draw the line.

A terrorist terrorizes. What line is there to draw? A rapist rapes. Do I need to define the why all the time? Or is it just a free for all? You keep referring to societal perspective when in truth societal perspective is just as diverse as those in the society. Each class or segment of society has its own perspective. You use the term society as a blanket in reflecting my opinions. My opinion is my own based on my singular experiences, education, and perspectives. The society agreed with invading iraq. I didn't. The society went ballistic about the attack on the towers. I didn't. We have been corporately raping others countries for decades yet we get a taste of our own medicine from a different avenue and then yell foul... We are responsible for the worlds distaste of us by our own actions. Yet we do not take responsibility for our actions. However, a corporate raider is just as much to blame as a terrorist. I am proud to be an american but I am not proud of america, in fact I am genuinely dissappointed. We ignored terrorism since Israel became a state, until it directly affected us...

Man, that one line just spoke volumes about you.

Well, I tried.

<<----leaving him to spew on...

You people are hilarious

Are you trying to turn this into a comedy routine? Lol. Do you like circular arguments? Do you really just want me to repeat that the point of view (or piece of art) in respect to the "terrorist" would just be again all defined by whoevers point of view your looking at it from? That he wouldn't see himself as someone whos just trying to terrorize but rather one whos a warrior in a war? Why do you want to go in a circle? I don't understand. I don't want/need a comedy partner/duo type routine for the posters of mingle2.