After last week’s rather momentous event of America executing the bogey man, this week’s news seems to have the volume turned down a notch to say the least.
Soooo, there’s going to be a slut walk in London. I’m sure I’ll join most men in being quietly bemused and amused. Some police officer (with years of experience in crime fighting) says that you might be less likely to be raped if you dress less provocatively, suddenly that rather innocuous message has been distorted by rabid feminists into “if you wear a short skirt you are asking for it”. Still never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Since it is coming up to summer, and soon any man who has the slightest heterosexual inclinations will soon have to stare at the pavement if he is to avoid having lustful thoughts (even then its still probably a lost cause) I am going to take it upon myself to suggest something to the fairer sex.
Dresses are your friend! they are flattering and depending upon the cut usually far more modest than virtually anything. And modesty is attractive! Besides nothing is more generous than male wishful thinking. But my question is this, do women realise how immodest women’s trousers are? They leave very little for the male imagination to work with, do women realise they might as well be walking around in their knickers?
Joan of Arc was burnt alive for wearing trousers! (she should probably be the patron saint of transvestites but I guess she had to settle for the French) Where has the idea come from that women should try and dress like men? Do women even still ask the time honoured question, does my bum look big in this? Oh and if women don’t want men to stare perhaps the low cut top should be made less obligatory.
Now don’t get me wrong, lest I be taken out of context, if women want to walk around wearing next to nothing that is up to them, I’m sure the part of me that makes me need to visit the confessional is very happy about it. (well unless they are mingers of course)
Public service announcement over, and now that I’ve probably just alienated half my already modest readership…
Well ok then, condoms, have you ever wondered whether they are marketed to children? Well I suppose its not exactly news, but they are. I can remember going to a lavatory back when I was young and innocent and wondering why the sweetie machine was out of reach.
So yes condoms are marketed like the latest creation of Bandai, coincidence, erm no. If you think that condom manufacturers don’t spend significant lumps of cash lobbying the government about ‘sex education in schools’ then you are mad.
Business is business and convincing the government the only solution to the teenage pregnancy issue is prolific use of prophylactics is a big part of their game plan. Of course don’t worry if the condom doesn’t work, you can just have an abortion, where of course the abortion business empire also lobbies government in a big way to inveigle itself into our school system. (Even Catholic Schools!)
We live in a strange world where to suggest the current course our society is on is twisted and broken gets you shouted down by the kind of lefty liberal fascists who decry the summary execution of Osama Bin Ladin but will throw a street party when Margaret Thatcher goes to meet her maker.
Another bugbear I need to get off my chest is that the global warming business empire is still being ever so successful at promoting its money spinning theory. I was talking to a friend in a pub last weekend and was shocked to discover that he’d swallowed the AGW (anthropogenic global warming) theory hook line and sinker.
He simply said, ALL the worlds scientists agree global warming exists and is man made and is going to drown the planet in rising sea levels, this from one of the brightest people I’ve ever met. Really, all of them? there isn’t any controversy at all on the issue? Its all been sewn up has it? Its time a posted a link to one of my favourite bloggers.
In other, non news, news apparently someone still wants to debate the existence of God with Richard Dawkins. Really? in the words of Admiral Akbar, ITS A TRAP! Richard Dawkins isn’t really an atheist (something he’s been cleverly misleading the world over for some time now)
If he was just an atheist he wouldn’t care about other people’s religion, as it is he hates religion with a deep seated passion and does everything he can to misinterpret and misrepresent religion to the world, especially Christianity and in particular Catholicism. I do question where that motivation comes from.
Finally, I guess the real news story is that Syria is going to hell in a handcart and the world is doing absolutely nothing about it and almost pretending it isn’t happening.
I just watched a video of an infantry fighting vehicle firing at random in the deserted streets of Homs. Is it because the Syrian military would be too tough a nut to crack? would it put Isreal in harms way? or are there worries it could turn into an Islamic republic like Iran if it became democratic? or is it because they reached peak oil there a while back? or that Barrack Obama is sleeping on the job of America being the world’s policeman. Who knows.
On that cheery thought my work here is done.