Nudity versus sex

Aliaa Magda Elmahdy is a student in Egypt who has started a campaign to challenge silly Muslim attitudes towards nudity, and in fact, towards women in general. Her strategy? Posing nude on her blog:

The 20-year-old wrote on her blog that the photos, which show her naked apart from stockings, are her “screams against a society of violence, racism, sexism, sexual harassment and hypocrisy”. Her blog has received 1.5 million hits since her photos were posted earlier this week.

From this we’ve learned two things and reinforced a third: We’ve learned that some people do have guts, we’ve learned that novel nudity has a strong appeal, and it has been reinforced that people like naked women.

And yes, yes, here is the link to her blog.

The article, apparently being written by a lazy journalist, goes to Twitter feeds for quotes on the issue. There was one I especially liked:

Another supporter commented: “We need to learn how to separate between nudity and sex.”

Whether in the Islamic, Christian, Jewish, or other religious world, there is a difficulty people have in distinguishing between these two things. There really isn’t a good reason for it; I think, like with the unprincipled opposition to legalized prostitution, this all comes down to an irrational “ewwy!” feeling. Sex is something which has been beaten down, portrayed as a negative thing which comes with nothing but bad consequences (unless done within the confines of marriage, of course). I think that’s a view we could do away with for the better.

via PZ.

Thought of the day

Dear people at the gym,

When I ask you for a spot, I mean that I want a spot. I do not mean that I want you to lift the weight for me.

Thank you,

Michael.

Pizza and potatoes for all!

I have been doing what I refer to as a 5-5-5 plan. It’s actually known as 5X5 training, but I like telling people that I’m as excited about my 5-5-5 plan as conservatives were about Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan a few weeks ago – the difference is that my plan will be effective. But I digress.

Part of my plan includes eating. A lot. I’ve already put on 5 pounds in a little over a week and I expect to add another 5-10 pounds by the time I’m done in a month or so. This is roughly in line with the average lives of most Americans except that my weight gain is controlled. And zero of it is fat. I can do this plan for two primary reasons: 1) I am regularly working out (and I have seen strength gains already) and 2) I’m not eating a bunch of shitty food. Not that I’m opposed to tastiness, but the majority of what I consume throughout the day has good nutritional value, including lots of protein.

Now, if I was to stop working out while continuing my food intake levels, I would put on a bunch of fat. Even with a favorable metabolism and youth on my side, I wouldn’t be able to avoid it. But I wouldn’t do that to myself because I value my health, unlike most Americans. In fact, the valuing of health in America is so low that Congress actually wants to continue the practice of effectively calling pizza a vegetable:

The final version of a spending bill released late Monday would unravel school lunch standards the Agriculture Department proposed earlier this year, which included limiting the use of potatoes on the lunch line and delaying limits on sodium and delaying a requirement to boost whole grains.

The bill also would allow tomato paste on pizzas to be counted as a vegetable, as it is now. USDA had wanted to prevent that.

It’s unclear if this relates to the healthy eating bill Michelle Obama lobbied to get passed not too long ago, but it’s shitty any way you slice it. And speaking of slicing, guess which groups were most active in this effort to keep kids fat?

Food companies that produce frozen pizzas for schools, the salt industry and potato growers requested the changes, and some conservatives in Congress say the federal government shouldn’t be telling children what to eat.

Shocking, I know.

So let me summarize what happened: a number of businesses that live off government purchases want to keep doing so and the party that lives off donations from businesses like these said sure. Very pragmatic.

But what isn’t pragmatic is the ideology that underlies much of this. Republicans believe that the government should stay out of telling kids what to eat*, but that is either a fundamentally dishonest or fundamentally stupid argument. The government is footing the bill. It can restrict whatever it damn well pleases, just as it restricts prepared foods and (in at least some states) energy drinks from being purchased with food stamps. I fail to see why anyone thinks there is a fundamental right to eating pizza and potatoes.

But by all means, let’s keep feeding kids bad food. Think of all the benefits. No longer will “the fat kid” get bullied and mocked – it isn’t easy to go after half the class. And with this generation of 20-somethings being the most educated group in history, there will be plenty of jobs for them in the health care industry as more and more kids develop diabetes. And as airplanes and stadiums and movie theaters and any place with seats grow older, they will need to be replaced with bigger and wider places to sit. That’s going to be a windfall for manufacturers and maybe even the construction industry. If anything, The Obese Generation is going to be a boon for the minority of people who won’t be on disability in the coming years.

*In fact, Republicans believe the government should stay out of everything. Unless it’s a social issue on which Christianity has an opinion.

Thought of the day

I am rooting for Green Bay to have a perfect season on one condition and for one reason. The condition: They aren’t competing against the Patriots. The reason: So Mercury Morris will forever have to shut the hell up.

The Trench Bridge

It’s neat-o.

Designed by RO&AD.

Oakland vs New York City

Oakland PD’s Strategy: Force confrontations with protestors, fire tear gas, cause chaos.

New York City PD’s Strategy: Surprise the protestors but allow them several hours to move their stuff.

Oakland PD’s Result: Confrontations, streets filled with tear gas, chaos.

New York City’s Result: Peaceful dispersal, quiet arrests, a soon to be clean park.

PZ to “man-boys”: ‘I’m old’

PZ found a talk where the speaker, Philip Zimbardo, argues that boys and men are underperforming in a life in a number of ways. Zimbardo points to stats that show that boys are 5 times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD, 30% more like to drop out of high school, and less likely to achieve certain higher education levels than girls. PZ had this to say:

The difference also leads to many man-boys who can’t interact with women except on the most superficial and cartoonish level.

[Zimbardo is] talking about a real problem, but I was not convinced by his explanation. He attributes it to a phenomenon called arousal addiction, where people are hooked on constant stimulation of any kind, and he blames it on the internet, video games, and porn. I get very suspicious when anyone starts talking about the internet rewiring our brains…because a) I haven’t seen any persuasive data that it’s a serious and significant, let alone deleterious phenomenon, and b) everything rewires our brains — we respond to experience.

In other words, PZ pretty much disagrees with everything about the talk, but he wanted to take the opportunity to denigrate “man-boys”. Part of his motivation is obviously his inundation in feminism, but I think there’s more to it. All these stats focus on younger generations. As we’ve seen before, PZ is like most old people in that anything to do with younger generations is probably bad in some way. After all, there isn’t any evidence that men today are any different from the men of yesterday when it comes to flirting, sociability, getting laid, etc. Old people just like to imagine as much.

I think the real issue here is that things like ADHD are over-diagnosed and in a way which favors diagnosing boys. Things like drop out rates are more difficult to explain; I don’t really know what the source of that problem is. And my hypothesis on the difference in higher education levels is that people are more able than ever to take out loans to enable themselves to go to school. That has led to a dramatic increase in the pool of people attending college, a place where men have traditionally out-numbered women; it isn’t so much that men aren’t going to college as much, but rather that women are going more. And besides that, good paying jobs in certain industries (such as those which require significant physical labor) tend to favor men.

Or it’s just that men are awful, awful creatures who just want to rape women and laugh about farts. One or the other.

Muslims to Muslims: Don’t call the NYPD

Apparently the NYPD has been spying on New York Muslims for quite some time. Often they do so without any evidence of wrongdoing and the common rationale seems to make as much sense as praising a ‘prophet’ who raped children. Well, the Muslim community is getting fed up:

Muslim community leaders are openly teaching people how to identify police informants, encouraging them to always talk to a lawyer before speaking with the authorities and reminding people already working with law enforcement that they have the right to change their minds. Some members of the community have planned a demonstration for next week.

Good. This is what every group should be doing. Of course, we don’t want some groups to do this – gangs, mobs, other criminal organizations – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a good legal strategy. In fact, given the utter lack of evidence the police have for their actions, I would say it’s one hell of a legal strategy. I’m glad these Muslims, even with their patently silly religious beliefs, are being pro-active. I hope they thwart these police efforts, eventually curbing the baseless spying.

Heresy!

I wouldn’t believe it if I didn’t hear it with my own two ears, but Elmer Fudd is a vegetarian. A god damned vegetarian.


(Start at 4:55.)

Why I love the 2012 Republican field

I have really been enjoying the field for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination so far. Not only is it quite likely that none of the candidates will be satisfactory to the American public, but none have been satisfactory to even the Republican base. Here’s the run-down:

Michele Bachmann: This is basically Ann Coulter but with tact. She hates most good things, thinks gays can pray away their devilish sins, and she has a pretty blatant disregard for science. She got the base going for about 3 weeks at one point, but then everyone realized just how crazy she is.

Herman Cain: His 9-9-9 plan is utterly – to use the tact of a Coulter – fucking retarded. It would cost the poor more, be a windfall for the wealthy, and raise prices on everything because, despite his “apples and oranges” insistence, states aren’t suddenly going to do away with their own taxes. I don’t know about the rest of the country, but I would rather not pay 14% tax the next time I need a new shirt or nightie for Nate’s mother. Plus he harasses women and says stupid things pretty constantly.

Newt Gingrich: It looks like the former Mr. Potato Head stunt double is about to become the next Republican top-nominee fad. It won’t surprise me if this only lasts a few weeks like Bachmann, Perry, and now Cain, but Gingrich at least has an outside shot of maintaining momentum. Of course, his problem is that he sleeps around and has a number of divorces. I hear Evangelical voters don’t like that much.

Jon Huntsman, Jr.:
This is the only moderately reasonable candidate in the field. He holds some of the bad core ideas of the Republican party, but at least he isn’t the polarizing figure everyone else is. Of course, combine that fact with his Mormonism and he has no shot. Plus he knows Mandarin. Knowing the Republican base, there will likely be suspicion that he’s a communist.

Gary Johnson: Who?

Ron Paul: He puts on a good ramble, but the media hates him. I think he could actually fire up the Republican base against President Obama, but he’ll never get the nod – he’s too honest.

Rick Perry: There are three things I don’t like about Rick Perry: One, he panders to Christians. Two, he isn’t that smart. And three…well, I don’t remember the third reason. Oops.

Mitt Romney: Unless Gingrich is able to hang onto his outside shot, Romney is the guy. The base doesn’t like him mostly because he’s a Mormon, but he has been campaigning for president for 4 or 5 years now, so he at least has name recognition. Of course, he won’t be much of a competitor since he has seemingly changed his position on nearly everything over the years.

Rick Santorum: I think this is the worst candidate in the field. His complete disdain for gays is his primary position – he really froths at the mouth when he talks about them. He may be the only candidate I have actually hated. I think he would be better suited for Ugandan politics than anything.

Conclusion: Gingrich has an outside shot, but it will probably be Romney. That gives the President a pretty good shot at another 4 years. I’m not super excited about things either way, but it will certainly be better for the country than another Republican.