The Weekly Muse

This is an experiment.

All writers need a muse. I have mine. It’s called the RANDOMOLOGY ARMY. I need to be challenged. I need YOU to try and stump my writer’s brain.

Click on the poll below to tell me what my next story will be about. The poll will expire one week after it goes life. After that, I have one week to write a story based on the elements you voted for. You may choose up to three items. In the case of a tie, I will cast the tie-breaker vote.

Next poll goes live on August 1st for a story on August 8th.

Now, be merciless!

Weekly Muse for August 29

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

6 Replies to “The Weekly Muse”

  1. Other: the punitive paradigm; the idea that the correct first response to drug abuse/addiction (or even mere possession because of the possibility of “future” abuse) of certain drugs is the criminal justice system (even drug courts still run so-called addicts through criminal justice system, entailing criminal records still–and is used to bolster “addiction” claims, i.e., “there are x-many people in treatment centers”); the conflation of use and abuse, addiction and dependence–or the complete removal of the word “use” in discussions; the overwhelming overlooking by the media that before drug laws there were essentially no narcoterrorism (no one even seemed to bat an eye at the fact that Osama Bin Laden was found next to “marijuana” growing like a common crop–which it was; the repeatability of the unintended consequences of drug prohibition (whether it be alcohol or other drugs); the fact that alcohol prohibition required an amendment to the constitution while drug “tax” laws were snuck in through the Ways and Means commission and simply reformulated into the Control Substance Act when the taxes were ruled unconstitutional; the idea that even medical cannabis is subject to the interstate commerce law because a State market would have an effect on a “Federal” market; the use of “scientific” language in a context and culture where the science really does not matter; the stereotyping by even John Stewart (“thanks for fact-fucking us stoners”–fuck you Stewart). I want to see more people discussing what I–and I would argue other academics who have studied the issue closely–consider public enemy number one: prohibition and the punitive paradigm; and the impotence of the media and even satirists like John Stewart to address this policy issue (instead making stereotypical jokes in a fashion that would not be tolerated if we were discussing the Gay community, or Muslims). I know that if I really care I should wright my own blog article; and there is a blog article in the works … just as soon as I finish an assignment on whether or not ESP is “marginal science” (hint: I reject the question for reasons I will not go into here). Pleeeeeease.

        1. I’m sorry, I thought you were asking for a vote on the next issue to discuss, not what topic should be chosen for–under closer examination–what appears to be a request for input on fiction. My bad. I saw the “Now, be merciless” and falsely assumed this was a poll for serious issues (though given the choices I should have been more skeptical of my quick assumptions). I guess this has nothing to do with your intentions. Within the context of fiction I vote “The end of time.” My sincere apologies; I’ve been spending too much time watching the news and hoping for a savior where I can expect none.

          1. BTW I am having issues with the voting mechanism now that I have tried it. P.S., I see no reason why drug policy cannot be incorporated into fiction. Also, input outside your preconceived “poll” should not be excluded from incorporation into your fiction simply because it is a serious issue. Gene Roddenberry was not a Science Fiction writer; he used Science Fiction as a platform to discuss social issues; I see no reason why you couldn’t do the same. Much Love.

Leave a Reply