Those of you who’ve been reading my posts for a while may recall my pledge, but for newer readers, here it is: I never make up the things I post here. Why? Because I’m just not that good.
In the spirit of that pledge, here’s a screen shot of the search terms that have been used to find my blog over the past seven days:
(If you are unable to see the image via email or your RSS reader, click here to visit the main site: https://dwallace12.wordpress.com)
I have a reasonable idea how search terms 2-4 might have led surfers here, but I have to admit that I’m baffled by term #1. I’m certainly not above some adolescent, sexually tinged humor – in fact, unresolved adolescent that I am, I revel in it. But I have no idea what I might ever have said in this space that would have caused Google to dig up my lightly-read blog in response to that particular search. If anyone knows, I’m all ears. And belts, I guess.
Unlike my newest friend and subscriber, Holly Thomas (whose comment you can see attached to my last post), I was unable to resist temptation, so I replicated the search – first a web search and then an image search, which is what WordPress reported was actually used. Curiosity did not kill the cat, but it certainly curled his hair. So shocked was I by what I found that I felt compelled to look through at least 20 pages of search results. Serious research, you know, is hard work.
Anyway, I never found a link back here, so I still don’t know how this connection occurred. But if we are known by the company we keep, I really should go home and rethink my life.
Said rethinking better done if someone would help me with the sign language inquiry from last time.
Carp Diem 
So just when does the results of this heavy duty chastity belt research get written up on your blog?
Michael, I suggest you look at Steve’s Smolinsky’s second comment. You might think of that as the Executive Summary.
Of course your comment caused me to look on Google Images for Chastity Belt Teasing. Mostly if found the images odd, unrelated,and fairly boring but am totally intrigued that in the middle of the first page it brought up there was a big picture of Sarah Palin.
Do you suppose this is a social commentary from Google?
Occurred to me that I should let you know that I also follow Dan’s motto: I’m not smart enough to make this up.
So here’s the link to Sarah Palin centered in the chastity belt Google page:https://www.google.com/search?num=10&hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=615&q=chastity+belt+teasing&oq=chastity+belt+teasing&gs_l=img.3…3014.9702.0.10215.21.6.0.15.0.0.89.182.6.6.0…0.0…1ac.1.KYnqjusEO7E
(Note from Dan – some of what’s on this Google page is not for the faint of heart. Whether that includes the picture of Sarah Palin is up to you. As for the rest of it, click at your own risk.)
You realize, don’t you, that by having written this you’ve reinforced the connection, so the Google beast now thinks it’s correct to associate your blog with Chastity Belt Teasing. And that somewhere in the gassy bowels of Google my name is now linked with CBT, Congress, and Sarah Palin. As my mother used to say with her eyebrows arched, “How can I ever thank you?”
If you look carefully, I think you’ll find that I scrupulously avoided ever using the actual search term for precisely this reason. It only appears in the screen shot, which is not searchable.
A few commenters were less discreet. Cf: Steve Smolinsky (who now has bus tire tracks across his chest. I will, it seems, sink that low.)