Interviewed by Joshua Hansen October 2012
Joshua Hansen- How do you prevent vaginal discharge from permanently creating a yellowy-white stain in the crotch of your panties? Is the nature of this discharge smegmatic? Furthermore, why can’t I remember yesterday from my left nipples perspective?
I like to use the a protective layer of newspaper comics between my vagina and panties. This has the dual affect of keeping my panties clean while making the comic Cathy interesting to guys. Smegma doesn’t seem to be the problem. I burn all naturally occurring lubricants up in a foggy haze of vegetable insertion while drinking Robitussin/Formula 409 cocktails. Finally, your left nipple has no perspective, it is merely a sycophant of your superfluous nipple and only sees what it sees. If you flog it with beef sticks hourly you may break its right nipple dependence or it may do to you what it did to Bob Seger. Its hard to predict. Not the nipple, the outcome.
Joshua Hansen- Is it possible to have three-dimensional self-correcting quantum memory, and do you feel as if you’ve gained personal mastery of the Val Salva maneuver, and if so, do you feel like this mastery has had a positive effect on your Peyronie’s disease?
Memory is not possible. What we call memory is just a series of fabricated ideas of the past that justify and validate our present predicaments. They say hindsight is twenty/twenty, but mostly they are blind fools calling the voids in their perception truth. I have not even attempted to master the maneuver as it makes for better television to Barney Fife my way through it. Finally, the first rule of Peyronie’s disease is you don’t talk about Peyronie’s disease. That’s all I can’t say about that.
Joshua Hansen- Would you explain the peculiar aftertaste caused by Ronnie Corbett’s penis in purely chemical terms, and if you could choose one Kenny Loggins song to play at your funeral, which would you choose? (no ‘footloose’ or ‘danger zone’)
In purely chemical terms it tastes like all of the noble gases bonded to an irregular double hydrogen molecule. With a hint of aluminum phosphate and cheese. The last question is easy, my all time favorite Kenny Loggins song is Kenny Rogers. But I wouldn’t pick that song. I would probably go with that one about wearing my sunglasses at night. Because I’m a Top Gun, funbunny.
Joshua Hansen- Thank you, and have a pickle-dick painting…
Interviewed by Ryan Ackerman October 2012
Ryan Ackerman- If you had to suck a guys dick, I mean HAD TO, who would it be and why?
I would have to ascertain the two most evil men on earth and then pick the lesser of them so I could reward him for being the second worst choice.
Ryan Ackerman- Assuming that rising to the top of a political party makes you one of the two most evil men on earth, who’s dick would you be sucking this 2012 and why?
Romney. His evil is only hypothetical at this point. Potential to play a more evil politician on the tv doesn’t equal actual evil committed.
Ryan Ackerman- Do you think he’ll be very conflicted with you going down on him? Would you at least wear a wig and let him call you wife #2?
If he would prefer me to wear the wig over the magic underwear I would compromise. But he would have to call me wife #5 and go easy on me and my gag reflex so I didn’t pentabarf on his magic undies. I am pretty sure its not gay if those are still on, so no conflict.
Ryan Ackerman- Other than being forced to deep throat, how do you view any president’s actual impact on you? Do you feel that any president actually effects your day to day life? If they do how do they effect you and what steps do you take to deal with that effect?
At this point I do not feel the president has any affect at all. The major parties are just puppets of banker agendas. So the president himself under this system has not actual impact except as a symbol that impacts the political dialogue that I have to try to work around to have a logical discussion about our failed system.
I mean, what if Romney was elected president and didn’t live up to his promise to legishate women, warmonger and ignore our coming economaclypse? Of course we know that would not happen, because its not in the elite agenda; but a democrat can break all of their promises and do more harm but we never consider it could possibly work in reverse. And that says a lot.
Ryan Ackerman- With that in mind will you vote? Do you feel that a vote for who you want is better than not voting at all, and why?
I will vote, although strong arguments can be made for non-participation. But we are too close to the edge for that right now, methinks. I will vote not only with and for my conscience but also to build momentum for ideas and help pave the way for a more informed and courageous citizenry. Of course, it may be too late for that, as well. So I will probably just vote to be able to scream I TOLD YOU SO!
Ryan Ackerman- Thank you for this excellent discourse.
Interviewed by Candace Kelly October 2012
Candace- Why do you think that humans bully each other?
I do not think that there is a singular reason.
One reason would be that the alpha trait still exists in our evolutionary nature and bullying is just an expression of that archaic function.
But most bullying is more likely caused be people who have …See More
Candace- You mentioned taking men out of the hunt… do you think that it is possible that this need for power and/or destruction is something that can be bred out of men as a species, or is this behavior so hard wired that it will be a permanent fixture in our society?
I think that human beings evolved this far without awareness of their evolution and how their activity contributed to it. I think that in order to evolve further we must do it through self-awareness and a methodology that examines how we want to evolve…See More
Candace- Evolution of a species is a tall order, even for man. What changes would you make to the education system to speed this process along?
The current educational paradigms are so corrupt that they cannot be changed to produce a positive outcome. This is an inherent problem within the systems and structures they reside within. The modern education system was designed specifically to contr…See More
Candace- Thank you, sir. Have a shpadoinkle day!
Interviewed by Sara North October 2012
Sara- If there is one character in Alice in Wonderland (book or movie) that you identify with, who would it be?
Well, it may sound to cliche but that would be Alice. Alice was an archetype of human curiosity and the depths we will often go to satiate it. Modern social structures work well to either kill this curiosity through fear and conditioning or redirect them to some activity that validates and perpetuates the institutions within those social structures.
Sara- So are you saying you can identify with a feminine perspective?
Not as much as I would like to. Although I do try as much as possible. I have a lot of work to go. But this is one of the most fascinating parts of our coexistence as distinct genders is being able to examine the internal via the external.
And that was so totally not an intercourse reference so let it go, Sara.
Sara- Do you believe in gender roles or physiological limitations?
I believe that evolution has certainly endowed us with gender-specific qualities that often lead to what we call gender roles. There are certainly some gender-specific roles or attributes that are socially constructed but to call gender itself a social construction denies the mechanisms of evolution. It is also contrary to what we can observe in other species, especially our fellow primates. There are obviously physiological limitations. For instance, men cannot give birth because our physiology is not equipped for that. And the male body has a higher amount of muscle per mass on average. That is not to say that a woman cannot be stronger than a man. Exercise could make most women stronger than most men. But the optimal limits suggest that the strongest man would be stronger than the strongest woman.
Sara- What are your thoughts on the statement “might, make right”?
That would depend on how we define ‘right’. In the traditional use of this term, ‘right’ is defined as the status quo rather than an agreed upon moral principle. As such, might cannot make right in the moral sense. Only consensus can do this. And when I say consensus I do not mean the democratic method of the tyranny or the majority. I mean voluntary societies held together by the consent of the individuals within them.
Sara- So if a group of people shared the common trait of cannibalism, and choose to live together, and voted it was ok to eat other towns or cities, but not their own neighbors, would this be morally right because they were voluntary societies held together by individual consent of the individual?
In my opinion, yes. And not because moral relativism, either. It is the responsibility of a voluntary society to defend itself and its own moral practices. No matter how amoral another society may be we cannot right that wrong through force, coercion or compulsion. You cannot right a wrong with another wrong and two wrongs do not make a right. It is inevitable that such freedom of association would create groups like you previously mentioned, those that produce an almost universally constant immoral value system. Hopefully by adopting a morally acceptable form of consensual societies we can evolve past these aberrant behaviors and ideologies and eventually live free of them, or at least mostly free of them with better solutions for dealing with them. In the meantime we must accept the kinds of people and societies that evolve naturally out of consensus even if we disagree with them. And if we cannot coexist without being endangered by them we must be courageous and fight them them at our own doors when they come knocking rather than breaking down every door and forcing the occupants to squeeze into our idea of the perfect home as an act of prevention that itself creates immoral activities.
Interviewed by Amy Hanson October 2012
Amy- What human failing are you least sympathetic to and why?
Blindness to authority. Mindless obedience. My main objection with it is that it creates conditions in which those lacking that weakness are caught in the cross fire. It seems to limit the choices of others more than any human quality I can think of. There are more followers than assholes. If we had less followers the assholes would not be such a problem.
Amy- What human failing are you most sympathetic to and why?
Empathy. While empathy can be a strength it can also be a failing when it is applied too liberally or without rationale. Good intentions pave the road to hell and all of that. Empathy in this way can lead to restrictions enacted for the ‘greater good’ that end up actually doing more harm than they resolve. But I am more sympathetic because empathy is also a necessary solution to many human problems. It just needs to be harnessed and applied with consent and not force, coercion or compulsion. When it does those last things it becomes authoritative and blindly obedient.
Amy- What is your chief characteristic?
Prankster. I identify with the prankster deities the most as well as other forms of pranksterism like internet trolls, comedians and whatnot. Shamanism is mostly pranksterism. Often the best sort of lessons come with humor and even some honest trickery. I suppose it does alienate me from some people but those are the people less likely to be swayed by my shamanism, so it is a fair trade.
Amy- I think everyone can agree that you are a prankster. Thanks, Joshua. Have a bomb ass night, yo! 🙂
Its pretty unanimous, fo sho. Thank you, Amy and have a wicked dope ass night, girl. 🙂
Interviewed by Trey Webb November 2012
Trey- As an author in what order of importance do you put the following: Environmental descriptions, character development and plot.
Also what writing styles and/or authors would you say have been the most influential in your own personal development?
Of those three I put them in the following order- Character development, plot and then environmental descriptions.
I do not really write a lot of environmental descriptions unless it seems the only way to put the characters or plot in context. I am not a fan of some of the ‘classic’ literary forms which ramble on with descriptors that do not seem to serve the characters or plot but are just for color or imagery. I don’t think that is really necessary in modern literature. Media has trained us to fill in those kind of blanks. We understand the world and even far away places from all of the media absorption and so we do not need descriptive dialogue. Since I always begin a story from a basic situation, usually involving characters, I find having strong characters as the most important element and then the plot evolves from the kind of personality that their character has. Just like in real life, people react differently to identical situations. So when the character gets in those situations they should make sense in the context of the character. So I usually even use plot to develop the character.
I consider theme above all of these. Theme is central to nearly every story. Whether that is just a gimmick that I want to exploit (usually for humor purposes) or some kind of political or existential idea. I consider most of what I write to be allegorical. Parables and parodies.
Trey- With character development being centric to your writings; What proportion of your stories would be something creative coming to you out of nowhere vs. you sitting down and crafting a character you had not yet thought of?
I don’t think I have ever written a character that was not in some way not based on myself. I always start with something within my own experiences, ideas and archetypes and then try to vary them enough from there to make them more interesting to myself and the reader. Not that I am not interesting enough as it is, but part of the writing process is exploration and all exploration should lead back to self-discovery. Since I also tend to start stories from personal experiences, dreams or jokes I don’t think they are ever from nowhere or unthought. They probably have existed for some time in at least an archetypal form.
Also, I forgot to answer the second part of your last question. Douglas Adams was the biggest inspiration to me. Reading Hitchhikers Guide made me realize the potential to use humor and speculation to craft parables and parodies. I think that science fiction when combined with humor is always the thing that inspires me the most. Christopher Moore and Tom Robbins were also pretty big influences as well as Mark Twain and Kerry Thornley.
Trey- In your writings, is there sometimes hidden meanings or metaphorical story lines readers should pay attention to?
If you write the characters based partly on your own self introspective, what would you say the plots themselves are based on, or maybe that ties into the first question?
Joshua Scott Hotchkin Well, there are always very specific things that I embed into the stories. Specific themes and lessons and whatnot. But I also know that all of that will be perceived differently to every reader, so I try to just bury layers of my own personal meaning and understanding in them so that in the act of interpretations the reader can also find layers of their own within.
The plots are generally just based on the necessity of the themes and character. Or leading up to a punchline. I dont really put any forethought into them. I just start writing and follow each word with another. My instincts usually work to satisfy myself with what comes from that method.
Trey- What would you find more personally satisfying: 1) A successful author, who lives successfully and comfortably off licensing and royalties. With a million fans. or 2) A successful author who’s work is pirated by everyone, who lives and scrapes by with the lifestyle of a starving artist, with a billion fans.
I am dragging you into the I.P. realm and putting you on the spot!
I need a qualifier. Is the writer still writing what they want to and enjoying it in both cases?
Trey- I will say yes for both cases.. I will also ask, would you write stuff you despised for wealth if it took all of your time, leaving little time for what you “want” to write?
I would rather be successful. I don’t think there is anything wrong with being comfortable for doing what you love most. I don’t understand selling out, unless it means the artist changed to make money.
I would certainly take writing jobs that were not fulfilling as my own ideas in order to gain enough success to earn artistic freedom. But I could not and would not write something I absolutely hated for money while destroying my own creative output. Writing is almost a compulsion to rid myself of that creativity. I must obey that urge.
Trey- (Scenario) I am going to pay you generously to write an Epic Trilogy, but I want the main character description and plot description right this moment.. Go!
A young Amish man joins anarchists in a post zombie-apocalypse scenario. In a world that has survived zombies and has even given the surviving ones rights a moral component tries to disrupt the left vs. right paradigm that keeps the zombies alive in order to control humanity. The do-gooders and the highly religious come off as the most ridiculous while our Amish character comes to terms with what his own beliefs mean in this new world.
Trey- In closing, and in regards to a topic I know you enjoy: What advise would you give parents who would like to prod their child’s interest in writing or perhaps nurture an existing interest, to develop their understanding of creativity or help their creative process? Help us shape young minds here Joshua.
Replace punishment with creative activity from a very young age. If you can teach children to use their creativity to deal with the issues that make them act out, but in a positive way instead, they will become both better writers and better people. I think the time is coming where creativity is everything and punishment is obsolete and that these new paradigms are inextricably going to be connected if we are to get there.
Trey- Thanks Josh for some very awesome insight into the mind of a great up and coming writer.. I hope you are discovered while you are still alive and not like some of those artists who are instantly self made soon as the dirt hits the coffin!
Interviewed by David Metcalf November 2012
David- If you could reinvent modern public education from scratch, which three core concepts would you want it to have, and how would they influence the daily direction of such a system?
Philosophy, independence and critical thinking.
A philosophy is necessary to be developed first and foremost. It is the basis of all education. From Philosophy stems why we learn and what we learn. By having first precepts or principles we can instill purpose and context into the content of learning. Philosophy is the foundation for education.
Independence is key to learning. Not every child needs to learn the same things at the same pace at the same time. What a child decides is important to learn should help them develop their own personal interests and goals based off of their philosophy. Disciplines like reading, writing, math, history, science and the arts are only tools to reach an individuals overall goal and should not be put in importance above the reason the individual chooses to use them. In order to do this we would have to rethink the ideas of classroom and teacher and instead opt for a solution that taught individuals independently rather than groups as the same.
The most important thing that an individual must learn is how to think for themselves. We must become adept not at answering things but at questioning them. We should not be testing students but giving students tools to test the world. Our education systems do not foster life long learning because the point of them is to condition students towards conformity. Once that goal is attained then learning becomes unnecessary. But the student who has learning as its own goal and is able to do so by challenging the assumptions they encounter will continue to learn and to helps humanity to progress.
David- To what extent is doubt–or lack of certainty–the basis for enriching a personal philosophy?
A personal philosophy should not be considered a destination but a journey. It should evolve with the individual in order to foster and represent personal growth. It should not be static but always changing in order to provide a more holistic and consistent worldview. New ideas, information and observation should act to move the individual forward. This is only possible when one is able to express doubt and uncertainty about their own assumptions and those they encounter. Without doubt and uncertainty we are led into the dead end of dogma and all growth of the individual and their core philosophy is stunted so long as they insist on absolutes and the infallibility of their ideas, sources and methods.
David- If you could go back in time to give a single piece of advice to your childhood self (in 2 minutes or less), what would it be?
This question assumes that there is something that I wish I could have avoided, something I could change or some experience that was unnecessary. I do not believe that any of that is true. I am happy to be who I am and every bit of the ride along the way contributed to that. I would not change anything so it seems absolutely unnecessary to go back and give myself any advice.
However I feel obliged to give you some kind of answer maybe I would go back and tell myself to start a savings account with a high interest rate so that when I came back to now I would have some cash waiting for me.