Sunday, August 2, 2015

Are you really overweight?

In males, obesity brings not just boobs but significantly diminished sexual appetite and capacity.

Get a mental picture of a man built like Fat Bastard and ask how anyone could possibly find his pee-pee in all that blubber, assuming he or they had any interest in doing so.

You know he can’t reach it, himself, and even if someone else found it nothing very interesting would happen.

In the best of circumstances, male sexuality is iffy.

Hence the efforts women put into being provocative; hence the market for Viagra and rhino horn.

Too, wiping your own butt becomes quite stressful, if not impossible, and puts you quite out of breath.

Who will do it when you can't?

What if the toilet really does fall off the wall?

Think of taking a shower.

Can you reach everywhere you need to?

When you’re done, do you sit on the edge of the tub or lie gasping on the floor like a beached whale, totally out of breath and praying it’s not time yet for that fatal heart attack?

Can you take a shower without using one of those bathtub seats for the seriously infirm?

A really heavy-duty one?

Can you climb one flight of stairs without lying down afterward for five minutes to catch your breath?

Can you do the climb without stopping halfway up to catch your breath?

Can you tie your shoes without getting out of breath?

Can you do it at all, or do you need someone else to do it?

After a shower, can you stand to look at yourself in the mirror before you dress?

Does the sight cause you near-suicidal despair?

When standing, can you just reach down to pick up a dropped item from the floor?

When standing, can you get down onto your knees without denting the hardwood or cracking your kneecap?

Once down on the floor, can you get back up without help?

Can you get back up without leaning against the furniture and pushing yourself up?

Can you buy t-shirts and jeans at any store or only in the stores for the “Big and Tall”?

Just asking.

The things people write in emails. Jared Fogle.

Subway Jared Reportedly Texted About Paying A 16-Year-Old For Sex

He has been a valuable public example of something all too rare, somebody who shed a lot of excess weight and kept it off for many years.

Of course, he had a motive unique among those betrayed by their appetitive impulses, he was making a good living keeping the weight off as proof of the virtues of Subway sandwiches, eaten in moderation.

And in truth the calorie loads of Subway sandwiches look reasonable and even modest, compared to the general run of fast food and especially to the more extravagant burgers out there.

Super-size me, indeed.

But people lose control when forced by circumstance into situations of great stress.

Think of alcoholics falling off the wagon.

I hope he can keep it together and is not ruined by this scandal, in which so far he is at worst believed to have paid a 16 year old for sex, a young girl who was openly soliciting.

Jared Fogle

He had a 62 inch waist, at his worst.


Says Wikipedia,

As of 2013 Fogle, who is six feet two inches in height, weighs 200 pounds.

Not bad for a man that tall.

I'm just under 6' 1'' and the last time I weighed 195 pounds my doctor told me I looked too gaunt and should gain weight.

He was not kidding.

He is far from being a fatso, himself.


Age of consent laws are grotesque artifacts of Victorian moralism in league with Victorian feminism, much like laws criminalizing prostitution.

US federal child porn laws make illegal images of activities that are not themselves illegal, and to that extent are also grotesque.

For both, see the articles in Wikipedia.

Phooey. In 2008 he said he opposed gay marriage. Firmly.

Scott Walker Claims He Still Doesn't Know If Obama Is A Christian

Michael McGough back in February.

Based on the public record, Walker should have been able to affirm personally what his spokeswoman did: that Obama identifies as a Christian -- and not just a "social justice" liberal Christian. 

In an interview with Christianity Today in 2008, Obama said that “accepting Jesus Christ in my life has been a powerful guide for my conduct and my values and my ideals.”

The man is, after all, a deep-dyed liar.

And why is this old article in today's LA Times?

Wait until he's a real threat to Hillary

UCLA students for Bernie

If and when he gets that far the sisterhood and the race-baiters will turn on him.

He's too old, too white, and too male.

The only thing not wrong with him from the liberal point of view is that he's not a Christian; that would certainly have been one too many, not only depriving him of the invaluable tribal enthusiasm of the Jewish left but engaging the hostility and suspicion of both Jews and secularists.

Though her relative social conservatism and instinct for triangulation on social issues will not make it easy for them, the sisterhood, quiet so far, will remind us that the deal in 2008 was that that was the year of Obama, the historic black candidate, and next up would be Hillary, the historic female candidate.

They will also start bashing Bernie with everything from his long past that doesn't quite pass a contemporary feminist PC sniff test.

Poor Bernie just doesn't really sound as though his consciousness has ever been raised.

And the women will join the blacks in belaboring his whiteness and his unfortunate insensitivity to race per se, to blacks in particular and non-whites in general.

And that might play nicely into bashing him for his unfashionable apparent loyalty to the two-state solution, traditional Zionism, and the idea of an of course ethnically specific Jewish state, a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Conservatives have already played the race card against him for his opposition to mass low-wage immigration and his opposition to trade policies that have made the rich richer as well as the Chinese, the Mexicans, and others, all at the expense of American working people.

Both his ethnic Zionism and his American nationalism put him at loggerheads with the anti-nationalist cosmopolitanism of most influential younger liberals, notably Jewish ones, and will certainly come under fire if he rises to the point of posing a significant threat to Hillary, or even of influencing her positions.

He will get out of this long campaign all smiles only if he never really threatens Hillary.

Framing the tax on scofflaws

It's opponents call taxation of gambling a "tax on stupidity."

Municipal reliance on traffic fines could be called a "tax on scofflaws."

Heavy taxation on tobacco is a "tax on addiction" and on alcohol is a "sin tax," the latter two engaging the government in collusion with producers in exploitation.

Heavy taxation on gasoline could be regarded as a tax on working away from home.

All of these are regressive ways to finance government and several are much favored by liberals.

But not the second which, associated in liberal discourse with racism and police violence, is now referred to exclusively as "shaking down the poor" by its authors.

Here's a sample.

Shaking Down Poor People Is Tied To Police Violence

Saturday, August 1, 2015


As I recall, a pound of frozen Brussels Sprouts used to be marked as 5 servings at 25 calories each.

Now it's marked 5 servings at 45 calories each.


Wrong place, wrong time?

A point few on the left will admit except when recommending legalization of infanticide is that late term fetuses are just babies in a dangerous place.

Early term fetuses, in contrast, are mere masses of human cells not shaped up into a remotely recognizable individual human being.

As Judith Jarvis Thompson so famously wrote decades ago, "an acorn is not an oak tree."

But a sapling actually is, small and immature and weak though it be.

Allowing murder of any class of humans for selfish reasons or, worse yet, at will, is a little too scary for me, and so I would prefer that late term abortions not be allowed at all except in those cases where the usual arguments for euthanasia fairly apply.

Much less that they become profitable, less costly, or more entrenched thanks to uses of killed babies that would make even Jonathan Swift sick.

And so I wonder where the tissues to be used for research that this flap is about actually come from.

And I fear the worst, that they are "harvested" from killed late term fetuses that are undeniably murdered innocent human babies, killed for wholly frightful reasons.

George Will

Even apart from that it is in place to ask, since lawful "reproductive services" really are not health care services, why the government should be financing their provision, or requiring that employer insurance plans cover any or all such things, assuming all the while that government should be providing, or requiring employers or others to provide, health insurance for people at large.

Some of what PP does counts as real health care, I gather.

But much, maybe most, comes under the heading of "reproductive services," no?

It would be a step in the right direction for courts to stop lying about the constitution on this matter and let the states prohibit late term abortion.

Perhaps the Justice Department could even begin prosecuting later term abortions as violations of the killed infants' civil rights.

And defunding Planned Parenthood until and unless it restricts its activities to provision of actual health care might be a good thing, on the whole.

The "crime wave" argument against immigration, and against laxity in enforcement of immigration law

It isn't just Donald Trump going on about murdering wetbacks.

Denmark astonished at 1,000% Muslim Somali majority crime numbers

Immigration policy is the West is everywhere beyond the reach of democracy.

Ideological warfare, revisited

UK: David Cameron Declares War on Islamic Extremism

Is this the proper business of any liberal, or libertarian, or democratic governments?

Is official ideology any more welcome than official morality, or government financed efforts to win the hearts and minds not only of foreigners but of their own peoples?

Or are we now really all pretty much agreed, with Jihaders and with the most intolerant reds, that everyone else has to agree with us?

Victimless crimes

Feminists vs "sex workers"

Libertarians are probably more consistently Mill-ish than J. S., himself, on this issue.

And the feminists are entirely full of beans, beginning with the question who is exploiting whom, when the participants are no more sensibly to be accounted coerced than folks in less controversial lines of work.

It is evident that it makes at least as much sense to say that prostitutes exploit the sexual urges of their clients as to say that clients exploit the prostitutes' need for money.

And neither accusation makes any sense, given the buyer of anything is always exploiting the seller's need for money and the seller is always exploiting the buyer's need for whatever is to be sold.

That is at the root of all exchange.



"Gender apartheid"?

I love it.

Why not "gender genocide," while you're at it?

Or "gender fascism"?