Faux Outrage

From the NY Daily News

Target is being criticized for advertising its "Annie"-themed clothing line with white models when the movie character is played by a black actress.

More than 10,000 people have signed a Change.org petition asking the company to replace ads with ones featuring girls of color.

"Being African American is not ugly, it is not bad and we are sellable!" the petition says. "These grossly misleading ads are adding to the divide and does not give young African American girls aspiring to become actors anything to be optimistic about."

Funny thing about this is:

Original Annie

The original Annie, including Daddy Warbucks, is white. Had white folks gone about complaining to whomever about the replacement of the white character, as originally conceived, by a black one, people would have shitted themselves. Yet I would completely understand doing so. It's not like The Wiz vs. The Wizard of Oz, in which the former was based on the latter but clearly named to establish that these were in fact different visions of the same movie.

In this case the entire idea of Annie was remade for whatever purpose. Now people want to be mad about advertisements that feature girls of the same race (mostly) as the originally conceived Annie and folks are upset.

To me, better to have not even remade Annie so that the perpetually outraged could go about making their own stories rather than insisting on placing themselves into others.

Seriously. I cannot get myself worked up over this!

What Kind Of Engineering Is This?

So there I was perusing autotrader.com as I contemplate my next car given that one of my current ones has nearly 200k miles on it. Generally speaking, I call quits at 200k. So having had a 1987 6 series, I looked at the new(er) model 645ci's for sale. They have dropped in price quite a bit (hello depreciation). Also that model is the only one you can get a manual transmission with (the current lineup doesn't have a manual unless you get the M model. No thanks). So having lined up an interesting model, I went and did the due diligence: Google Search: known issues with 2005 BMW 645ci

And the above is partially what I found.

Wow.

Apparently the engineers at BMW who designed this engine decided that to get coolant to the engine they would put a pipe from the front of the engine where the water pump is, to the back of the engine. Of course this pipe isn't a part of the aluminum block. No it's connected at both ends by a rubber seal.

Seriously. And it gets worse.

At the back of the engine is a cover that directs the coolant to the two banks of the engine. This too is connected via a gasket.

Do you know what it takes to replace the back cover? Removing the tranny and the exhaust.

Seriously.

Do you know how much that costs at the dealer? About 2 grand. But that's not all.

Do you know that the pipe they fitted is KNOWN to leak at the rubber seals. Do you know that this is expected at about 89k and can happen at 40k or so.

Seriously.

You know how much the dealer wants to charge to replace that with another failure prone part?

$5000 - $9000.

You read right.

However did that get past the management? I've read that a sales person told one owner that "well the car was 80K new so you should expect high repair costs."

Sir. There are high repair costs and there is a total engineering fail. The cooling system design is the latter.

Now I'm a diy person so I don't scare easy on old cars. Valve cover gaskets are cake to me. I've done 'em at least 8 times already. I've done a power steering rack. I've done motor mounts, Alternators, and the like. If I have the tools, agreeable weather and can do the job safely, I'll do it myself. But the online PDF I saw to replace that pipe ran nearly 30 pages with photos. The amount of stuff you have to remove just to get at the valve covers shocked the hell out of me.

I think that the management at BMW said to themselves one or both of the following:

1) Well we stuck these fools for $80k+ when the car is new so these suckers can pay us nearly $11k to pay for our design flaws.

or

2) Well the original owner paid us nicely. We can make more loot when this car hits the second hand market and these poor buyers get stuck with these cars they invested in and have to pay for repairs (hopefully coming to us, but we'll take the money for the parts).

So this is my PSA for those of you out there looking at any V8 BMW from 2004-2010. If the pipe has not been replaced recently (preferably with one of those aftermarket ones I've seen) AND the alternator cover (whatever that is) gasket hasn't been done, along with both valve cover gaskets, do NOT purchase the vehicle unless you are willing to do the job yourself. You are going to get hit with a rather large repair bill because these are labour intensive jobs.

PS While I'm at it, can we do away with these engine covers? Unless they are helping airflow around the motor or helping dissipate heat there is no reason for them and they're just another thing that has to be removed and re-installed when work has to be done.

Makes Me Wanna Hollar[Back]

So unless you've been under a rock for the past week you heard about this video of a white woman (allegedly Jewish, not that it matters) walking around Manhattan NY for 10 hours racking up 110 harassing incidents. There are a couple of things that should be noted about this video, lets get to it.

1) The Maths.

Getting 110 incidences of “harassment” in 10 hours could seem to be quite epic. The video is highly time compressed and focuses on what I assume were to more “egregious” examples of harassment. Indeed the end of the video has text that indicates that “winks” and “whistles” were edited out. We'll get to that in a few but first the maths.

First and foremost. Who. THE. FUCK walks around Manhattan NYC for 10 hours straight? No seriously. I'm not just talking about being out and about for 10 hours. I mean walking around apparently aimless, without any expression whatsoever, speaking to nobody? Not even a cell phone call? No headphones? Who the fuck does that in New York City? For goodness sakes at least act like a normal person in NY and put on some sunglasses (you know we all wear 'em) and put on some headphones like everybody else and look like you're going somewhere to do something. Ok rant over. Back to the maths.

So 100 incidences in 600 minutes means someone did something every 6 minutes. We do not know whether incidences like the crew of men who told her to smile were counted as one incident involving multiple persons or multiple incidences with one per person. If it is the latter then I think the count needs to be dropped. Why? Because if a group of people stop you and robb you, you weren't robbed three times but you were robbed once by three people.

2) What exactly is harassment?

I have a problem with some of the actions considered harassment. It appears that the author ascribes to the theory that any comment made within earshot whether directed at the person or not, that is not specifically asked for, is harassment. I do not ascribe to such a theory. This theory presupposes the idea that we each can police the bodies of other people. That simply is unacceptable. To this end I completely reject the claim that “winks” are harassment. I also reject the idea that saying “good morning” is harassment. I do not know how many of the 100 were winks and “good mornings”. But removing those incidences would lengthen the time between incidences.

So what is harassment? Harassment is generally behavior meant to disturb or upset someone. One may claim that one wishes to walk down the street and not be spoken to (or to speak to anyone) and therefore anyone who DOES speak to you is harassing you. The problem with that is it assumes that all unsolicited contact is harassment (it is not). It also assumes that everyone knows that you do not wish to be contacted. That's what we refer to as mind-reading. Those of us in a sane world know that we cannot expect others to know what is in our minds. Also it assumes that such contact was done with the intent to disturb. With this in mind we return to the video to comment on the actual harassing that was done.

Those persons who felt the need to tell Shoshana that she “needed to smile” were harassing her. Criticising a person on the street because you don't like how their face looks is definitive “disturb”.

I'd like to point out something here though. In this video there are a total of three women in the scene. In front of Shoshana was a rather large woman in a pink top. Apparently nobody said shit to her. Is it clear to Shoshana that she is the recipient of "looks privilege"? The worst cases were the black guy who decided to walk beside Shoshana for blocks. A couple of things on this:

In the beginning this guy wasn't out of line. He said his piece seeing if he would get a response. Then it looked like he was going to take his rejection..

But then he goes to walking beside her for quite some time. Let's discuss what is likely going on here Most of the black males commenting assumed Shoshana was “Latina”. This is evidenced by the “hey mami” comments. It is a pretty well known fact that black men, in general have a thing for “not so black” women. OKCupid did research on their members that shows that their black male customers preferred “latina” women over black women (note check the really low scores that black women get from other races. It is not pretty). Other research shows that black men “marrying out” at a rate of 22% (and IMO that number is growing) beaten only by marrying out by Asian women (who usually go after white males. Many Asian males are NOT happy about that).

With this in mind we realize that the fellow walking next to Shoshana was actually using her as a prop to show off to the community that he is “with” Shoshana.

Ohh lookit me with a WHITE[ish] GIRL!!

His hope is that one of his boys would see him with the “mami” whome he would later get props for “getting at”. For those of you who doubt this phenomenon I will relate a date I was on with a biracial woman who would be classified as “latina”. We went somewhere I have gone to in the past. As I walked to the bathroom to wash my hands, I was given the “thumbs up” by not less than 3 black males who were in the restaurant with their dates (I presume). I have never had any such thing happen when I was in the same location with black women. Never. And yes, they were attractive thank you very much.

So in essence not only was Shoshana making a commentary on street harassment, but she was also demonstrating her high status among those black males relative to the black women who we can also see in the video who not a single man in the street made any commentary too.

Does that mean that black women do not get that treatment? They do. I have witnessed it.For example, one summer on the 165 street mall/walkway off Jamaica avenue. There was a rather hour glass shaped woman in very form fitting clothes who got the attention of a crew of men by a sneaker store. So yeah it happens. But to be sure it happens to women who are considered above average attractiveness. But anyone who is honest knows that special attention is given to those “not so black” women.

3) Courtship or Harassment?

The next incident of note is the rather persistent male in the red cap.

What's the phrase? Persistence is the key to success?

There is a problem with this example because it starkly highlights the gender expectations in “courtship”. In essence men are expected to take the risks and approach women. There is usually a high level of rejection and a level of game playing between genders where persistence is required to make a connection. Anyone familiar with the classic Roxanne Roxanne track by UTFO knows that is a shining example of “rapping to a sista”. In short, the idea is that if you have the “right rap” you an get "the digits" (e-mail address preferred!) and hopefully more. However it is expected that you will be rejected or met with skepticism with your first attempt and therefore a bit of persistence (sometimes called “game”) is necessary to get past the “get away from me loser” response.

Higher status men are usually able to use their material possessions to get past the “get away from me loser” and can illicit positive responses with their vehicles, clothes and jewelry. Low status males usually can only depend on their guile and slick words. Mr. Persistent was by appearances a low status male. That's not to disrespect him. It is what it is.

So here's the thing. Is it fair for a society that expects males to take all the risk in initiating courtship to also be hit with charges for harassment? Doesn't sound fair to me. On top of that, while we could say that “he should have known” once she failed to respond, I would counter that it was her failure to respond that turned this situation into what it became. Is it too much to ask that once it was clear that this fellow was trying to ask her out (as HE is expected to if HE is interested) that she tell him “thanks but no thanks”? Is regular human common decency no longer expected from women? Here is a heterosexual man trying to get the attention of a woman (you know, normal shit) and he's being clowned across the internet for it. For all the talk of the importance of "sex ed" in schools, apparently there is a failure in some quarters to deal with the psychology of courtship.

And here's the thing, we don't know how Shoshana met her lapdog, sorry boyfriend, but I suspect he made uninvited advances to her. It may not have been on the street, but it likely happened. And in that case she decided that she liked him so it was OK. This is also a part of the problem with claims of harassment. It is sometimes entirely dependent upon WHO is doing the unsolicited human contact. If it is some “loser” “creep” or whatever other label placed on males who women do not care for (or don't need something from..or do...) then it is harassment. But if it's the “hot” guy who runs the Central Park lake who gives a wink and says good morning. It's an “OMG I gotta tell my girls” moment.

Lastly I want to deal with this common bullshit I hear from women: "I wasn't dressed up or anything".

[ Shirt and Jeans? So?]

Look. Women dress up to compete with each other. Heterosexual males do not give a good damn if you are wearing booty shorts or sweats and a bandana. While men are somewhat required to signify status via material showing in order to increase the odds of success with women. This is why we see many instances of men who are generally considered "not good looking" with women who could be considered way out of his league. Women are not under the same pressure. Women merely have to be more attractive than the woman next to her to "win". This phenomenon is clearly demonstrated in the video where the "harassers" clearly ignored the other women in the area who were objectively speaking "less attractive" (except ol girl in the grey shirt...dudes...you saw her).

What is also disturbing about the "crew neck shirt and jeans" commentary is that it implies that if women wear a certain outfit that she is then "asking for.." some kind of attention. It should be obvious where this line of thinking can go. I don't think Shoshana wants to take it there.

PS:

The same day I first watched this video i happened to be walking across a NJ college campus where I came upon a dark skinned, well overweight black woman who upon seeing me dropped her head and stared at the ground. I've seen this many times, it is one of the two general reactions I get when I approach women. The other reaction is for them to look off into the air as if they suddenly caught sight of Superman. Generally the more attractive the woman the more likely I'll get the "I just saw Superman" reaction. The less attractive the woman the more likely I get the "oh damn he might talk to me and I'm not worthy" reaction. Every now and then I get a "good morning/afternoon" or "hi". I assume I should consider this harassment since I did not initiate commentary nor "asked for it". But anyway, the point being that there are some [many?] women who LOVE to get even a fraction of the positive attention that Shoshana got.

Conspicuously Absent Info.

So a Mayor in southern California gets shot by his wife, 3 times to the torso and dies of his wounds. The shooting happens during a domestic dispute. The only people reported to go to the hospital are the dead man and the son he was fighting with (who was reported to be intervening).

None of the reports include any statements that the wife had any bruises or had been physically hurt in any way. None of the reports include statements that the wife had a history of physical abuse.

The wife is interrogated by police and allowed to return home. How is it that a man is shot 3 times during an argument (and a physical altercation with a third party) and the known shooter is not arrested?

Does anyone reading this think that given what has been reported that a man similarly situated would have not been arrested and or charged with a homicide?

The wife did not call 911. The wife went to get the gun. Something is not right. Either there are facts in the case that are not being reported on or there is a serious double standard being applied.

Europe Is Not A Country....

RT reporting on India's Mars expedition:

This is India's first mission into such deep space to search for evidence of life on the Red Planet. But the mission's primary objective is technological – if successful, the country will be joining an elite club of nations: the United States, Russia and Europe.

We do realize that Europe is not a nation right? At least not yet. And by the actions of not a few political parties and sentiments of the populations, perhaps never.

More Seat Fights

I'm noticing a pattern here.

According to Delta, Flight 2370 left New York’s LaGuardia Airport about 7 p.m.

A passenger on the flight, Aaron Klipin, told reporters in Florida that another passenger got into an argument with a woman sitting a row ahead who wanted to recline her seat so she could knit. The passenger behind was trying to nap on a tray table and began screaming at the woman to put up the seat. Eventually, the unruly passenger demanded that the flight be diverted and the crew complied.

I'm just saying...I see a pattern.

Leg Room Fiascos

I haven't flown in a while. I actually avoid air travel (and bus travel) and drive wherever it is I'm going. Partly because I despise the security circus as well as the fact that I am over 6 feet and the seats leave someone my height and above with a lot of problems.

If at all possible I will ask for an aisle seat so I can stretch out my legs or volunteer to sit by the door which always has an entire row of legroom available. Yes! I will volunteer to be the emergency door person. Odds are I won't be needed.

The two things that do not mix are entitled mofos and airplanes. Folks feel that since they paid x amount for a seat on a plane they are entitled to fuck up your legs for the entire flight so they can chillax.

The 60-year-old from Paris apparently told the passenger in front of him that her reclined seat was hurting his legs, WCVB reports.

But the woman apparently refused to budge.The disagreement turned into a row, and a flight attendant attempted to intervene. The man allegedly followed the crew member down the aisle and grabbed his arm, according to a federal affidavit.

Let me assume the request did NOT go something like:

Gade bitch, deplase chèz ou moute anvan m 'frape ou Fuck a soti.

You'll want to use Google Translate on that one.

But assuming the convo didn't go like that, why didn't the woman look at this technically elderly man and be a decent person and realize that being 6 foot something on a plane is hard enough as it is and move her seat up? Was it REALLY that serious for this chick to lean back for the flight?

I know, both persons paid for the section with extra space. But from my reading, the guy did so because he has a physique that calls for it. Chick seems to have simply wanted the relative luxury of the extra space. If the airline. I think the attendants should have asked if anyone in the door rows would have been willing to trade places. Or if there was space in a more spacious area of the plane, volunteered to keep a happy customer and moved him there.

But that's what happened when entitled people meet airplanes.

A Second Thought On Robin Williams

It's been bothering me since I heard it so I'm gonna put it out there. Apparently the story is that when Robin's wife went to bed she left him elsewhere. Ok. Not the biggest deal. A lot of couples don't sleep in the same room. But what really bothers me about the situation is that chick did not so much as kiss Robin goodbye. Say goodbye. Attempt to fix the man breakfast or any damn thing. Simply saw him laid out (or sitting there dead, we'll soon find out) and left the house for the day.

That's pretty fucked up.

And really, every report I'm read of late has said that folks could tell that he was going through a rough patch. What was this woman doing? You don't check on the well-being of your depressed husband? Man who had recently done a stint in rehab?

That's pretty fucked up.

Robin Williams was found by his assistant. Not his wife. His pay for help who leaves from somewhere else and who has to be let into the house, but the woman who lives there walked out like there was no thing and didn't even kiss him goodbye.

That's pretty fucked up.

Robin Williams

The recent death of Robin Williams made me think of my favorite Robin Williams movie. While many of the commentaries I've seen on Robin's career have centered on his comedic movies and hits like Mrs. Doubtfire and Good Will Hunting, for me One Hour Photo was the one that stuck with me. It was the first Robin Williams movie I saw where he was not being funny. His introverted, troubled, in need of love character was the polar opposite of everything I had seen before. Though honestly I didn't really follow Robin like that.

There was something about that sad face Robin could put on his face that was symbolic of deep suffering that stuck with me. I have rarely if ever seen a comedian do such a thing. I didn't know at the time that Robin was dealing with an alcoholism problem and certainly did not expect to hear of a suicide.

The report that it was a suicide made me go right back to One Hour Photo. Maybe what I saw was really the real Robin Williams. It is commonly said that one of the ways that Black folks survived slavery and the like was to develop a sense of humor to laugh through the hard times. It could be that Robin's humor was his own means of dealing with very real deep down issues. Insomnia was another one that struck me for the same reasons as One Hour Photo.

Again, there was Robin Williams playing a murderer. The comic showing a very different side.

You'll probably not hear these movies mentioned when watching or listening to the coverage of Robin Williams, but for me, these are the movies I'll really remember him for.

Media Matters

Twitlight

So I happened upon one of the Twilight movies the other day. I usually turn when it comes on as I'm not the target audience but decided I would give it a go to see why it's so popular. That didn't last long. Apparently there are two groups: Vampires and Wolves. Fine. Then there's this human female. Apparently she's the love interest of both a vampire and a wolf. OK. Female human decides she's going to lay up and get pregnant by the vampire. Ok. Wolf boy decides he's gonna stick around as a “friend”.

WTF?

No seriously. What kind of wussy bullshit is that?

I turn around and this chick is 20 months pregnant with a vampire baby who is apparently sucking the life out of her. She's surrounded by all manner of vampire folks and this lone wolf guy is sulking but present. Why?

Then after the baby literally busts out the mother leaving her dead (and soon to be a vampire) wolf guy not only jumps to her aide but when his fellow wolves come (for reasons I still have not figured out and honestly don't care) he jumps out to defend the vampires.

WTF?

Why is wolf guy still around once his “love interest” decided to take up with the vampire? Does he have any amount of self-respect? He reminds me of that guy who shot up the people in california. Stuck on the wrong female(s). If she doesn't want you then move along. Is the creator of this “saga” telling us that no other women, sorry they are under age so, girls, are interested in him? He doesn't have any other females he is interested in? No seriously. It's one thing if he were still hoping to get with her before she got knocked up. But why. The. Fuck is he still around after the vampire put his little one in her?

Wolf man should have been out. Of course this would ruin the fantasy world that the author and audience, which I suspect is mostly female, that has been constructed where not only do they get the prince but a fall back “dependable” mofo to boot.

Look you young ones out there. There is probably a female out there you're gaga about. Fine. All us straight men have been there at some point. Here's the deal. If she decides that she would rather fuck around with Prince charming (not you) or Jock of the Week (not you) or Big Man On Campus (not you) or anybody else, while fully knowing you are desirous of her, then you put your mind to someone else. You don't need to wish her ill will. Wish her good luck and move, the fuck, on. Do not be the fall back guy. Do not be that mofo she calls up and complains to about her man problems. Not your problem. As soon as that shit starts your response is to be “oh wow. Sorry to hear that but I have homework (or anything else) to do. Good luck with that.” and hang up. Whatever you do, do not be wolf guy. You WILL be sorry.

The Strain

So the new stuff on FX is The Strain. One of the sub plots of this show is that the main CDC doctor is going through a divorce and is, as of this writing, dealing with child custody issues. A few notes on this bullshit.

Firstly, this guy works for the CDC and is responsible for protecting the health of the entire US of A. Not exactly a low responsibility job. Apparently he is divorcing because his piece of shit wife thinks that he doesn't spend enough time at home with her and their son. Yes, this piece of shit wife, doesn't appreciate that she is married to a man with the responsibility for the health of the ENTIRE US of A. Rather than make sure he doesn't have to worry about home and the child they had, she decided to get divorced.

WTF.

Am I the only one who thinks she is a total piece of shit for that move? Oh right he did cheat or is cheating (not entirely sure about how that is going on) but I suppose that entire plot twist is a way to justify wife's piece of shittiness.

Anyway. The wife, ex-wife, whatever, has a new “man”. And when I say “man” I mean that in the “sexually mature male” manner. This man is fucking the piece of shit wife in the house made possible by the ex-husband's salary (made by protecting the entire US of A from disease), and who is still paying the mortgage.

WTF.

After a court hearing in which the son has declared he wants to be with mom so that dad can do his important work with the CDC the piece of shit wife tries to shame her ex husband by declaring how the new man is being a “real father” by spending time with their son.

WTF.

No that boyfriend who has brought nothing but his dick to the table is what we call a “disneyland dad”. He's the fun guy with zero responsibilities. He's not paying the mortgage. He didn't make the downpayment on the house. I haven't even seen that mofo WORK. And if he works he doesn't do shit anywhere near as important as keeping the ENTIRE US of A protected from dangerous diseases.

See, back in the day, fathers used to take their son's to work with them. That was when society was largely agriculture based and some people had small artisan type businesses. You taught your son the trade that you had. If you were a blacksmith you taught your son the trade. Mechanic. Same. Plumber? Same. Taylor, welder, whatever. Son's rather than being under the supervision of women for their entire childhood, became apprentices to their father's trade. Thus a situation where “your father is never home” didn't come up because father and son worked together.

The times this did not apply is if the son did not have an interest in the father's trade or the family wanted a “better life” for their kid and sent them off to school. Today though these things generally do not apply. Unless one owns a small business, the son is not made an apprentice to the father. He cannot go to dad's job and learn the trade. This is the situation with the main CDC character. His “trade” does not allow the presence of a small boy. His son may later become a doctor, but that will be far in the future. Knowing this, the piece of shit wife was SUPPOSED to prepare the son for the work that would be involved to take on the father's trade (if he wanted). Instead she gets Disneyland dad and tries to shame the ex with him.

Stephen Smith

Lastly we have this Stephen Smith issue. Lets be clear on the facts.

The most recent large-scale study of domestic violence was conducted by Harvard researchers and published in the American Journal of Public Health. The study, which surveyed 11,000 men and women, found that, according to both men’s and women’s accounts, 50 percent of the violence in their relationships was reciprocal (involving both parties). In those cases, the women were more likely to have been the first to strike. Moreover, when the violence was one-sided, both women and men said women were the perpetrators about 70 percent of the time.

So with this in mind we see that Stephen Smith said nothing wrong. He said nothig that was not factual. Why was Stephen Smith suspended AND why did he take it? We can't even make factual statements anymore?

Stephen Smith should sue his employer for gender based harassment and discrimination. Why? Because Whoopi Goldberg defended Smith by repeating the same thing Smith said. She was not suspended and Disney owns both ESPN and ABC. If simply stating that women ought not put their hands on men (or anyone else for that matter) is a suspending offense, then Goldberg ought not be seeing her seat on the view for the same amount of time as Smith.

Where are the advocates on that? Where's Media Matters? Where's Move On? They send me mail about all kinds of shit but can't be bothered when a person is attacked by an employer for stating the obvious?

Violinist's pre-Sochi Olympic results rigged, claims Slovenia ski body

From The Guardian UK:

he Slovenian Ski Association said on Friday it had found evidence indicating that the races it hosted in January were "fixed at the behest of Thai ski officials to meet her qualifying criteria for Sochi".

The Slovenian association president, Jurij Zurej, said the suspected irregularities included falsification of times and rankings.

"The starting list included a person who did not even compete, a racer who fell was registered as finishing high in the standings," Zurej said. "In addition, the dates of the competitions did not match the actual state when the races were held."

Zurej said Vanessa-Mae might not have known about the violations at the time.

The 35-year-old, who was born in Singapore and raised in Britain, said after finishing the race in Sochi that she was thrilled to have taken part, although she clocked the two runs in a total of three minutes, 26.97 seconds – 50.1 seconds slower than gold medalist Tina Maze of Slovenia.

I'm not surprised by this. I've had a feeling for the past couple of Olympics that persons are being admitted that have no business being at the Olympic games. I have seen in the summer games, where people get lapped on the longer distance races or come in waaay waaaay after the third place winner has come in. I have asked whether there is some kind of standard in terms of time these entrants have to meet. I understand that the countries want to be shown, but I think that there should be minimal qualification times for the Olympics.

For example, For the 5 or 10 kilometer races. The cut off time should be the time of the person that finished on the same lap as the winner. Anyone trying to enter the Olympics who cannot meet that time should not be allowed.

Similar things should be in place for the other timed sports. a 10 second gap is HUGE in most of these events. No one who's 50 seconds out should even be admitted.

Similarly, that woman, the Saudi who was in the Judo competition but had essentially no qualifications other than being a Muslim female should never have been allowed to participate. If a country needs to change it's culture to meet international sporting standards then that's what the country needs to do. The whole "feel good" nature of that admission was, in my opinion, an insult to the athletes. It would never be acceptable to put a green belt in the arena from any other nation, why should an exception be made in Saudi's case?

I know that would affect my beloved Jamaica bobsled team, but I'm going to be consistent. If Jamaica wants to do bobsledding then they should pay up for training in a country with ice and snow. Otherwise, may I suggest they get their bike on.

Sexual Assault on NY Subways By the Numbers

The MTA says that 4.3 million people ride the NYC subways every day.

The New York City subway system is one of the most efficient people transports in the entire world. The hot and dingy subway system of the 1970's has been completely renovated into a safe, convenient and comfortable mode of transportation between nearly all areas of New York City. Over 4.3 million people ride the subway system every day; over 1 billion people go through the turnstiles per year!

1 billion people per year. Over 5 years that's 5 billion riders going at least one stop.

The NY Daily news reported on a long term sexual assaulter:

A Daily News analysis of subway crime last month revealed women reported being victims of subway perverts more than 3,000 times during a five-year period ended in July 2013.

3,000 victims out of a total of 5 billion riders (.0006 percent of total ridership).

If we assume half of the ridership is women then that's .00012 percent.

Assumptions

From the LA Times:

Exactly how the rampage began remains one of the case's key mysteries. How did a physically unimposing 22-year-old manage to stab three men to death, apparently without drawing anyone's attention? Police are not releasing any details of their findings in the investigation.

There are few assumptions that go with this line of thinking:

First is the assumption that simply because one is male that one is somehow immune to being killed or hurt. The fact of the matter is the vast majority of males are unskilled in the art of self-defense, are not that strong at all and are deathly afraid of physical conflict. Thus the idea that a "physically unimposing' person supposedly could not kill 3 people reveals much about the questioner rather than the perpetrator. It is also this line of thinking that is used to excuse female violence against men, particularly when objects are used by the "physically unimposing" female. This is why I am strenuously against attitudes and policies that excuse female physical aggression against males. While your average female does not have the same strength of a male of similar mass, it means nothing when objects are involved or the target of aggression is unaware of the danger posed. This leads to the likely way that this guy killed his roommates.

Not knowing the time of death for these guys, my first guess would be that he took each of them out overnight by stabbing them while covering their mouths to keep them from crying out and waking the other roommates. As of this writing there has been no comment as to whether there were defensive wounds on Rodgers to indicate that any of the roommates had struggled with him.

The other similar situation would be slitting the throats of each roommate. However; the police have not made such a statement so that's unlikely.

In either case it is highly likely that he got the drop on each of them if he managed to stab each one to death without any defensive wounds.

Lessons From The UCSB Shooter's Video

The LA Times has posted a transcript of what is alleged to be the UCSB shooter's video describing his issues. I want to go over it with lessons for other young men who may feel the same way but who have not had a grown man sit him down and explain things to him.

"For the last eight years of my life, since I hit puberty, I've been forced to endure an existence of loneliness, rejection and unfulfilled desires, all because girls have never been attracted to me. Girls gave their affection and sex and love to other men, never to me. "I'm 22 years old and still a virgin, never even kissed a girl. And through college, 2 1/2 years, more than that actually, I'm still a virgin. It has been very torturous.

First. I was a virgin until way late into my senior year in university. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a virgin. None. As a matter of fact there have been many times I wished I could go back and NOT have done it when I did. Yes, if you have a high sex drive, that shit can be tortuous. That is why there is a process called sublimation. Many important people in history redirected their sex drives to inventions and other endeavors that changed the world. My advice: If you can wait, wait.

Secondly, Unless you are a total troll with a completely fucked up face, there are women who are attracted to you. They may not be the ones you are fixated on (more on that later) but they are certainly there. I roll my eyes whenever I hear people tell me about how they "cannot find anyone" but have a gaggle of male (or female) friends who would make excellent partners for them. But we also have to be truthful to ourselves. We know what is considered attractive within our racial groups (assigned or dominant in the case of admixture). Take a serious assessment of your physical attractiveness. Attraction is not a choice. Attraction happens in a split second. If your face doesn't do it, something else is going to have to. Men have a benefit that is rarely extended to women: We can buy our way in....sometimes. You ever see a man with a woman that he has no business having on his arm? He got her because he made up for his unattractiveness by having something else to get and hold that woman's attention. If you are so situated you need to find out what your "other thing" is going to be. And no, being Mr. Nice guy who does any and everything a woman asks you to do, is not that "other thing".

Thirdly, nobody has "forced" this guy to endure anything. He forced himself for reasons explained and to be explained.

"College is the time when everyone experiences those things such as sex and fun and pleasure. In those years I've had to rot in loneliness, it's not fair.

Dude! If you are thinking like this you need to stop right now because your priorities are totally fucked up. First of all, the purpose of going to college is to get an advanced education in as little time as possible. No one is paying x thousands of dollars a year to experience "sex and fun and pleasure". There are bars for that. There are parties for that. College is not, I repeat, is not your personal "can I get laid" adventure. Stop taking those movies so seriously.

"You girls have never been attracted to me. I don't know why you girls aren't attracted to me but I will punish you all for it. It's an injustice, a crime because I don't know what you don't see in me, I'm the perfect guy and yet you throw yourselves at all these obnoxious men instead of me, the supreme gentleman. I will punish all of you for it. [laughs]

"I don't know why you girls aren't attracted to me.." This is the statement of a loser and someone who is unwilling to examine his own behavior (I repeat myself). If you are thinking like this, you need to work on stopping it. As stated before, attraction is not a choice. It either is there or it is not. The only thing you can do is put your best foot forward. But if you are walking around with this sorry "I don't know why nobody is attracted to me", then it shows in your actions. It shows in your walk. Your talk. How you dress. Everything. You ooze "loser" and women pick that up and it is NOT attractive at all. And you know who's fault that is? Yours. Not the women. And because it is not the women's fault, there is no reason to "punish" them for it.

Going back to the earlier comment, I am certain that this guy was fixated on a certain type of woman...

"On the day of retribution, I am going to enter the hottest sorority house at UCSB and I will slaughter every single spoiled, stuck-up, blond slut I see inside there. All those girls I've desired so much. They have all rejected me and looked down on me as an inferior man if I ever made a sexual advance toward them, while they throw themselves at these obnoxious brutes.

And here we have it. This fellow was stuck on blond, relatively wealthy sorority "girls" (detour: I detest the use of "girls" to describe mature females).

For all you fellows out there thinking the same thing: Simply because you desire blond, rich sorority "girls" does not mean that they desire you or even have to desire you. Women, sorority or not. Blond or not. Rich or not don't owe you anything but common decency and human respect. That is all.

Secondly, I agree, some of these young ladies (and some of the older ones) do have some very nasty habits when it comes to rejecting men they do not find attractive. But a man of confidence says a quick "and fuck you too" in his head (and if conditions warrant, out loud) and moves on. Why? Because a man of confidence does not get stuck on any woman.

Let me repeat that.

A man of confidence does not allow himself to be stuck on any woman. Look here. Half of the world's population is women. Half of your town's population are women. Half your city, state, etc. are women. That's hundreds, thousands or millions of women. Why the fuck would you get stuck on one, ten or hundred who don't want you? They are a drop in the bucket full of available women.

If a woman you wants prefers to throw her legs open for an "obnoxious brute" then either be an obnoxious brute (which I don't advise) or look for women who don't like obnoxious brutes (hint: they aren't "stuck up, spoiled, blond sluts").

"I take great pleasure in slaughtering all of you., You will finally see that I am, in truth, the superior one, the true alpha male. [laughs] Yes, after I have annihilated every single girl in the sorority house, I'll take to the streets of Isla Vista and slay every single person I see there. All those popular kids who live such lives of hedonistic pleasure while I've had to rot in loneliness all these years. They all look down upon me every time I tried to join them, they've all treated me like a mouse.

For all you guys out there that think because you got a gun and can spray bullets at defenseless women and men that it makes you some kind of "alpha male", get a grip. If you want to see what "alpha male" is really about then you can start by looking at nature. See, in nature, the alpha male has to physically fight his way to that position by having fair and equal (in terms of equipment) fights with the other males. None of that drive by punk bullshit. In human terms, if you wanna be the alpha male, you gotta compete on the same field and win. That's how you get alpha status. If you can't compete on looks, you compete in another arena. Guess what? There are many alpha males. They are in different areas. You find one that you can dominate. But the whole kill off people who are defenseless is the ultimate in "not deserving of breeding". And you do realize that if you fail to breed then by definition you cannot be an alpha male. So if you want to shoot up a sorority house and then die to prove "alpha" status, well, fail.

Let me also address this "rot in loneliness all these years" since it is a recurring theme. The average lifespan of a US male is 75 or so. If you are 22 you are not "all these years" In fact at 22 you've only been able to get it up and spurt some out for about 10 years (depending) and for 7 of those years you couldn't legally consent to get any anyway. Get some perspective. This goes for all you folks being bullied. Grow a pair and think long term. You are going to be on the planet for another 50 years unless you do something stupid or something happens totally beyond your control. School will be a distant memory when you hit 40. Sorority girls will be like dust in your eye that you discard without a care at 30. There are so many things you will be doing that these trivial, yes, trivial shits your obsessing over will be the source of much laughter.

"The popular kids, you never accepted me and now you will all pay for it. Girls, all I ever wanted was to love you, be loved by you. I wanted a girlfriend. I wanted sex, love, affection, adoration.

Fellows: Stop seeking approval. I repeat: STOP. SEEKING. APPROVAL. I know, I know, people want to belong to a group. I get it. But just like this guy was fixated on the "blond sorority sluts", I guarantee he was also obsessed with a certain group of guys (likely the ones the "stuck up sorority blond sluts" liked) that he wanted to be in. It never, ever occurred to him to seek out other groups which he could and would have fit in with. When one obsesses over groups of people who don't necessarily want to associate with you, then it sets up a repeated cycle of rejection. This is why we learn to not to look for approval or to force ourselves onto people who don't like us. We form our own groups (or go solo) confident in our own value.

Furthermore, unlike the bullshit a lot of you young people are being taught by schools and certain political leaning groups, Nobody HAS to like you. Nobody HAS TO accept you into their social circle. And yeah, those people can and may talk shit about you, including how you look and what behaviors you engage in. You better get really comfortable with the idea that some people will simply hate your guts for no good reason. Deal with it.

I have a feeling that this fellow would likely have been a rapist. Fellas if you are thinking like this guy, I would SERIOUSLY reconsider how you view women. There is nothing wrong with wanting sex, love and affection. This is natural. But when the one you wish to deliver these things does not want to and you think that annihilating them is an appropriate response, you have serious problems. No one is obligated to give you sex. No one. Not everyone is going to love you. Deal with it. You're only going to get affection from so many people in your life so lower that expectation partner. And unless you are a rock star even less people are going to adore you "just because". Besides, if it's sex you're after, "adoration" is probably NOT the emotion you want to rise in a woman. Very few women I know talk of wanting to have sex with men they find "adorable". Adorable is for puppies not sexy men.

"You think I'm unworthy of you. That's I crime I can never get over. If I can't have you girls, I will destroy you. [laughs] You denied me a happy life and in turn I will deny all of you life, it's only fair. I hate all of you.

They think you're "unworthy" of them. Fuck 'em then. Seriously man. It's not a crime. It's not discrimination. It's nothing but how nature works. The "spoiled sorority blond sluts" don't want you. Hey great! Why do you want a spoiled woman? Why do you want a slut? No seriously. The crime here is obsessing over women who are likely not even GOOD for you.

Secondly, NOBODY and I mean NOBODY is responsible for your happiness. You are responsible for your happiness. You decided to walk around hating people who didn't even give you more than a second thought. What kind of idiot allows people who don't even care about them, live in their brain rent free? What kind of idiot sits and decides to end their lives over people who don't give 2 shits about them? Don't be that idiot.

"You forced me to suffer all my life, now I will make you all suffer. I waited a long time for this. I'll give you exactly what you deserve, all of you. All you girls who rejected me, looked down upon me, you know, treated me like scum while you gave yourselves to other men. And all of you men for living a better life than me, all of you sexually active men. I hate you. I hate all of you. I can't wait to give you exactly what you deserve, annihilation."

Jealousy is a dangerous thing. If you have that green monster (I do) you need to get a hold of him and put him under lock and key. Stop obsessing with people who you think are having a better life than you are. This is an opportunity to make the changes in your life to make you successful in the way you can be. Let me tell you man; I've seen people with girlfriends and wives and great lives who when I was young and dumb thought would be lonely bastards. Again, unless you are a total troll, there is someone out there for you and you probably already know her. Stop obsessing on women who do not want you. They don't have to. Stop obsessing on women who are not good for you and don't want you. They are doing you a great favor. Stop obsessing over "brutes" who have women throwing themselves at them. If they don't get a major STD then will likely have to pay a lot of their income on child and spousal support and have expensive and emotionally brutal divorces. And even if all that doesn't happen, guess what? It doesn't matter because it isn't important for you.

Spend your time worried about the women you DO want you. Ask yourself if you're the "snobby, stuck up, blond dude" who doesn't pay her any mind when she's a perfect match for you. Stop walking around thinking you are entitled to sex, love and affection from whatever woman you lay your eyes on. You are not so entitled. Take an honest assessment of yourself and be real. Are you socially awkward? GO out and learn how to loosen up. Dress like the creepy guy who jumps out the bushes? GO shopping and get some decent clothes. Do you smell? Take regular showers and invest in some smell goods. You walk with your head down all the time. Learn to walk with confidence. Are you afraid for your safety? Take up weight training and self defense courses, I guarantee your attitude will change.

I know a lot of you guys coming up don't have father's in the home. You need to seek out male roll models. Is there a guy out there that you admire? Pick his brain. Talk to him. A lot of us older fellows have a wealth of wisdom that we'd love to share, but we wont tel you unless you ask.

"Lawful"?

From RT.com:

The partially censored document cited a failure to take "all lawful actions necessary to immediately regain control of nuclear weapons," without specifying those actions. The scenario, under which a hostile force, possibly terrorist, would seize a nuclear missile silo aiming to capture the missile warhead is called ‘Empty Quiver’, and the internal report said the security team demonstrated called a "critical deficiency," in failing to properly respond to it.[italics original]

when it comes to regaining control of nuclear weapons exactly what is the point of "lawful"? When it comes to securing a weapon that can wipe out life for a few miles, I would think that shoot first and don't even consider asking a question would be the only rule in play.

Bullshit

Chiara de Blasio:

As the only person who can diagnose myself, I believe that I was born with the disease of addiction.

Unless Chiara was born to a mother who was taking some substance that went through the placental barrier she was not born an addict. That is some self delusional bullshit. She might have been born with a genetic anomaly that lends her to being anxious and/or depressed but, with the exception made earlier, no one is born an addict.

Long Held By Who?

The new research challenges two long-held beliefs about human health: that the autonomic nervous system -- often called the "involuntary nervous system" -- is not subject to training in ways that would override its control of functions such as as heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, perspiration and digestion; and that no behavioral intervention (short of, say, going to the doctor's office and getting a vaccination) can influence the immune system to spin up or stand down.

LA Times Actually it has been long held in many parts of the world that a person, through meditation, can in fact control many so called "involuntary" responses. In fact many martial arts incorporate the deliberate cultivation of such control in a means of mastering and focusing energy. The LA Times should review it's biases.

Oscar Pistorius: I let off 4 shots but didn't mean to shoot anyone.

Guardian UK reports on the Pistorius trial:

He then questioned Pistorius about the moment he opened fire. The athlete described it as an "accident" and insisted that he had not intended to kill anyone, even an intruder. "I didn't have time to think," he said. "I just discharged my firearm.

"I didn't intend to shoot someone. I shot out of fear... I didn't intend to kill anyone... I didn't have time to think about what I was doing... Before thinking I fired four shots. [my underlines]

Contradictory anyone? He shot, 4 times, at a door, not the ceiling. not the floor, but at the door. By accident, not meaning to shoot anyone. Is anyone buying that?

RoboCop 2014

There was obvious political commentary in RoboCop. Over the top in many cases. I liked it. The movie started by dealing with one of my favorite subjects: drones. While the opening sequence was clearly an exaggeration of the attitudes it is also clear to anyone who is thinking long term that such drones will be the future of the US (and other) militaries as well as domestic policing.

One of the things that Sam Jackson's character does very well is to articulate the arguments that will be used to push for more drones. Is the senate pro crime? Is the senate for the death of American soldiers? Is the senate against saving the lives of citizens?

Mark my words when I say that these will be the very same arguments used as more and more automated technology is deployed by the state and citizens will be emotionally primed to accept these challenges. Risk is bad. Who wishes harm to the American soldiers? Who wants to be seen as pro crime? Already we have seen a proliferation of legislation with emotionally charged names and attached to emotionaly charged events. If you oppose a piece of gun legislation you are pro child killing. You are pro mall shooting.

Sam Jackson's character looks dead into the camera when he makes his charges, much like our cable news talking heads do. I was left wondering how many people in the audience really thought about the reality of his questions.

Understand that the defense department is, at this very moment, funding research into automated vehicles able to navigate various terrains without human input. Japan's Honda is going full on with their AIBO robot. Understand that this WILL be happening.

The next issue was the medical issue. Murphy has been reduced to lungs, heart, throat and head after his “event”. It's pretty clear he had no living will cause his wife is left to make a decision about his life that we find out he clearly did not want for himself.

Side note, how much blood did they have to remove given the smaller amount of “body” (if you want to call it that) he has? The brain uses 70% of the glucose in the body and 25% of the oxygen. Does he require less breathing to maintain optimal oxygen levels?

Anyway, the interesting proposition presented in the movie is that being human is all (or exclusively) about what happens in the brain. The body doesn't matter. But of more interest to me is that HE had no choice. His wife made a choice for him and then he was made into a robot for the sole purpose of serving the state and the profits of a corporation. Clearly with the type of body he was given (I guess flesh like material wasn't something that was being researched), there was never an intention to give him his life back, unless you think that his life consisted only of solving and preventing crime.

Maybe it's just me but the question I asked myself was how, when this guy gets “aroused” (in the mind) how exactly does he release that? I was pretty clear that he “enjoyed” his wife. The movie was also quite clear that his sex life was done for (not even taking into consideration that he must be hooked up to the blood-nutrient machine. I suppose we are to take the lesson that so long as he's alive he should be grateful.

I dunno.

I would think that a company with such technological advances would have been long able to produce human looking appendages. Even now we have the technology to repair the skin of burn victims without leaving the tell tale “burn” patterns and look that accompanies skin grafts. In the last “suit up” scene, I fully expected to see a more 'human” body to pop out of the ground. Maybe it's because I reject that being human, alive, is simply about the brain and it's processing of signals.

I suppose I would eat the red pill too.

It could come down to this: Would you prefer to be dead or “alive”, able to do many great things and unable to feel anything except whatever it feels like to have a malfunctioning suit? Take the questions seriously. The technology that will give us more artificial limbs whether they be as replacements for damaged/amputated ones, or as voluntarily added will be here sooner than later.

Some parents outraged that steamy 'Drunk In Love' performance aired at 8 p.m.

From the NY Daily News:

Some watchers took to Twitter complaining that Beyoncé's sexiness right at the beginning of the show was inappropriate, considering some children may have still been watching at that hour.

If you are a parent and have your kids up watching grown people TV you have no business complaining because you are already fucking up.

Tale of two guards: Kennedy Airport security personnel show divide in compensation

Kennedy Airport security guards Prince Jackson and Dolores Holman work the same job — but they receive very different pay.

The 56-year-old Jackson makes $8 an hour, receives no medical benefits and gets five days of paid vacation. Holman, 51, has a far cushier gig. She rakes in $17.43 an hour, enjoys full medical and dental coverage and gets 15 days of paid vacation. Holman even has an employer-sponsored 401(k) plan — a perk that Jackson can only dream about.

1) Clearly the company that hired Dolores Holman did not get the memo that she was to be paid 25% less that Prince Jackson.

2) At no point did I read that Prince Jackson was attempting to get employment at a security firm that at least pays better. It is indeed wrong that he is paid so little while others doing the same work are getting 50& more than he is but one does not sit on one's ass on your time off and NOT look for better work for better pay while complaining about the differences waiting for some savior to come by and fix stuff for you.

App Store Pulls 'Barbie' Plastic-Surgery App Following Backlash

The First Lady of the United States just said:

"Women should have the freedom to do whatever they need to do to feel good about themselves,

So that would include plastic surgery. So why pull the App? I mean if women should be able to do "anything" to feel good then "whatever" includes plastic surgery. So which is it?