You are currently browsing the monthly archive for April 2014.
You’re welcome. :)
Forced Birthers Lying (again) for Jesus – How shocking.
The escorts and clients hear lies coming from the anti’s all the time. The breast cancer link that doesn’t exist, the “fact” that 20% of all women who have abortions attempt suicide, the curious item about how the equipment the clinic uses is 27 times more powerful than your home vacuum cleaner (although the anti recently upped that to 29 times, I guess people weren’t being properly scared at the lower number). The list goes on and on. These are all attempts to scare and unnerve the clients but are easily dispelled with a little Google-fu. Lately though there have been a couple of examples of the antis lying to their own flock.
In a recent article by Matt Damico in the Southern Seminary Magazine he said “There are a number of Catholics and other individuals who also do sidewalk counseling – although the number of escorts usually outnumbers the…
View original post 490 more words
Damn youtube making me all warm and fuzzy on the inside.
Pushing the envelope back when doing so was not such a fashionable undertaking. Hurrah for Tom Lehrer!
All Hail the Double Face Palm of Fashion!
Oh the consternation! Oh the anguish! What are people to do when presented with such a horrible choicewhen their very societal presence and standing threatened by a humble German sandal.
Dear Fashion World and associated flaky devotees – you amuse the fuck out of me. Someone ‘famous’ does something different and then whether it is a good thing or not, you ravenous lemmings go whole-hog-wild and make it a trend.
Case in point – Australian bedroom slippers:
“Generally worn for warmth and comfort, Australian ugg boots had never been considered fashionable in their country of origin.[27] But the Deckers UGG brand emerged as a fashion trend in the US through Deckers’ actions to promote it as a high fashion brand. Deckers solicited endorsements from celebrities such as Kate Hudson, Sarah Jessica Parker,[29][35] Cameron Diaz, Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lopez,[36] and product placements in television series such as Sex and the City, and films such as Raising Helen.[27][37] This marketing campaign “led to an exponential growth in the brand’s popularity and recognizability.”[38] Oprah Winfrey received a free pair when her endorsement was sought by Deckers; she then bought 350 pairs for her entire production staff, and eventually featured UGG brand boots as one of her “Favorite Things” on her TV talk show in 2000.[39] Other actresses who discovered UGG brand boots through surf shops began wearing them.[32] The company reported US$689 million in UGG sales in 2008,[40] almost a 50-fold increase from 1995;[41] By 2012, worldwide sales of Deckers UGG boots were over US$630 million a year, with 95% of world market share. By way of contrast, ugg boots in Australia were worn predominantly as slippers and associated with “daggy fashion sense, bogan behaviour” and the “outer suburbs” when worn in public.[42][43][44][45][2] According to Australian fashion stylist Justin Craig: “The only people who get away with wearing them are models, who give out the message: ‘I’m so beautiful, I can look good in any crap.‘“[29]
Yeah and now these slippers are nearly ubiquitous – why? – because the people on TV said they were cool. *facepalm*
Now, you people doing the same thing with Birkenstocks. Someone who, arbitrarily appointed as famous, wears a pair of birkenstocks, and an article of footwear once considered “untouchable” is now hotter and more of a “must-have” than the preserved tears of baby-jebus. It is a load of foolish bandwagoneering that illustrates how ingrained the herd mentality is and how pliable the term ‘fashionable’ is.
“Why Arb,?” my gentle readers must be asking. “Where is this all this bitter animus coming from?” Well dear readers it comes from my adoption of Birkenstocks as footwear of choice based on the utilitarian needs these shoes satisfy for me. From my shiny patent leather dress shoes, to my winter/teaching clogs, to my summer sandals, Birkenstocks have meant I can work and play in comfort and not have to worry about unergonomic footwear slowing me down or ruining my posture. Birkenstocks are well made, high quality, highly – utilitarian products – that when associated with the frivolity of the fashion world, irks me to no end.
Oh, and I have not forgotten about Tom’s either with their insipid ‘feel-good’ marketing bullcookery.
My friend recently rescued some softbound books from his apartment’s lobby area, sort of a communal reuse and recycle area. In publication called New Politics I found the opening paragraphs from Betty Reid Mandell’s article The Future of Caretaking most informative, and worthy enough to be shared with you fair readers. This, as always, is an adventure in touch typing, so any errors in spelling and style are most likely mine and not Betty’s. Do note how she points out one of the fundamental paradox’s of conservative thinking.
“One of the casualties of unfettered capitalism is caretaking. The needs of capital take precedence over the needs of children, the aged, and the disabled for sensitive and reliable care.
Conservatives say the family is crumbling and crisis; feminists say the crisis is in the lack of caretaking provisions for working parents and lack of cash support for unemployed parents. Conservatives want a return to the male breadwinner type of family where men make the living and women stay home to care for their children. Irving Kristol believes that this would solved problems such as illegitimacy and male irresponsibility. Francis Fukayama hopes that women will rediscover their biologically imprinted nurturing capacities and realize that taking a few years off work to stay with their young children is best for their families. When this happens, he says, “day care will become the lot of the children of ‘working class or welfare mothers’ only.”
Conservatives call for a moral regeneration to restore the nuclear family and the breadwinner father who earns the “family wage,” yet they favour economic policies such as deregulation, weakened unions, and lowered wages which, along with rising expectations, create the need for both parents to work. Feminists, on the other hand, call for “family-friendly” state and employment policies that will it possible for parents to combine work and child care without sacrificing their careers or neglecting their children, their aged parents, or disabled family members, and with requiring that the caregivers be female.”
-The Future of Caretaking. Betty Reid Mandell. New Politics Winter 2003, p 61.
Another one of those “must reads” of great western literature. I read it, and it was, as most “must reads” boring as all hell.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…