Sunday, July 26, 2009

Our Manifesto--Now With Pornography!!

So tell me, readers, do you like that title? Does it make you feel good about the site you enjoy reading so much? Because I assure you: if more computer readers do not start visiting this site soon (so that I can MONETIZE it), "Our Manifesto--Now with Pornography!!" will not be just the title of a single blog entry; it will be a quotidian, relentless, and irreversible alteration in the material conditions of this website.

Why? Because the one thing that computer readers wish to see more than anything else--more than celebrity interviews, more than film reviews, more than photos of cute animals accompanied by amusing captions--is pornography. In other words, it is beginning to appear that I will not be able to make any money off of this website unless I transform it into a pornographic website. And so I ask again: Is this really what you want?

I believe that I have been patient--and more than patient--in my largely unsuccessful attempts to increase readership. I believe that I have explained--perhaps not in so many words, but I've made it perfectly clear--that I find myself in dire financial straits. Indeed, so dire are those straits that I have been willing to make substantial--and, to me, not entirely amenable--modifications to this site in order that I might raise money from it like so many other important people have been able to do. It's not that I blame you dear reader--good heavens no!! No, not really. I understand perfectly well that you would rather read about the latest celebrity "hook up" (whatever that means) than ponder my airy musings regarding some obscure aspect of Hegelian thought. I understand this fact, and I have made accommodations to this fact.

But the question now stares us directly in the face, you and I: Must those accommodations include Bukkake?

How do you like that word? Because I assure you, the next time you see it on this website, it will not be the word alone with which you must deal, but the grotesque and wholly nauseating reality which that word denotes. And again: do you think the MILF craze has peaked, or would I be wise to pack my site with videos of older-but-not-yet-menopausal women engaged in sex acts? Is it your considered opinion that it would be wiser for me to focus on the more "mainstream" pornographic genres, such as "babes," "girl-girl," and "anal" (and in what kind of depraved bourgeois dystopia has "anal" become mainstream?), or do you think that the real money is to be made in the niche genres such as "fisting," "gangbang," "BBW," "watersports," "hentai," and "scat?" I would like to know; I really would. Because the clock is ticking and I need to MONETIZE soon.

Well, there you have it. No need for acrimony, no need for hurt feelings. The above considerations have pointed out the course of action which each of us must now faithfully pursue if we wish to prevent this site from being inundated (by me) with a torrent of filth to which millions of readers would, alas, flock. You must work in your sphere--raising awareness, manning the phones, direct mail, etc.--and I in mine (i.e.--performing the intellectual labour which makes this website a reality). When next we meet, I hope to have gladder tidings.


Legal Update: I have to report (literally, it turns out) that the l'affair d' my Paul Robeson pen has been resolved. As per the settlement agreement (which includes the public disclosure of said settlement on this website), Lindsay Lohan has returned my Paul Robeson pen, and I have given Ms. Lohan the high-end gift basket which my secretary--who has since fled the country on an entirely unrelated matter--promised her in an email. I must tell you that no one was more surprised than I to learn that the State of California considers emails to be legally binding contracts. So, long-story-short, it cost me $1,500 to get my Paul Robeson pen back. That sounds fair. OH WAIT IT DOESN'T.


Legal Update II: I must say (again, literally) that I in no way intended to imply that the aforementioned legal settlement was unfair to either of the parties involved.

Legal Update III: I decided to get a two-fer out of the shyster I was obliged to hire, so I consulted him about another unfortunate situation as well. I am very sorry that Melanie Pricksinge has somehow inferred from my jocular correspondence with her father (for which, see below) that she might be my daughter. This inference is wholly unfounded and inaccurate. I have been, for my entire life, both infertile and impotent, so there is not even a reason for the DNA test which she is now demanding.

No comments:

Post a Comment