Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Our Warped World’ Category

Check this out: 

 

Can you see it? Well, I’m no screenshot expert. It’s the nutrition information for the Baskin Robbins Heath Shake. Wait, here’s a close-up:

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

..

.

Much better! So, I am totally baffled as to how a milkshake could possibly have 108 grams of fat, 64 grams of saturated fat, and 2310 calories. 1580 grams of sodium? I mean, what did they put in it? Milkshakes shouldn’t have 65% of your daily recommended amount of sodium. And even straight-up fat doesn’t have that much fat in it!

There’s a lot of talk about personal responsibility and freedom of choice when it comes to obesity and related health issues. Food companies and their cronies are fond of saying that they’re just providing options for people and that if people choose to consume unhealthy foods, it’s out of the producers’ hands. I think that’s true to a certain extent, but the existence of “foods” like this is just beyond the pale. Who would ever even think that a milkshake could contain 320% of the daily recommended amount of saturated fat? Why do food companies carry so little responsibility for the health of their customers that they can even get away with producing something like this? This milkshake (to use the term loosely) has 77 ingredients in it! That’s insane.

The trickery is that, while these huge food corporations talk about personal responsibility and freedom of choice out of one side of their mouths, the fact is that they rely completely upon the ignorance of their customers in order to sell their products. If they need people to not know what is really in their food, or what the ingredients or nutrition information mean, then the arguments about responsibility and choice are meaningless.

This just makes me never want to eat in a restaurant again. I mean, what the hell?

Read Full Post »

This story is from last week, but it’s pretty nuts so I’ll link to it. A teacher at Cal State was fired because she refused to sign the loyalty oath required, by the state constitution, of all state employees. The oath states that the signatory promises to “defend” the state and US constitutions against “all enemies, foreign and domestic.” The oath has been in place since 1952, when it was passed because of the Red Scare. This article in the LA Times focuses on one particular woman, a Quaker, who refused to sign the oath because it conflicts with her pacifist beliefs, but it also cites several other examples of people being fired for refusing to sign it.

If I’m not mistaken, not only would an oath to protect your state against enemies conflict with Quaker views on pacifism, but Quakers, as a rule, do not sign oaths or swear in court. So I think it’s not just the particular content of this oath that would be a problem for Quakers, but the requirement of a loyalty oath itself.

I don’t have anything super-illuminating to say about this, I just think it’s disturbing. In my view, the wide-spread hysteria around communism in the sixties is viewed as a dark time for civil liberties in this country, so its pretty shocking that this archaic law is a) still in place and b) still being strictly enforced. Sad.

Read Full Post »

I know that everyone has been talking about this for days, but I just have to comment on this “Open Source Boob Project.” So, in case you haven’t heard about it, some dudes were sitting around at a comic convention or something, and talking about how awesome it would be if they could just go around touching women’s breasts, and then someone offered her breasts up for touching, and then many more breasts were fondled over the course of the convention. This, naturally, led to the creation of color-coded buttons (green for yes, red for no, natch) and the title “Open Source Boob Project”. Get it? Boobs that everyone can access, like open source software. Free! And finally, this led to the writing of a super-smug blog post by one of the masterminds of the whole thing and then a  groundswell of protestations from the feminist blogosphere.

Here’s a link to the original post, but don’t read the whole thing if you don’t want to vomit just a little. I’ve bravely waded through it and excerped a few key points for your enjoyment.

“This should be a better world,” a friend of mine said. “A more honest one, where sex isn’t shameful or degrading. I wish this was the kind of world where say, ‘Wow, I’d like to touch your breasts,’ and people would understand that it’s not a way of reducing you to a set of nipples and ignoring the rest of you, but rather a way of saying that I may not yet know your mind, but your body is beautiful.”

Allow me to translate: “Guys, I want to be able to grab boobies, but I don’t want the boobie-carriers to get all pre-menstrual about it. Is there any language I can appropriate towards that end? Something about liberation, perhaps? Yup, chicks love hearing about that crap! Let’s proceed with the button-making!”

You know how dudez like to say douchey things like, “The only reason people are opposed to strip clubs and porn is because we live in a puritanical society where people are, like, *afraid* of expressions of sexuality. I think it’s totally brave to just be totally open and honest about what you like and, you know, stand proud in the face of that sexual oppression. ” Uh, sure, buddy. Strip clubs are so totally liberating, and you’re obviously so mature and cool for really *getting* it. Well, liberating for mainstream hetero males who are into fake body parts and long hair and female degradation, anyway, and lord knows that people like that have been woefully underrepresented in our culture for far too long.

 Here’s the breakdown: (more…)

Read Full Post »

Luckily for men, their continued access to female bodies has been upheld in court, again. This is from the Feminist Majority’s Feminist Daily News Wire:

Oklahoma’s Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that taking pictures up someone’s skirt in a public place is not a crime. The court voted 4-1 in favor of 34-year-old Riccardo Ferrante who was arrested for putting his camera up an unsuspecting 16-year-old girl’s skirt in a department store, reports the Associated Press.

Ferrante was charged under Oklahoma’s “Peeping Tom” statute, which makes such offenses felonies punishable of up to 5 years in prison. Tulsa World reports that the court ruled that the statute only applies in situations where the victims are in a reasonably private place such as their own homes, a restroom, or a locker room.

The Associate Press piece says, “testimony indicated he followed the girl, knelt down behind her and placed the camera under her skirt.” I suppose it’s a relief to the women of Oklahoma that men are NOT allowed to do something like that to them when they are in locker rooms, bathrooms, or their own homes. I fail to understand, though, why that sort of assault become acceptable once you enter a public space.

Actually, I do understand it. The understanding of women’s bodies as public property, present primarily for the pleasure of any man who can be bothered to shuffle out into the daylight, is being institutionalized here by the Oklahoma Court of Appeals. The responsibility for not being grabbed, ogled, harrassed, what-have-you,  continues to lie on the shoulders of women, and woe be to any woman who dares step into the public realm, where consent is implied because of her mere presence there.  It’s a way of keeping uppity bitches in line, and the examples of the great expertise men use in applying it never cease to amaze.

Read Full Post »

How it works

how it works

Read Full Post »

Here’s a tidbit of news that made me want to vomit this morning. Apparently, in Massachusetts, a rape cannot be considered a rape if consent was granted as a result of fraud or deceit. So, this pharmacist in Springfield has been conducting pelvic exams on women who believed that he was a doctor, which of course he is not, but charges have been dropped because he tricked the women into consenting, rather than forcing himself on them. This is some seriously fucked up shit. Who the hell wrote a law explicity exempting fraud and deceit from the definition of rape?

I heard about this awhile ago when a man was not charged with rape after pretending to be his brother and raping his brother’s girlfriend, but I didn’t realize that it was because of a state law until now. This is totally revolting. I wrote to my legislators just now about it. Wow! What a red-letter day for civic participation! And how sad that it’s required on this front!

Read Full Post »

There was a good article about meat production called “Rethinking the Meat Guzzler” by Mark Bittman in the Times yesterday. It was a lot of pretty basic stuff about how industrially produced meat is terrible for the environment, non-industrial-scaled producers, and especially our bodies, all of which I am always happy to see in mainstream news sources. I really don’t have a problem with eating meat in theory, but I do have a problem with the methods with which most meat is produced, mostly for environmental and economic reasons. The part I especially liked in the article, though, was this:

Americans are downing close to 200 pounds of meat, poultry and fish per capita per year (dairy and eggs are separate, and hardly insignificant), an increase of 50 pounds per person from 50 years ago. We each consume something like 110 grams of protein a day, about twice the federal government’s recommended allowance; of that, about 75 grams come from animal protein. (The recommended level is itself considered by many dietary experts to be higher than it needs to be.) It’s likely that most of us would do just fine on around 30 grams of protein a day, virtually all of it from plant sources.

Ah! Refreshing. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »