I see that the moronic Extinction Rebellion crowd have been acting up again, this time protesting the new (and very-much-needed) new runway at London’s Heathrow Airport. Which makes me want to suggest to BritPM Boris Johnson my perennial solution:
Punch:
Counter-punch:
Tell me you wouldn’t buy tickets to watch that from the bleachers…
Update: And another one. With this lot, I’d leave them glued to those blocks, then toss them all off London Bridge into the Thames.
There are things that are crimes (e.g. murder, acting like a Clinton etc.) which carry penalties and punishments. Then there are things that are sorta-crimes (like spitting on the sidewalk, or voting for a Socialist) which carry few if any penalties. Then there are things that are technically non-crimes, but which should carry a penalty. Like this one:
PARENTS were left furious after a nursery [preschool daycare] banned meat and dairy and instead force children to eat from a completely vegan menu.
Mums and dads have blasted the controversial move to switch their kids to an entirely plant-based diet which they claim was done without consulting them first.
Meat, fish, eggs and dairy products will be completely off the menu from January for 260 children, aged 0-4, at Jigsaw Day Nurseries in Chester.
Instead, staff at their two nurseries will offer the likes of a lentil-based “Shepherdless Pie”, coconut rice pudding desserts and cereal served with soy or oat milk.
Some parents say they are fuming at the decision to “impose a lifestyle choice” which “discriminates” against their meat-eating children.
Here’s the loony boss’s opinion:
Claire Taylor, founder of the nurseries, which is Chester’s largest private childcare provider, defended the decision which she says was “made with the children and the planet’s future in mind.”
She added: “We appreciate that this is a decision that comes with a business risk associated, however we feel passionately that a sustainable path is the one we wish to follow for the benefit of our children’s future.
“The food that the children eat within our nurseries not only has an impact on everyone in the setting but also on the health of our planet.”
…
She cited the “overwhelming” evidence published over the past few years highlighting the impact of animal farming on the planet.
So my question, O Gentle Readers, is this: what this stupid bitch is doing is clearly not illegal. But other than withering scorn, what should the penalty be for this kind of idiocy? (And don’t say, “Just pull the kids out of the school” because some parents have no choice in the matter. Myself, I’d just feed my kids steak every night and give them biltong to take to school to make up for the nutritional shortfall, but that’s not the matter under discussion.)
It’s not an infringement worthy of scourging or suchlike; but I feel that it should be punished in some way.
I welcome suggestions in Comments.
From the normally mild-mannered Prof. Reynolds:
“Vegans should just be grateful for not being pantsed on sight. Veganism is stupid and immoral, and mostly a marker for mental illness or deficiency.”
True dat. He left out a lot of other endearing vegan traits, but the Treacher Man has his back:
“You just can’t please vegans, because if they were capable of happiness, they wouldn’t be vegans. You can’t cater to them — in this case literally — because their entire philosophy is anti-human. They’re ashamed of their own existence on this planet, and that shame has turned them into totalitarian wackjobs.”
I think I’ll just have one of New Wife’s beef pies for lunch, because I can.
I will never forget reading some thread online where an Austinite was moaning about all the Californians moving to Austin for the tech jobs — and complaining that they were too conservative for Austin.
I hate to break it to y’all, but if you leave California because you’re surrounded by liberals and have lost your “political voice”, and then move to Austin TX (!!!), that isn’t moving at all. You’ve just exchanged the world’s best climate for an oven, you’re still going to be surrounded by liberal assholes, and your political voice will be drowned out again, this time by liberal Texas twang. As Mark Pulliam discovered.
So Pulliam is leaving Austin and Texas, and moving to Tennessee. Given his poor decision-making history, he’s probably heading for Nashville.
Might as well just move to Greenwich Village and have done with it.
I haven’t ever understood the fascination with a fat ass on a woman. I know the anthropological reasons in primitive societies — where a wife’s ass was an indicator of her husband’s success, i.e. the better he fed her, the better provider he was — but I never understood the fascination for lard-assed women in the civilized world, and nor do these guys.
I know, I know: this post is useless without some kind of pictorial underpinning. [sigh]
…and that’s one of the least offensive examples out there. A single trip to WalMart… well, you know the rest. (No such pic posted, on humanitarian grounds.) And in any event, I speak not of the genus walmarta — those women who become pear-shaped either through diet, childbirth or unfortunate genetic background; I speak here of those vain modern women who have fat or worse injected into their posteriors to plump them out deliberately.
Anecdotally, a Black (female) friend once told me that Black women have fat asses as a protection against their male counterparts’ predilection for anal sex: “It keeps them further back” — but I don’t buy that, unless that’s the primal cause for Black men to have larger-than-average dicks, I dunno. Maybe, in the case of the Kardashian coven, the butt enlargements are simply done as an attractant for their favorite choice of partner (i.e. wealthy Black men).
Whatever.
What I do know is that this female trend towards buttock-amplification is pretty moronic, even when matched against female stupidity such as spending untold dollars on crap like anti-aging creams and potions (none of which work).
And I, for one, am not a huge fan thereof. In fact, were it not for her superstructure, I’d find Carol Vorderman quite unappealing.
But hey, as the man said: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.”
Within the bell curve, however, something that would occur more towards the middle — such as that as shown by Diogenes in her weekly series — is far more appealing:
What I also find unattractive, by the way, are those who inhabit the left-hand side of the same bell curve: the snake-hipped, flat-buttocked women of the runway model kind (which may also explain my disdain for the average Chinese or Japanese woman, few of whom seem to have any buttocks at all).
As with all things, sufficiency is what we strive for.
Except when it comes to boobage. Even I have my limits.
Good grief, why bother to go if clapping is going to intimidate you?
Snowflake students at Oxford University are the latest to demand that clapping should be banned because applause noise can trigger anxiety and want ‘jazz hands’ to be used instead.
The idea for a British sign language alternative for clapping involving the waving of hands was put forward at the student union’s first meeting of the year on Tuesday.
Sabbatical Officers Roisin McCallion, Vice President for Welfare and Equal Opportunity and Ebie Edwards Cole, Chair for Oxford SU Disabilities Campaign, successfully passed the motion to mandate the encouragement of silent clapping.
My suggestion is that for “clapping”, substitute “slapping”, but no doubt some fainting fairy is going to have a problem with that too. And if the noise of clapping triggers that much anxiety in them, I wonder how they’d react to gunshots.
And note the caption for a couple of the pics:
Sabbatical Officers Roisin McCallion (left), Vice President for Welfare and Equal Opportunity and Ebie Edwards Cole (right), Chair for Oxford SU Disabilities Campaign, successfully passed the motion to mandate the encouragement of silent clapping
Yep, that’s what education is all about. “Sabbatical Officer and VP Welfare and Equal Opportunity”, my aching ass.
And to think that one of my greatest dreams once was to attend Oxford.