Breast versus Chest

A friend of mine e-mailed me the other day to tell me that she and her husband were watching a television show about a guy getting a sex change operation. While in today’s medical marvel world, a rather blase story, but she pointed out something very interesting.

During the whole process, the show had no problem at all showing a man naked from the waist up. He went through medical procedures, and hormone shots, and therapy, and each time they showed him in a state of undress... no problem showing his chest and nipples.

When it came time for the man’s implants, on the other hand, they showed the surgery in graphic detail, from the cutting open of the hole, and insertion of the implants, but the moment the implants were in place... they pixelated the “breasts”.

Wait a minute. What’s wrong with this? Just because the man has now taken a female form, its not ok to show a breast? I happen to know some men (who are not men trapped in women’s bodies, they’re just... fat) that have WAAY more cleavage than I do, and yet I’m sure there wouldn’t be any problem showing that on television (see “The Biggest Loser” or any of the myriad weight reduction shows on tv). Plenty of naked male boob flab going on there. But throw in the intent that the man wants to be a woman, or perhaps make these flabby guys wear Manbras and we draw the line at showing it on television.

If there’s a baby attached to the breast, that’s fine to show. Show a breast with a lovely piercing during a superbowl, not so fine. Ok, so we’ve ruled out that having something attached to a breast makes it ok to show (baby versus piercing), so baby ok, starburst piercing not ok. Breast reduction or implant surgery... ok to show blood and tissue and gore, not ok to show a nipple. Simply fine to show someone being ripped apart, blown apart, mangled, chainsawed, or hacked... just don’t show any breasts during that.

Do we wonder why our children are messed up?

The New Politically Correct Tea Party

Illinios Lieutenant Governor Pat Quinn urged citizens to send tea bags with their electric bills to protest the raise on electricity rates in their state.

The post office says that while its not illegal to mail tea bags, it could possibly gum up with postal service equipment and slow their jobs down, and also cause some security concerns. In light of that announcement, the Lt. Gov then said it would be ok to just send a picture of a tea bag in with the electrical bills.

Flash back to December 16, 1773. Three groups of fifty Boston residents known as the “Sons of Liberty” board the ships; Dartmouth, Eleanor, and Beaver with the intention of throwing all of the tea into the Boston harbor to protest the tea act. A harbor master explains to the groups that throwing all of the tea into the harbor would be very messy, and affect the other boats in the harbor, which would need to be cleaned. The group aggrees and goes home, and instead write a letter to the editor complaining about taxation without representation, being forced to buy untaxed tea from the British East India Company, and generally being cranky. If that were the case, I’d be drinking tea instead of Starbucks and sitting here bitching about being taxed by the Royal Colonies.

There is such a thing has peaceful protest, and despite the concerns of the postal system, there has to be a way for citizens to protest something they don’t like in a peacefuly, yet inconvenient way to get the point across. Using “National Security” concerns has become the trademark of all excuses to stop citizens from peaceful discord. We can’t congregate anymore, we can’t mail tea bags, we can’t do a lot of things anymore because they throw the whole “oooh, National Security” concerns flag and we simper back to our holes and continue to stew over being ineffective and castrated. Thank you government can we have another.

This year in Maryland the de-regulation of power companies went into effect. In 1999 the Maryland General Assembly thought it would be a good idea to de-regulate power companies so that independent power companies could come in and do business and give the almight conglomerate Baltimore Gas and Electric (BGE) some competition.

Let’s see, BGE came in, paid for the entire infrastructure of power lines, owns all of the power companies that generate and route electricity... and the Maryland General Assembly thought that Bob’s Power Company would come in, do the same and give BGE a run for their money. The problem with that is that Bob would have to buy his power from BGE, so why would anyone buy Bob’s power, when Bob would have to pass the power cost on to us, and bump up the bill to cover his administrative fees. Hmmm, no thanks, I’ll just stay with BGE. Ok, another alternative would be that a company outside of Maryland could provide us with power. Except it would be the same situation, unless the outside of Maryland company strung extension cords to your house. Once again... stupid scenario. The only thing de-regulation did was increase our power bills by 72%, which is very convenient. There is talk of un-de-regulating power, which doesn’t help matters any.

This election year, plenty of fingers were pointing to those that made those decisions in 1999 that landed us in a 72% power increase (on top of gas being over $3.00 a gallon), and I have every confidence that the Maryland voters will go to those polls in November, forget who did what and vote those idiots back into power. “Hey, here’s a name I recognize... I’ll vote for them” Yes, you remember that name because they thought it would be neat to provide competition for a business that can’t be regulated. Next year I expect they’ll de-regulate air.

Television, and other stupidity

As the new tv season approaches, it is once again chock full ‘o stupidity.

I see that “reality” tv is once again booming, thanks to Survivor and their racially divided “tribes”. Big hoopla about that. Here’s a thought... don’t watch it. I can pretty much guarantee that if nobody watches, you won’t have that crap on tv anymore. Keep complaining about it and you just give them free publicity. So turn it off, go play with your kids or something.

Nancy Grace, who berates a woman whose child is allegedly stolen from its bedroom, then has the gall to play the interview (actually, it was mostly Nancy screaming things at this poor woman) hours after the woman commits suicide. Why isn’t she answering your questions Nancy? Because you’re puppet head, you bleached blond, poofy haired bitch, that’s why. She doesn’t have to answer your stupid questions. You claim you’re “helping”, helping what? Ratings? How about volunteering at a soup kitchen, or cleaning up trash along the road, or even (if your law license hasn’t been stripped) defending indigent people. Helping isn’t sitting in an air conditioned studio screaming at people for your “scoop”.

Then there’s the endless parade of daytime “talk” shows that showcase the dregs of society. Who are all these people, and why do they think we care that your husband had a sex change and married your son? We know you’re dysfunctional, your family has probably told you a zillion times that you are dysfunctional and should seek professional help, they meant a licensed shrink, not Jerry Springer!

What’s up with YouTube anyway? I thought there were a gazillion copyright laws that said you couldn’t tape a show and then post it somewhere, or make a profit from it, or something like that. Its bad enough that you have to pay 10 bucks for a ringtone that lasts for three seconds, how are these people getting away with taping practically a whole freakin show and posting it on YouTube?

What’s with everyone now calling everything “i” something? iJack, iThis, iThat. I would think that Apple would be storming down people’s butts for copying their catchy little naming thing. Do they actually think that by naming something “i”, that people would immediately think it came from Apple and buy it sight unseen? iDont’care. iAmsickofthewholething.

Some artist painted an elephant (after getting approval) for an art show, and now the city is freaking out because people are freaking out, so they’re saying they have to scrub the paint off the elephant. Here’s a quote from someplace “Ed Boks, the head of the ASD, said the order was made after consulting with two animal rights activists and the city attorney's office.” See anything wrong with that picture? I’ll point it out if you are incapable of spotting stupidity: Why on earth is this city consulting with animal rights activists? Wouldn’t Zoo elephants keepers, or a zoologist, or even the freakin Barnum Bailey Circus be more informed about what is and isn’t good for an elephant? Do we think that two animal rights activists who probably protested outside of a circus as packaged meats know more about elephants than say... ohhhh... licensed professional animal caretakers?

Don’t get me started on that hoopla about the animal activist that “saved a dying dog from a chain” by stealing it from the owners when they weren’t home. Apparently some group in Utah now wants to help change the law so that anyone that feels that you aren’t treating your pets right can just take them and be free of any legal repercussions. I hope they change the child laws so that you can just steal some kid that isn’t getting the candy bar it wants in the store.

end of rant

Men in a Women's College

Men in a Women's College
Originally uploaded by Shmoomeema.

Apparently the all woman students at Randolph-Macon Woman's College are upset because it was announced that men would be admitted to the 115-year-old institution starting in 2007. Due to financial reasons (they can't find enough qualified women students to go to the college), the officials have decided that instead of allowing the college to bleed to death financially, the best thing to do would be open up the college to men. This, apparently is not ok with the current students, past students, etc.

I find this to be a bit hypocritical. I'm a woman, and I think having an "all-women" college to be a bit offensive. Where is all that "we're equal" crap, and "we deserve the same opportunities as men" crap the women's libbers are always spouting.

If you want to be equal, don't create "women only" institutions. What about all that hoopla complaining, and fighting for the opening of "men only" institutions (Naval Academy among others) to women. You didn't think it right to have men only stuff, what's with the women only stuff?