Home » Racy
Category Archives: Racy
Power Line: The Week in Pictures: Thank God It’s Saturday Edition.
Shared via Google News
They say to drink a lot of water, I just filter mine through ground coffee beans first… Thanks Again, California. You give New Meaning to the Phrase “Stick in the Mud”… Ya Dopes.
Trigger (heh) warning: I don’t particularly like California or Californians. I don’t like their arrogance or the fact that, somehow, they’ve come to rely on politicians who continually screw up all things good and happy, causing everyone to hate everyone else. This post will reflect that disdain for politicians, Californians and other general sticks in the mud. This post will not be my fit in my usual PG category posts. You have been trigger (heh) warned.
California is at it again, taking the best in life and exploiting it to remove all of the joy and happiness, bastardizing scientific research in the process… and all in the name of your safety. It’s kind of what California does (that gives me an idea, but we’ll get to that in a minute). In California, nobody can ever be happy, people must live on the screwed up edge of: “We must do more! We MUST remind the people of how necessary and brilliant we are!” I don’t like California because its idiocy tends to infect the rest of the US. When they threaten session, I say they can’t get there fast enough.
In fact, did you know the self-esteem movement, that which has likely led to more unmarriageable men than any other single “idea” in the history of humankind, can actually be traced back to California? Better, and not surprisingly, the science that was used to back up the need for changes to the education system was skewed and manipulated to support that lunacy.
Well, California is at it again, this time training their keen brand of idiocy and ignorance on coffee.
See, according to California’s “Council for Education and Research in Toxics (CERT).” coffee causes cancer (specifically a chemical created in the roasting process). Now, if you don’t know already, the study used to suggest that there may be a link to the chemical and cancer was conducted using the overdose method, where testers take the maximum tolerable amount of a chemical and inject it into a small animal. If the small animal gets cancer, bingo. The rub is that the small animal would have to inject something like the equivalent of 486 gallons of coffee a week into its body to cause cancer. Then you have to adjust that to human proportions… And folks, I’m not over exaggerating… I’m under exaggerating. In other words, there’s just no freaking way.
In fact, and let this sink in for just a second, The American Institute for Cancer Research lists coffee as a food that fights cancer. Allow me to channel Samuel L. Jackson for just a moment. Mother f***er, click on the mother****in’ “Research” tab. I’m not even going to copy and paste the quote, mother****er. Better, have a look at all the cancers coffee is shown to fight. Hey, here’s a mother****in’ idea, what does the World Health Organization say about coffee? Well, let’s see:
The World Health Organisation has cleared coffee of causing cancer
So, in other words, everyone else on the freaking planet has discovered that coffee is actually good for you, and in many cases decades ago, but that’s not good enough for the anti-science fun police in California. They’ve deemed it necessary to make convenience stores label coffee as a possible cause of cancer.
Here’s that idea I wrote of earlier…. How about a little truth in advertising, there California? I want the next commercial from the tourism board of California (whatever that bureaucracy is named) to include a disclaimer that while California may be one of the more beautiful places in America, its political apparatus foments hatred and division of its people by constantly attacking happiness itself and that human contact should be kept to a bare minimum lest you accidentally bump into one of those who support a life devoid of happiness and are infected with that resident’s penchant for supporting those attacks.
I read a neat post on an uproar over Pinarello’s marketing ads for their new road eBike. First, some backstory.
Last year, in the off-season, my cycling buddy Mike, my wife and I would regularly go out for dirt road rides on our mountain bikes. Every once in a while, Diane would join us on her cyclocross/gravel bike. I have a Specialized Rockhopper 29er, my wife has an almost identical Trek Marlin 29er. My buddy, Mike has an older Stumpjumper 26, a hand-me-down from a friend. My wife wanted a gravel bike so she would have an easier time keeping up with us, as Diane did. I suggested against the idea, because if she got used to taking it easy on a gravel bike while we were on mountain bikes, that would adversely affect her fitness next season – at some point she would have to play “catch up” and catching up always sucks.
Back to the Pinarello kerfuffle… My wife would buy that Pinarello tomorrow, if we had the cash, for the exact same reason. Hell, I’d think about buying one to keep up with our 24 mph average A Group for the same reason [ED. I wouldn’t, because I’d likely be excoriated for being a wuss]. I have to stay on track though, I don’t want to mess up the narrative…. Yet.
Along comes Pinarello and their new eBike, the Nytro. Their ad campaign featured a young lady who wants a Nytro so she can comfortably keep up with her boyfriend and his cycling buds [ED Exactly like my wife, ahem]. The other side of the ad features an older fella who works too much to train but with a Nytro, now he doesn’t have to miss a Sunday ride with his buds.
Pinarello got my wife and me right – though in all honesty, I have my normal friends to ride with. I don’t need an eBike to ride with the A guys (and yes, every one of the regulars in the A Group is a male of the species. I only know of one woman who can ride with them. She’s a pro).
So, the question is, is Pinerallo, who marketed almost exactly to my wife and I, sexist for doing so?
My wife absolutely does not want to work hard enough to keep up with us boys. So if Pinarello’s marketing is sexist, my wife would have to be as well. If anyone thinks my wife, because she wants to ride with us but would like a little assist with an eBike, is a male chauvinist, it’s because they are one of two things: ignorant or stupid. Pick one, or be bold and go with both.
In this age of faux outrage, masquerading as care for real issues, I grow tired of the chattering masses who take umbrage with human nature and the differences between men and women and try to use those differences as a means to prove sexism.
It seems increasingly more common that some people simply have to be angry to be happy.
Observe: Is Pinerallo sexist for marketing to women who would love an extra assist to keep up with the boys on Wednesday night, or are those who are angered by the ad campaign sexist for picking on Pinarello and for believing that women who want the assist are lazy for not wanting to train hard enough to keep up in the first place? Touchè.
My money goes on the latter.
Unfortunately, my problem is that I’ve taken that latter tact with my wife. She’s so close to fast enough to hang with us. With a little more effort and willingness, she’d be right there.
Hey, isn’t that sexist? In my case, I’m a sexist either way just because I was born a male, but that’s the point. In truth and reality (neither of which actually matter), it’s simply how this works.
The simple fact is, you (especially if “you” is a male) can’t win, and the whole narrative is designed that way. On the one hand, you have real sexism – all one needs for proof is the implosion of Hollywood (which I’ve been watching with glee, those pompous, arrogant @$$holes). On the other, you’ve got this faux sexism that is used to bludgeon someone just for the sake of hammering them. Call it bullying – I think that’s the new buzzword of the decade.
As I’ve also shown, for those who claim faux sexism, you can flip the narrative on them – you just have to be quick enough to do it and that ain’t easy. For real, no BS sexism, the narrative can’t be flipped. There is no justifying Charlie Rose walking around butt naked in front of female colleagues – you can’t flip that narrative, the behavior is just plain wrong. It’s that fake narrative that we can work with.
The trick is to first reject the premise of the narrative in the first place; in this case, “Pinarello is sexist for suggesting that women need an e-assist to keep up with the boys”. Pinarello didn’t suggest that at all, the hucksters added that to the narrative to justify their angry reaction (that’s the rejection of the premise). What Pinarello did was offer an option to women who don’t feel they can or want to keep up with their spouse or boyfriend on a bicycle. They offered the same option to men, if you were paying attention.
The trick is flipping the narrative: “Claiming that women simply aren’t willing to work hard enough to keep up with the boys is sexist, and that means you’re a chauvinist. You need to stop that sexist shit that permeates our society and gives men cover so they believe they can abuse womyn as a result.” Women often simply have different priorities, and what really works for society is men and women living in harmony – if that means a spouse buying an eBike to keep up, who cares? The important thing is the couple gets to ride together – whether the wife or the husband is the stronger cyclist.
Bob’s your uncle.
Just hopefully not a pedophile uncle.
This is some good, old-fashioned family fun. Gulp. “Is it hot in here?”
Just what the World Needs, another Snowflake. A Different Theme on a New Meme; The Carleton University Scale Dust up.
Trigger (heh) warning: If you still wear diapers or pull-ups and are easily triggered to melt, this post is likely not for you. You have been trigger (heh) warned.
I originally thought the story was a fake, it’s just too perfect. University Athletics management removes a weight scale from the gym and leaves a sign:
Social trends? In a gym? Fitness trends? Which trends would they be? Specifically.
Now, the meme diverges from there and suggests that the scale was removed at the request of one snowflake who was “triggered” by seeing the scale and asked that it be removed. If that’s the case, I shudder for the future and am now considering working till I’m 80 so I don’t have to rely on that dipshit to provide for my health care and partial retirement. Hey, only 33 more years to go.
Whatever the case, that part really didn’t “technically” make the original story. The original story is way more fun to play with, from the snowflake perspective, anyway.
The sign left in place of the scale encouraged people to “focus on other ways of measuring their health beyond just their weight”. Why is management suggesting those who use a scale are only using the scale to measure “health”? You don’t use a scale to measure health. A scale measures weight – and that is the only thing it measures – and nothing does that better.
It’s very simple really, a scale is a tool used to let one know if one is consuming too much food. If one does, the number goes up. If one doesn’t, guess what! YES! The number goes down. If we are lifting weights in conjunction with cardio, that number stays there for a bit while the body trades fat for muscle. Then it drops. Rocket science this is not.
Let’s move on, now that I’m in captain obvious mode.
Bruce Marshall, manager of health and wellness at Athletics, said focusing only on weight can have a negative impact.
Bruce Marshall must not be doing his job as the manager of health and wellness if his people are teaching those who use his gym to only focus on weight. I wonder why they wouldn’t teach balance like everyone else, but weight plays a part in that balance.
So anyone who weighs themselves once a week, or even once a day, is fixated on weight now, according to Bruce Almighty?
A great thinker once said he’d rather be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than the faculties at Harvard and MIT. Bruce is why. If he has people using his gym who are fixated on weight, why does he have to remove the scale and wreck it for everyone, why can’t he do his job and teach those few who do fixate on weight how to moderate? To postulate that anyone who uses a scale is fixated on weight is silly and lazy.
The Great and Powerful Bruce then makes the next natural leap from fixation to obsession. It just keeps getting better!
The last line is the best, “Why not look at other indicators?”
Hey, Mr. Wonderful, why not use all the tools in the toolbox? Why fight with one hand tied behind your nuts (or vajay-jay)?
[It’s a funny visual though, ain’t it?]
Now here’s where we get to drop the Brucemeister into the dumpster. Watch this…
So, Mr. Fantastic wants us to take girth measurements? Being fixated on the scale is bad but being fixated on girth is good, yes? How about obsessed? I wonder if Mr. Fabulous knows that being obsessed with girth is unhealthy!? While we’re at it, what are the right girth measurements? Please, Oh Wise One, bestow on us the proper girth measurements so we may obsess on them. And oh, goody, we can “set goals in terms of cardiovascular fitness and overall strength” instead of relying on a number on a scale. This is madness. It’s such an easy concept but the waters must be muddied so that only a doctor can properly assess whether or not one’s ass is too big.
Here’s the problem: I picked this article apart while watching Star Wars. It was easy because Bruce has himself in the middle of his own one-man circular firing squad. See, I don’t think he actually believes that gobbledygook he was spewing about scales. His arguments were too simple to turn around and use against him because they’re based in rainbows, unicorns and hope.
Come to think of it, I’d bet the mirrors are next. They are good as gone and I can’t wait to rip apart the note The Brucinator leaves in place of those.
Where this story really went off the rails was when a student chimed in on Facebook with:
“Scales are very triggering,” she said. “I think people are being insensitive because they simply don’t understand. They think eating disorders are a choice when they are actually a serious illness.”
One can only imagine how I, an ex-drunk, managed to recover from alcoholism. Alcohol is everywhere. We learn to disregard the trigger, I don’t expect the world to stop drinking because I’m an ex-drunk. It takes a special kind of nincompoop to suggest a scale is a trigger that should be banished for those few with eating disorders.
I will put this as simply as I can, from a mountain of experience; If I am “triggered”, I am the problem, not the inanimate object that “triggered” me. I need to be fixed. Period. [PS. Those aren’t “scare” quotes. They’re “stupid” quotes.]
One last tidbit from The Washington Democrat… err, Post:
Marshall told CBC, in response to the criticism the school has received, “We will weigh the pros and cons and may reconsider our decision.”
We can only hope that he doesn’t obsess over weighing those pros and cons on a scale.
I couldn’t resist.
This post was a result of reading my friend, Gail’s most excellent post on the subject. I just wanted to take it in a different direction.
Liberal Preppers are loading up on Granola, Tofu… and Guns and Ammo in the Event of a Trumpocalypse? Welcome to the Club Boys and Girls!
Seriously? According to reports, it’s true! It appears liberals/progressives (I repeat myself) around the US are flocking to gun stores to get their Trumpocalypse firearm and load up on ammo while they’re at it.
We can gloss over the irony that it’s about time liberals discovered that the Second Amendment to the Constitution covers more than recreational hunting but let’s not get too crappy, eh? ‘Tis a reason to celebrate!. No need to point out that if Republicans hadn’t blocked their attempts to block that Amendment, they’d be stocking up on sticks, stones and Rambo knives. Oh wait! Would those be Rambo knives recategorized as “assault knives”?! So make it “sticks, stones and butter knives”.
I digress! Let’s look at the positives! And I’ll offer you new whipper-snappers a tip or two, you know…. so you don’t accidentally kill yourself (or someone else)!
- We’re a little hysterical right now, so let’s take a deep breath. Oooooommmmm… Okay, calm? A person who voted for Donald Trump and happens to be disagreeing with you in a conversation is not a threat on your life or safety. That means you can’t actually shoot someone for disagreeing with you or for voting for Donald Trump. This may come as a surprise to you with all of the fake news out there in the New York Times, Washington Post, and coming out of NPR or your average ultra-liberal professor but it’s true. You cannot kill someone for not liking Big Government.
- The place for your pistol is not in the drawer or under your pillow if you have kids. “I told him/her not to go into my room” won’t bring them back. The pistol goes in a nice little quick access safe on the night stand.
- It will cost you $10,000 minimum in court/attorney costs if you’re caught pulling your weapon in public. If you shoot a person, even in true, blatant, obvious self-defense, $100,000 minimum in defense costs. You can’t afford the defense, so you better be sure before you even think of brandishing that weapon because you’re going into court with a public defender and a life sentence is a loooong time. Again, a “he/she hurt my feelings” defense will get you 25 to life.
- Practice, at a legitimate firearm range, drawing, aiming, and firing your pistol. Become comfortable with your firearm. Become a good shot. Learn which end is the business end. Learn where “the bullets go”. Practice.
- Being able to purchase a firearm does not allow one to carry it on their person in a concealed fashion. You need a special permit or license for that depending on your State Law – this goes to that “well regulated” part, and that goes (by design, ladies and gentlemen) by State. In mine, I had to go through a special course to prove that I was proficient with my firearm (and contrary to fake news, not everyone will pass… a guy two stalls down was failed instantly when we all had to duck because he didn’t know enough to keep his weapon pointed down range or flat on the table in front of him).
- After the course and test, expect a background check from the FBI. They put your fingerprints on file too.
- Carrying a concealed firearm without a license is a felony in all but one State (I believe one made it legal to carry without a license, or is in the process of doing so) though many do allow open carry. It’s my personal.preference to refrain from advertising though.
- Now, for a few lighter tips. Unlike many of y0ur liberal friends, we won’t give you $#!+ about purchasing a firearm or showing up at a range. We’ll welcome you to the club because that’s what we do. It’s about the Amendment and the Right, not you. Please learn from this and treat us accordingly – no need to try to shut down the firearm range you practice at to assuage your guilt for being there.
- Notice I used the words “pistol” and “firearm”, not “gun”? You played with toy guns when you played Zombie Apocalypse in the backyard as a kid. Pistols are not toys. Period.
- Hopefully this is where you realize all that hyperventilating by your side is silly and you’re at the point you’ve come to understand what an incredible responsibility owning a firearm is. Honor that responsibility, please.
Finally, to wrap this up, we on the right freaked out a little bit when President Obama was elected in ’08 so I can dig that you lefties are a touch discombooberated right now. We survived Obama (for the most part) and you’ll survive eight years of Trump (heh)…. Unless you happen to be a bureaucrat, in that case, Vaya con Dios. I hope that new post in Nome, Alaska is a peach. Bring a warm jacket, eh.
It’s about damn time, too.
With that, welcome to the club!
There are many simple rules in life that are not mandated, but wise to follow. For instance, never take advice on how to drive drunk from an ex-drunk. It’s very simple really, if they had any clue how to drink responsibly, let alone drive (namely leave the car at home and take a damn cab), they wouldn’t be EX-drunks. Another would be never take the advice of a politician, unless it’s, “we politicians need to do less so we screw up the country less”, in that case, they’re right.
On the other hand, when someone offers their experience for my benefit, I always give it a fair roll around the melon. Sometimes I can use it, sometimes I can’t, but I always give it a fair shake because these are the people who actually care.
That said, I like to write, from time to time, about good times and noodle salad (As Good As It Gets). I come at life from an interesting perspective having been a recovered drunk for the last couple of decades and only being 43 years-old. I made a pretty fair mess of my life and the prospects weren’t looking too rosy when I quit drinking, so to have made something out of myself, to have become a decent, contributing member of society (rather than a drag on it), is a pretty big deal. This was made possible by the fact that I didn’t just stop drinking, I completely changed my life, how I looked at things, my thought patterns and how I handled responsibilities (I actually handled them for once).
With that complete change in attitude and outlook came immense benefits, far too numerous to mention here (I’d be well into writing something that had as many words as the Bible or a dictionary). One of the benefits really stuck out at me the other day when a new blog friend posted a comment on my tongue in cheek look at how women can help their men get fit, here. In that post I wrote this: “…there’s one other way to reach your man in a meaningful way – at least one that will work. Nagging is not the answer.”
Weronika (pronounced Veronica) responded thusly:
“LOL the group of retiree males with whom I ride… they claim cycling helps them get away from their wives. I think they’ve suffered too much nagging and not enough cleavage. Poor guys. Their wives need this post.”
Veronica is right, but those guys have a part in this too… So I responded.
Now I’m going to break here – my response to her comment is not kid-friendly so if you’re under 20, please don’t bother going any further… (more…)