When the nation of China, is the way in which the American accent makes a mockery of (or takes the piss out of) American sexual intercourse (not gender, but sexual intercourse as it pertains to life in the United States), a type of culture is the way in which a type of accent makes a mockery of a type of sexual intercourse; when a type of culture is the way in which a type of accent makes a mockery, of a type of sexual intercourse, the result is a type of sexual intercourse having nothing to do with a type of accent attempting to befriend a type of culture.

A type of accent is not accent. A type of culture is not culture, and finally, a type of sexual intercourse is not sexual intercourse: when non-sexual activity is detached from no accent trying to support no culture, the very simplicity of sexuality is detached from communication trying to destroy culture – communication trying to end culture is culture trying to help communication.

Culture trying to help communication is the inability to try to help communication. The inability to try to befriend communication is communication being the avoidance of the inability to try – the inability to try is just avoidance, and so, communication can mean the avoidance of avoidance, or more plainly the sheer and utter fact of interaction.

When communication is actual communication (when communication is what it’s supposed to be), it means that sexuality is detached or is an enemy of communication: so what could this mean?

When sexuality is opposed to communication being itself, communication being itself is the friend of sexuality: communication being itself is self being avoidance, and self as an avoidance means to engage in sex.

The self is an opposite. An opposite that’s an opposite is an opposition which isn’t possible – the impossibility of hostility is what it means to have sex.

The impossibility of hostility is the hostility of possibility. The hostility of possibility is a resistance toward magic – sex is what it means to suppress magic.

If such is the case, and magic is oppressed by sexual intercourse, it then must stand to reason that sex and all that’s connected to sexual intercourse is the cause of magic – magic wants to help sexual intercourse, to keep onto its dignity.

Sex is the cool. Cool is dignity, and as such, magic is the endeavour to help coolness keep onto itself (which in effect means that magic is the embodiment of the absence of coolness).

The absence of cool is the victimised; the victimised is the mocked, and the shunned – the mocked and the shunned aspects of reality exist to prop up the non-mocked and the non-shunned.

In other words: slavery and homelessness are intended by reality as a device to protect mansions and exploitation, but only from the perspective that it’s only slavery and homelessness and neither mansions or exploitation which mean consciousness and reflection.

In order for reality to protect mansions, and to protect taking the piss, the price that reality pays is to only give self-awareness and morality to homelessness and slavery.