Ok, we're watching At The Movies with Margaret and David, and someone just mentioned star fades. And so, I just thought, how cool would it be if be could have those in real life? Like "well, we'd better get to uni" *starfade* and then there we are! At uni! With our hair being blown backby invisible fans!
Or "Oh no! What will we do?!" *starfadeout!*
Or perhaps "Ahahaha! I am so evil! They will never escape my plot.For I will rule evilly indeed! *glares evily at camera*" And then the world fades to black except for the eyes which glare until the last moment. And so on!
I'm all excited about this, even though I'm just guessing that it might, perhaps, possibly not eventuate.
Also, currently on the screen is a blue beach umbrella with a white fringe. How cool. I want one of those! How Grandma!
I seem to be excitable today. This is doubtless a good thing. Also, the font in the typing page is back to being the right size.
Anyway, I was talking today about someone who was afraid of butterflies. The interesting thing was that I was talking to Tim, who's afraid of dogs, including adorable postcard-like puppies.
So which, empirically, is scarier? Tim maintains that puppies have teeth and are not unlikely to run up your chest and use those teeth to bite your ear fair off. But on the other hand, butterflies do have a proboscis. Yeugh. Creepy . (A proboscis each, obviously, not like the butterflies are all ganging up to attack us with a giant proboscis the size of someone's leg, all straining to carry it around and suck things with, like small children, and the entire contents of frozen coke machines.)(Actually, how cool would that be? You could get one hell of a brainfreeze, though.)
Anyway, a proboscis is arguably a creepier thing to have than adorable little teeth. Also, for all that a puppy might run up you and eat bits off you in manner of a particularly choosy dinner in a buffet restaurant, a butterfly can fly. It could probably fly directly into your ear and sup upon your meninges or something. Although in fairness, they might have difficulty flying into an ear, wingspan is liable to be a problem. But moths can fold their wings, so I'm sure that if butterflies put their mind to it, they could achieve whatever measly ole moths can. In other news, I'm not great with these medical things, but it's just distantly possible that the meninges do not back directly on to the ear. But then, that's exactly where your basic proboscis comes in handy. See? Freakier.
Also, a butterfly is an ex-caterpillar which has seen the error of its ways, and broken out of a shell constructed of its own bodily excretion. Conversely, even the scariest dog was once a little puppy. But then again, lets not even think about where that came from.
Maybe I ought to stop overthinking this. Thought like this taken too far (not that I'm doing that, you understand) could lead to me being completely housebound within the hour. But then, I wasn't really planning on going out this evening, so that's more or less fine.
Anyway, I think it's time to... *dramatic pause*.... go to bed. So good night everyone. *starfade*
Oh, P.S. It occurs to me that butterflies may not, in fact, have a proboscis as such, but then, they doubtless have something like that. So that’s ok.
12 comments:
Tim's scared of puppies???
No the meninges is the covering of the cerebral tissue and spinal cord, if anything travels into your auditory canal, it'll hit bones.
i think they have a probsicis (or probisci, or whatever)
hehehe, butterflies...
but butterflies can cause tornados!!! :P
leach is right! maybe butterflies are scary after all...
Tim, oh Punny, is afraid of deep water and dogs, on account of bad childhood experiences. But not very afraid. And yes, I do know that you can't really go into an ear and hit brain (strangely enough) Reason being, that'd be real messy.
aww... poor bugger, but they're so cute, I'm assuming that's why he would prefer cats over you Angi? ;P
Ang, just in Tim's defense again (which I would happily have pointed out the other day since I was a sidebar to the conversation in question when it happened, except I wasn't entirely aware of why you regard butterflies as scarier), I'd like to mention the fact that it seems your fear of probosci stems simply from your lack of familiarity with it. I mean, we're all engrained at an early age with the norm of puppies being cute and cuddly, but we're just not exposed to butterflies and their protruding (or protrudable, I guess, but that isn't a word) body parts until much later in life, when we already have our idiosyncracies (YEAH! Love opportunites to mention that word) and neuroses firmly established. So an unfamiliar concept like a proboscis can naturally cause uneasiness well into your twenties... Because you'll never have one, you'll never be personally or intimately acquainted with anyone who has one, nor will you - just to bring this point back to puppies - be part of a family that has a creature as a pet that has one. One wouldn't assume, anyway. However, in terms of which one is actually scarier, it might help to note that practically every dictionary I find emphasises in its first definition of "fear" the concept of "danger", in its imminence or presence. Therefore I find it more likely that a puppy with, as Tim rightly point out, its teeth, actually posesses a higher quantity of 'danger' than a butterfly. This point also stands because puppies are more often than butterflies kept around small children who might do things to puppies such as chew on them, or stick forks in them, hence signalling further danger. It has also been noted that butterflies are quick easily, indeed quite frequently, captured in hand-held nets which, although logistically possible, is not a common practice with puppies and in fact may (I stress MAY) be frowned upon by certain royal societies charged with the prevention of such practices to such creatures as animals. And this capturing in nets I would personally view as a suitable and readily available nullification of the danger posed by butterflies, and therefore another reason we shouldn't fear them. Anyway, just to sum things up, I agree with you that a proboscis (or whatever) is weird. However, it can not adequately be regarded as a threat to one's personal safety, and in fact fearing such a thing is almost equivalent to fearing a Negroid man because his skin is darker than yours. I say 'almost' equivalent because butterflies and Negroid men do not share the same emotional and intellectual competence and therefore it is not harmful to a butterfly's self-esteem (since it doesn't have one) for you to fear its proboscis (I swear I've spelled that differently each time I've written it). This of course, relies on the very large assumption that butterflies do not experience independent humanoid thoughts and emotions. Should this assumption be false and it be proven conclusively that butterflies do think and feel the way we do, I would totally agree with you that those creatures should be avoided at all costs. I mean that's just getting TOO weird.
PS: Yes I am supposed to be doing my essay right now... what of it???
woah... that's a long comment... but point well made.
essays *pffft*
but you still can't write a blog post? *tuts*
I'm not afraid of either, I'm just wondering which is inherently scarier.
And nobody ever suspects... the butterfly!
lol I love the simpsons ;)
Post a Comment