One In Five Is A Dumb-Ass

"Those who opposed this war have been proven right, and those who advocated it have been proven wrong." -Charley Reese

Sing it, brother.

As predicted, news of the findings of a British study that men may have higher average IQs than women has spawned much emotional reaction. My favourite is this one from The Scotsman. It's sad that the writer begins with the assumption that the supposedly male researchers have "an axe to grind." As I suggested yesterday, these findings have no bearing on anything. They might indicate that men are better at, or are more motivated by, the writing of these particular kinds of standardized tests than are women-- but this does not necessarily translate to greater intelligence. And even if it did, human history has shown that men and women have always contribute equally, though in different ways, to the progress of civilization.

Thus it's saddening to see a woman "journalist" respond with such venom. The methodology of the study is fair game. The motivations of the researchers, as yet unknown, are not. Ask yourself what the outcome would have been if the study had found the opposite, that women score higher on IQ tests than do men. A hint is given from a post from this online forum:

"Haven't these researchers seen any sitcom in the last 20 years? Don't they
know that all men are knuckle dragging, yet lovable dimwits, who somehow
manage to earn a living and support a hot wife who is always right?"

I think this relates to what I see as our society's growing disdain for men and boys, which is a topic for another blog post. (And I'm sure that one's going to be a doozy of a comment-fest!)

In my constant quest to see my right to look at dirty pictures sustained, I draw your attention to U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta who recently identified as the top law enforcement priority for the American government --not terrorism, organized crime or narcotics-- but obscenity. Yep, you read that right. Prepare yourself for another morality crusade, this time against mere boobies and schlongs. The dumbification of the American populace continues.

Want proof? One in five Americans still believes the Sun revolves around the Earth. Such dumb-assery is startling enough, but it does not necessarily follow that the remaining 80% can do differential equations. Rather, I submit that a large contingent are scientifically underinformed and critically unequipped. This, for example, fully explains the inability of otherwise intelligent people to see through the mumbo-jumbo that masquerades as the science "undermining" claims of Climate Change. And it completely explains the public's easy manipulation by economists who don't fully understand their own quasi-science. It might even explain why so many fools voted for Bush.

Doing It Doggy Style

In this corner, eloquent firebrand anti-Bush Scottish MP George Galloway, best known for having John Malkovich want to kill him. In that corner, pro-war ideological turncoat Christopher Hitchens, known for the enormous chip on shoulder. That's right, babies, it's the pansy intellectual cage match of the decade! Those of you in New York, please attend this event and report back to me. Please!

What's that? Indian militants are producing porn to pay for their insurgency? As you know, I am a great champion of pornography, mostly because I like the idea of people staying the heck out of other people's business and crotches. But the issue here is not about pornography, but rather explicit sexual abuse. If villagers were willingly taking part in this industry to support their favourite terrorists, then more power to them; it's a novel and creative way to fund their enterprise. But I gather that women are being forced into these activities and villages are being terrorized. This is organized crime at its core and moral degradation at its lowest, and I have nothing but contempt for the people behind this venture. I link to it here so that my readers can get a better understanding of my personal morals, but also so that we all can learn about terrors being forced upon peoples a world away.

Meanwhile, topless virgins vie to to be the wife of the 37-year old king of Swaziland. You know, I just turned 38. No topless virgins vied for my company! What gives?

Okay, how do I bring this up? It seems, for the past few months, that everyday I am greeted with a story of someone having sex with a dog. There, I said it. Today it was this one. People are writing to sex advice columnists on how best to get their dog in the mood. And let's not forget about that Seattle man who died after being the ingler for a horse; it seems he was visiting a barnyard animal brothel. There's even a heavily visited site that provides instructions for the would-be dog fucker! (The research I do for you people.)

What is going on here?!!

Is this a sudden new social trend? It seems to have found berth with both men and women from seemingly all walks of life. Has it always been around (hey, we all saw those videos in high school), and is only now growing in media prominence? Or, God forbid, were the fundamentalists right and our society's growing acceptance of all things sexual led to this point? I don't know what to say about this, since data is actually scarce. But a statistic is often bandied about regarding 10% of farmboys having had sex with an animal, so clearly this is not a new trend. But what's with the seemingly new obsession with dogs? They smell like shit and are not the least bit sexy.

Now, my opinion about sex is this: do whatever the hell you want so long as everyone involved is an adult and has given informed consent. An animal cannot give consent, and is therefore the victim of abuse. End of story.

It's sad that I even have to make that argument. Ewww. Or ewe.

Ignatieff & Rae

Remember, folks, I'm still open to more guest bloggers!

In my continuing obsession with cryptozoology, I was intrigued by this story about a strange scream heard by residents of a small town in Ohio. The link includes a video with sound. How is this cryptozoological? Well, the scream sounds to me a lot like a supposed recording of sasquatch calls I once heard in a documentary. Who's kidding? It's likely a bunch of kids with a megaphone.

Now this story is likely to generate a lot of buzz. British scientists have shown that, among a sample of 100,000 people, men have statistically higher IQs than women. What does this mean? A great many things, potentially... or absolutely nothing. It depends, I think, on the methodology of the study and the type of IQ test applied. If the science ends up being rigorous, however, I wonder what the political fall-out will be. For the record, I'm one of those people who's all in favour of comparing races, sexes, nationalities, etc., in terms of measurable criteria like IQ and penis length. While practically useless, such comparisons usually provide ammunition against bigots and always help us refine our analytical methodology, since the methodologies of such studies are examined and critiqued by pretty much everyone on the globe.

When David Suzuki debated Phillipe Rushton back in 1989, regarding Rushton's controversial theories about racial superiority, I was quite disapponinted that Suzuki's main argument was that "this sort of research should not be done." Wrong, wrong, wrong! Every kind of research should always be done, so long as it is done well and with proper methodology and conservative interpretation. Keep these debates in the public eye by conducting and publishing the research, or else the bigots will accuse the world of hiding facts and refusing to face known realities.

Now, Brother Hrab sends us this article by a human rights professor arguing against torture. (Amazing that someone needs to argue against torture. Seems to me that the moral and practical arguments against it are self-evident!) I link to it here because the article names Michael Ignatieff as a well-known, though hand-wringing, advocate of torture as "the lesser evil." The author rightly takes Ignatieff to task for even using the evil/good dialectic. I've been meaning to talk about Ignatieff for a while, as he is an eloquent speaker and the author of a book I enjoyed some years ago, Blood & Belonging...

Canadian papers areall abuzz over how Ignatieff and the Liberal Party are courting each other, with strong speculation that Ignatieff is the heir-apparent to Paul Martin's Prime Ministerial throne. Getting less buzz is the whispered rumour that former Ontario NDP Premiere Bob Rae is being courted for the same job. Weird times, especially since Ignatieff and Rae are lifelong pals.

My disclaimer and disclosure: Bob Rae was my MPP when I was a kid, and I have many memories of him sitting in our living room listening to my parents complain to him during election season. But Michael Ignatieff --the son of famed diplomat George Ignatieff and genuine Russian royalty-- I have never met, though I went to high school with his niece Natalia, met his nephew Nicholas and have encountered other members of the family. I have nothing but respect and affection for the Ignatieffs I have known, but must recount one small observation. I'm not sure which one said it, but the opinion was expressed --passionately so!-- that slave labour could not possibly have been employed to construct the Great Pyramids of Giza, since the things were so beautiful that anyone working on them would have done so out of love and nothing more.

That such stunning naivete could have issued from an erudite and otherwise sensitive individual was my first exposure to the class blindedness of the casually privileged. It is perhaps unfair to judge one member of a family by the utterances of another, but I can't help but wonder if Michael is similarly blinded. It would explain his advocacy of torture, his apparent inability to truly conceptualize the moral horror of such a thing. It seems to me that there is an overlap in attitude among all those who approve of US torture of Islamic prisoners: an inability to project empathy to those of a different race, culture or class. Methinks there's a thesis here for some keen sociology student, or at least a lame-ass op-ed.

Having said all this, I actually approve of both Rae and Ignatieff entering federal Canadian political life. I may find them both morally suspect at times, but both men bring an undeniable intellectual gravitas that is sorely lacking in contemporary Canadian public life. I think I'd rather be lead by a brilliant, ethically-circumspect man, than by a dumb man whose moral position so far remains well hidden. In other words, I guess I'm simply tired of the cavalcade of standard business-loving lawyers and MBAs who masquerade as leaders of communities.

Child's Play

Greetings, my droogies, from the inside of one of those Chinatown vans that
illegally ferry people from city to city for cheap, cheap prices. I'm
travelling from Toronto to Ottawa for a mere $25. This is one of those
cases where the free market fills a needed social niche: the provision of
affordable transportation against the wishes of the busline monopoly.

I am blogging in the dark on my Treo, using for the first time the blogger
email interface rather than the hblogger programme. Hopefully you won't
see a difference in thee final result.

Some of you possibly know that I had a fairly traumatic closing months of
2004, and have since been exploring activities many consider banal, but
which are new to me, all in an attempt to rehabilitate my senses and soothe
the aching soul.

Among such activities are driving a car and learning to play the sitar.
Another is the reading of comic books --or rather, "graphic novels."
Sounds childish, I know. But I'm deriving a fair bit of satisfaction from
it. So, because I have nothing better to do on this journey, I'm going to
share with you my 3 favourite graphic novels:

3. KINGDOM COME - decades in the future, Superman has been driven into
retirement, Batman is almost a cripple, and a new generation of "heroes"
terrorizes the world like rampaging and spoiled Greek gods.

2. THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS - decades in the future, Batman has retired, the
other heroes have been sent away, Superman is a government lackey and the
world is slipping into fascism. An ageing Bruce Wayne dons the cowl one
last time to bitch slap Superman.

1. WATCHMEN - the perfect comic book. Someone is killing off the world's
superheroes.

Feel free to send me your recommendations for other great comics. Nothing kills time in a minivan better.

(Edited to add links and to fix grammar.... hey, the email interface ain't perfect.)

Whiny Stuff

Well, well. My first guest blogger writes a single post and gets a rollicking discussion going with, as of now, 10 comments. Meanwhile, I respond with a lengthy post on the signs of fascism and get nothing. Now I see where your loyalties lie, people! So today you get no depth, just smarminess. So there!

In the news....

• A couple is wrongly identified by Faux News as having fundamentalist ties and becomes the target of community abuse. The response? They were acting on the best information at the time. Now where have I heard that defence before?
  
  
• The bodyguard of the Ohio governor is demoted for having receieved, during work hours, a phone call from his stripper girlfriend. I hope there's more to his misbehavings than just that, because isn't a man entitled to receive a call from his girlfriend? Stripping is not a crime. Until it is, leave strippers and their boyfriends alone.
  
  
• Regular readers of this blog will know that I retain a morbid fascination with cryptozoology. Hence I was thrilled when it was reported on the wires that a farmer has trapped the elusive El Chupacabra. This article includes a photo.... of a mutant kangaroo.
  
  

For those of you curious about my personal life (and I know you're out there), I leave you with this charming photo of me and my beloved siblings, gathered at my cousin's wedding earlier this summer:

The Rise of Fascism

Many thanks to Sheila for providing Deonandan.com's very first guest column. Hopefully, many more will follow. Sheila also sends us today's first random link: Death by Caffeine. It seems it would take 3120 cups of my beloved morning decaf to kill me.

So Pat Robertson now says he was misinterpreted in his "alleged" call for the assassination of Hugo Chavez: "I said our special forces should 'take him out.' And 'take him out' can be a number of things..." Yeah, like maybe to the movies or a prayer meeting. Keeerist.

As Rotten.com puts it, the Blob has attacked Canada! That's right, my droogies. A mysterious slithering creature is terrorizing fish stocks near Nova Scotia, leaving a trail of slime in its wake. Oh, Steve McQueen, how we need ye!

Readers O Mine, you're gonna LOVE this. These people are complaining about the increasing numbers of non-white contestants in major beauty pageants. On the surface, they have an interesting point: the face of Nordic beauty is now African? But they have to understand that the world is changing. Miss Ethiopia may one day be White. Miss India may one day be Chinese. Miss America may one day be literate. (Baaad Ray!) More likely, we'll all be the same colour in 300 years and we'll be fighting wars over hair length or toe width.

You really need to see this. It's a video of the Smurfs from The Family Guy TV show.

Nojjy Boy sends us this NY Times article on the meeting of biotechnology with Hindu morality in India. Makes me a little uncomfortable, really.

Brother Bhash sends us a history of Guyanese "chutney music." I hate it, myself, but I'm sure somebody out there is interested. To kill the bad taste of chutney music, Brother Bhash sends us two more interesting links about Indian music. This one lists Indian songs which resemble Western songs, and this one is on a similar theme.

Now on to the real topic for today: the signs of fascism. Very often we critics of the American Right sink to using the word "fascism" to describe our neighbours to the South. Despite its recent failings, the Americans still enjoy a functioning Republic. But there's no denying that the signs of fascism are on the rise. This website has listed 14 signs of fascism. Let's go through each one in turn and see how it applies to Bush's America...

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Without a doubt, in the wake of 9/11, the USA fell under the sway of mindless knee-jerk patriotism. It's recovered somewhat since, but it's still there.
   
   
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - As we see with the Abu Ghraib abuses, secret trials, detention without charge or representation, the growth of the Patriot Act and every ounce of drivel that slipped from the crevice that is John Ashcroft's mouth, human rights have no place in the new America.
   
   
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The Bush apologists will rail against me for this one. But there's a strong argument to be had that the villifcation of the "Muslim world" as a whole (rather than the minor criminal conspiracy that defines Al Qaeda) achieves a state of endless near-martial vigilance. It's a strategy worthy of Goebbels and described by Orwell.
   
   
4. Supremacy of the Military - the near worship of "the troops" is indicative of this trend. It's on the wane, I think, but it's there. You can't be anyone in the USA unless you mindlessly "support the troops."
   
   
5. Rampant Sexism - Well, I can't fully blame Bush for this, since the degree of sexism hasn't changed that much since he came to office. But many of his policies have been regarded as tantamount to declaring war against women; his anti-abortion stance, for example. I welcome more examples or refutations.
   
   
6. Controlled Mass Media - Again, the apologists will whine about the supremacy of the so-called Liberal media. But Faux News dominates the landscape, and it's pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that they get their marching orders directly from the Republican spin office. The prosecution of the war, with its media filtering and exclusion of indepedent media, is a sign of attempted media control. We're not quite there yet, though, thankfully, and I think that's due to the rise of the Internet. Yay us!
   
   
7. Obsession with National Security - Well this one is obvious. Expanded military, new nuclear weapons, new army bases, de facto draft, airport paranoia, fear of Mexican labourers ---all signs of this obsession.
   
   
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - I love this one. An evangelican president, the return of Creatonism to the schools, the hiding of breasts of naked statues at the Department of Justice, policy driven by the dictates of a "higher father" ---the threat of theocracy is real, people. When joined with a true kakistocracy, this spells trouble on a Biblical scale. Pun intended.
   
   
9. Corporate Power is Protected - Um, Halliburton anyone?
   
   
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - I'm not up on any examples of this. Anyone care to pipe in?
    
    
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Oh this one is so common it's funny. If a Hollywood star disagrees with the president, there's an instant chorus of, "get the hell out of politics, you idiot actor!" If he agrees with the president... silence. As for intellectuals, like Paul Krugman, the fastest way to lose your intellectual status is to criticize the administration. And the fastest way to gain such status, however undeserved, is to support it. Calling Christopher Hitchens...
    
    
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Well, this has always been a staple of the American Right.
    
    
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Corruption is a standard in any government, Left/Right, Canadian/American/French/Indian/whatever. Cronyism, though, is all too transparent among this batch of Republicans. Utter incompetence is routinely rewarded, so long as the perpetrators toe the party line.
    
    
14. Fraudulent Elections - Ha! Insert your own commentary here, please.
    

Here's a test for you, kids. Shaila --from all the way in Rochester-- sends us this story about police thugs intimidating kids at Rick Santorum's book signing. Which sign of fascism does this correspond with?

For (Canadian) Political Junkies Only

(Ray seems to have run out of blog ideas, so he graciously passed on the invititation for others to make fools of themselves. Naturally I jumped at the chance!)

Living in Ottawa, there tends to be a preoccupation with government and cynicism towards it. Some may remember than when Paul Martin was campaigning to be the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada (aka as Prime Minister), he talked about the "democratic deficit." His changes mostly focussed though on individual Members of Parliament not having enough power (some have referred to them as "clapping seals". See also Paul Wells latest column at http://www.macleans.ca/switchboard/backpage/article.jsp?content=20050829_111326_111326).

Big deal. MP s already think too highly of themselves. What about real people being able to get into Parliament?

Yes, I realize that we live in a democracy, and that means anyone can run and become and MP. And I’m certainly not against elections, but let’s face it, they wind up being a popularity contest based on party loyalties. As Kim Campbell memorably said "Elections are not the place to talk policy." No wonder general cynicism continues. Why should we take any of these guys seriously?

And then there’s the other part of Parliament, namely the unelected Senate. The Prime Minister basically gets to put in his buddies that helped him become PM, and then we can’t get rid of them. Enough said.

So how do we fix this mess? I propose a real fix to the democratic deficit: make the Senate into a national citizen’s assembly. It would still be appointed, but instead of the PM appointing buddies, people would be randomly chosen from across Canada to serve two-year appointments.

The idea is essentially like jury duty, or the citizen’s assembly that was recently tried out in B.C. to look at electoral reform. The random selection could be configured properly represent the provinces, gender, ethnic, age or whatever other considerations. Since most people don’t have party allegiances anyway, there would be no political parties or caucuses in the Senate. To provide continuity, at the end of the two-year term, the Senator would have the option of signing on to another term. Just like jury duty though, there would have to be a good reason to refuse the initial Senator duty, or we’d wind up with a bunch of self-selected lawyers.

Many have argued for an elected Senate, but frankly, we’d simply wind up with a second House of Commons and all its associated problems. The Senate is to provide a "sober second thought" and without the party allegiances or fear of election, these people can concentrate solely on what they feel is good for Canada. More importantly, it gives another way for ordinary people to be involved, and have a chance to see what it is really like to make legislation.

Yes, it’s possible we could wind up with a bunch of lazy crooks running the Senate, but that could already happen (and some argue that it does). The beauty of a democracy is that it doesn’t matter who you are, you can still have a part in making decisions. None of this is meant to erode the electoral process, but the Senate is already unelected, so why not put some real people in there instead of a bunch of the PM’s peons?

Blogging As Therapy

Sigh. Still a little down today. Let's see if some blogging can lift my spirits...

Further to yesterday's discussion of the role of government in banning legal products, the lovely Miss G. sends us this article about the nation of Bhutan instituting a national ban on smoking! The best line is this, "If Bhutan were a celebrity, it would be Johnny Depp—reclusive, a bit odd, but endearing nonetheless."

Okay, for all you goth fans out there --and who isn't one?-- you need to visit the Gothic Name Generator. Henceforth you may all call me Balthazar Raine.

Brother Bhash sends us Guyana Radio. Oh, my poor embarrassing people.

Brother Hrab points us to this story about Pat Robertson openly calling for the American assassination of Hugo Chavez. Where to start with this? Firstly, the US government made it illegal some years ago to kill world leaders. (Like this needs to be codified.) So isn't Robertson committing some kind of crime by encouraging others to commit a crime?

The best bit is when Robertson accuses Chavez of being a "strong-arm dictator." Methinks the good reverend is confusing Venezuela with the USA and Chevez with Bush.

So did blogging cheer me up? Well, a little. Now on to the booze....

UglyDog.XXX

Greetings. I just had my heart ripped from my chest, sans anaesthesia. But that's not a topic for a blog. So instead we shall begin banal commentary in 4, 3, 2...

Man, that women-only gym discussion really wore me out. I need a vacation from blogging! But there's no rest for the self-absorbed, so oward and upward, my droogies.

Remember the world's ugliest dog? Here's another photo, courtesy of the LA Times. Insert "which one is the bitch" joke on your own time:

Meanwhile, here's a picture of Sonya Thomas, one of the world's champion eaters. She weighs 105 pounds. All I've got to say about that is this: this woman must use a good laxative.

This is a fascinating meme: the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Never heard of it? Have a good read.

And just 'cause I'm Indian and I like my wacky name, here's a site that describes the meanings for a whole lot of Indian names. No, Raywat is not listed :-(

As many of you know, I mostly prefer Batman to most other superheroes. And now an artist has put together a controversial Batman homoerotica exhibit. Sigh. Enough people already think I'm gay. I don't need this!

On a remotely similar note, BushCo is attempting to block the creation of the .XXX domain suffix which, obviously, is reserved for pornographic websites. My personal bias is to support the products of free thought in all its forms, damned be the social fallout. I've written about pornography here and here. But instead of arguing about the inviolate nature of free speech and the unacceptability of the creation of "thought crime", instead I want to make another point: if something is legal, then it's legal, and the government should not be trying to eliminate it. Porn, as it stands, is a legal product to produce, distribute and possess. The government thus has no right to curtail its production, distribution or ownership.

I realize that there are other examples in our society where this is accepted. Tobacco is the big one. It remains a legal product, but all Western governments are trying really hard to eliminate it. And I'm all in favour of reducing the prevalence of smoking and getting smoke out of my face. The latter is a civil rights issue; I have a right to a smoke-free environment. The former is a public health issue; the government has a responsibility to educate the public about the deleterious effects of tobacco smoke. But you will note that the government does not attempt to reduce the production of tobacco. This is largely because big tobacco lines the pockets of all major political parties and serves as the economic foundation of several communities. Bottom line: if we really wanted to end smoking, we'd make it ilegal. Failing that, the government has no business trying to eliminate tobacco from our landscape.

The pornography argument is similar, I think. BushCo's stated reason for delaying the creation of the .XXX suffix is to avoid helping the porn industry and to give them more time to strategize a way to destroy the industry. Since when is it government's job to plot to destroy a legal domestic industry? I call shenanigans!

Thoughts?

Guest Blogger?

From Walter Kirn, the current guest blogger over at AndrewSullivan.com:

"Psychoanalysis is outdated. If you really want to learn about yourself, take over a popular blog for a few days, scribble away about the odd ideas that no conventional publication would ever let you air, and wait about twenty minutes for the flood of e-mailed corrections, ass-kickings, character judgments, and other miscellaneous reactions that you've so roundly earned in certain cases and in other cases don't deserve. "

The model of Deonandan.com is fairly straight forward: I write something, usually either idiotic, masturbatory, enlightening, banal, quixotic and sometimes even pertinent. Then a host of my beloved regular visitors chimes in to either support, mock or rip apart my argument. I think it works pretty well and keeps me more-or-less sane, on-message and disciplined.

I'm toying with the idea of inviting some "guest bloggers" to post in this space, so you too can experience this unique form of psychoanalysis. Now most of you already have your own blogs, so you don't need my space to have a voice. But if there is anyone out there who thinks this is a good idea or who might want to post something some day, say so in the comment link. Give me a yay or nay or something. (And yes, guest bloggers can post anonymously. I'll just give you a generic guest password.)

Suck It Up

The killing of the "swarthy-looking" Brazilian fellow in London by police, following the London terror bombings, gets shadier every day. It seems now that the poor fellow was never running away. What rationale to the police now have for having executed him? This is shameful and, if true, someone needs to go to jail for a long time.

Sunday's post on women-only gyms generated a fair bit of discussion. To summarize, the defenders of the surcharge-free women-only-rooms in co-ed gyms supported that arrangement because --if I may speak on their behalf-- it's a small price to pay to encourage the eventual re-integration of the sexes within one facility, which is seen as a desirable goal. I, on the other hand, don't really care if the sexes are re-integrated and feel it's a matter of individual choice, so refuse pay for someone else's increased access.

It got me thinking about something else I'm pretty tired of: having to cajole people to take care of themselves. As is probably clear from this site, I'm pretty obsessive about my health. I don't eat junk food, preserved foods, hydrogenated or trans-fats, processed carbs, caffeine and a lot of sugars or excess sodium. (My rule is that, if it can exist uncanned and unfrozen on a shelf for more than 72 hours, it ain't food.) If it's got corn syrup or an unpronouncable chemical name in the ingredients list, I don't eat it. Every morning I run 2 miles, followed by 30 minutes of yoga and stretching, followed by 150 situps and 2 minutes of meditation. On alternate days I follow this regimen with upper-body weight training, usually lasting 30-40 minutes. (As we age, we lose muscle mostly from our gluteals and hamstrings, but I compensate for that with the running.) Then I bike 5 miles (mostly uphill) to work. When I can, I also squeeze in a swim, squash game or long walk.

Every year, I spend thousands of dollars on gym memberships, health magazines and dietary supplements. Every morning after I brush my teeth, I take supplements of zinc, magnesium, calcium, Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Vitamins A & D, a Vitamin B complex, saw palmetto, an omega-3 fatty acid pill, pumpkin seed extract, co-enzyme Q10, fish oil, psyllium husk fibre and tribulus terrestris. On weight-training days, a whey-protein shake is added to the pre-breakfast concoction.

This can get pretty complicated, time consuming and costly, obviously. But a healthy lifestyle need not be an expensive lifestyle. Cooking your food rather than eating out is cheaper and healthier. Fresh vegetables are cheaper than canned or preserved foods. And running on the street is free. It's all so easy and fun and the dividends are tremendous. There really is no downside to exercise and proper nutrition.

Despite this, it's like pulling teeth to get my more sedentary friends and relatives to make their lives healthier. Invitations to join me for a casual walk, run, swim, squash game, bike ride or even a tour of the gym usually go unaccepted, yet the whines about the big bellies and lack of energy persist. The public health specialist in me feels compelled to encourage health among everyone. But, you know, I've reached a point where I realize it's up to the individual to do at least 50% of the work, i.e. showing up. If any of my chubby friends and family members want me to help them get more active, I'd be happy to... but you have to show some initiative.

What does this have to do with the women-only gym discussion? Well, I no longer think it's my responsibility to enourage other people to do for themselves what is patently obvious for them to be doing. It's no longer my responsibility to drag people to the gym or to yank the third donut out of their hands. And it's not my responsibility to subsidize their segregated work-out space just 'cause they're feeling conscientious about their bodies or are intimidated by the big boys. Suck it up, people, and do for yourselves.

Pissing Off The Gym Segregators

Memo to a whole bunch of people: "Orientate" is not a word.

Memo to a whole bunch of other people: It's pronounced KILL-oh-meeter, not kill-AWE-mitter.

Check this out. Gotta love them Kiwis.

Well I spent my birthday weekend falling in love with driving. Who knew? Saturday night I puttered along in my rented Hyundai Accent all the way to Arnprior, Ontario, but was too chickenshit to drive back in the night (on those unlit country roads). So I holed up in a motel room, ate spoiled pastries and watched cable TV. That's livin', baby!

Now, pretty much the only political discussion forum that I read regularly is over at Rabble.ca, a left-oriented site that I occasionally write articles for. Even though the people who post there tend to be somewhat in tune with my particular political orientation, I learned the hard way a couple of years ago that it's not a place where I personally would want to actually post comments, since you can never be progressive enough for some people. But, like I said, I still read the site daily; the forum is probably better and more civil than other similar sites.

But I couldn't resist joining the discussion on this relatively banal topic: are women-only gyms discriminatory against men? Women-only gyms have been popping up everywhere since, it seems, many women prefer to exercise in the absence of men --for a lot of reasons including being free of harassment, free of being ogled and free of the whole macho environment.

I usually have the attitude that people should just suck it up and be adults and stop running away from society, which is how I see most segregated institutions. If you don't like the environment then change the bloody environment, don't run away from it. And if women think they're free from ogling or sexual attention in a women-only gym, then baby they are so deluding themselves. I used to argue that if men-only insitutions are discriminatory (as used to be argued during the more militant 70s) then surely a women-only gym qualifies on that score, no?

But when my elderly, overweight mother finally found the courage to go to a gym for the first time in her life a few years ago, due in no small part to the existence of a women-only gym, I quickly changed my tune. I now firmly believe that the existence of women-only gyms have a net positive effect on society, as it encourages fitness amongst a great many of those who otherwise would not seek it. Also, the microbial libertarian within me supports the business owner's right to choose whatever theme or membership he or she desires.

However, what still riles me is the existence of women-only workout rooms in a co-ed gym. This is how it works: a man joins the gym, pays a fee, and has access to the communal equipment. A woman joins the same gym, pays the same fee, but has access to both the communal equipment and her female-only segregated space and equipment. Does anyone else see a problem here?

Yes, it has been explained to me that the women-only equipment is not as good as the communal stuff. That's so beside the point. By having access to both the high quality communal facilities and the mediocre women-only equipment, the women have functionally shorter waiting lists for the same membership price. I really think that this would not survive a court challenge, though why anyone would want to take such a whiny case to court is beyond me.

So here's my solution: gyms can continue to offer women-only areas, but give the women an option at the point of membership purchase: for a surcharge she can have access to the segregated space, with an understanding that the equipment therein is poorer than the communal equipment. The size of the surcharge should adequately represent the functional decrease in waiting times the subscribers will receive, relative to that of the men who must use only the communal machines.

Thoughts?

Happy Birthday To Me, Happy Birthday To Me

Yes, my friends. Today I am an old(er) man. And failing Ezra Levant showing up at my doorstep and beating me within an inch of my life, I think it will be a pretty good day. It begins with a long run along the canal ('cause I gotta fight back that middle-aged spread) and a drive to work. Yes, you read that right. I rented a lousy Hyundai Accent for the weekend, and I can barely drive! Of course now I have a migraine, but I'm not letting it get me down! People have been universally good to me today. For someone who normally doesn't celebrate birthdays, I'm surprisingly quite touched by everyone's well wishes. Here's what The Toronto Star's horoscope had to say about me:

"If today is your birthday: You are embarking on an amazing expedition — a journey of discovery. This is your chance to see right into the heart of a vital matter. Despite your troubles, which will prove to be temporary, your future looks quite splendid. Happy birthday to Pete Sampras, 34."

Who gives a fuck about Pete Sampras? I share my birthday with George Hamilton, baby! Yeah! Also celebrating today are: my good friend Rosa Aguiar, my old deceased acquaintance, Jon Donald and failed professional wrestler, Terry "The Red Rooster" Taylor. (I forgot to mention that yesterday was Hulk Hogan's birthday.)

Not for the faint of heart, if you want to see the card that my buddy Andrew Currie gave me, click here. I warn you, it is not safe for work. Or for anywhere, for that matter. On the back, he wrote, "May all your dreams come true."

On to the links:

• This site checks up on right-wing Canadian pundit so you don't have to
• Nojjy Boy sends us this NY Times article stolen directly from this blog.
• You want to know what a hero is? This guy is a hero. Bringing porn to the downtrodden of Iraq. Bless his burgeoning capitalist heart.
  

Now this is quite unusual. As you know if you've browsed this site, my first book won the prestigious national book award of the nation of Guyana in the "first work" category. It is, so far, the crowning achievement of my literary career. When I won, I did so at the expense of another much beloved local contender, Hendree's Cure, by Moses Nagamootoo (a former Information Minister). When I went down to accept the award, I met a smart young man named Ruel Johnson who was trying to become a writer. We got on well and tried to stay in touch.

When I went back to Guyana a couple of years ago, I was pleased to discover that Ruel's first book had won the same prize right after I did! In the words of one reviewer, "I can safely say that Ruel Johnson is the best young writer to emerge in Guyana in at least a generation." He really is that impressive, and I made it a point to congratulate him on his accomplishments, fully expecting more great things from this fascinating fellow.

Interestingly, I recently came across an article in Guyana's national newspaper which heavily cited Ruel's quotations. In the article, Ruel (seemingly a fan of Nagamootoo's) states, “What passes now for Indo-Caribbean literature, just as what passes for Guyanese literature, is simply an authentic literature of disproportional misrepresentation”, and gives as an example the fact that a Canadian named Raywat Deonandan eclipsed Nagamootoo for the Guyana Prize.

As hurtful as this was initially, I must concede that Ruel has a point. In terms of rewarding accomplishment, ex-patriate Guyanese with only tangential involvement in indigenous Guyanese culture tend to be revered more than the local flavours. Maybe Nagamootoo was indeed more deserving of the award than yours truly.

But let me finish with this thought. Is it not possible that since there are now more Guyanese ex-pats living in the USA, Canada and the UK than there are in the shrinking nation of Guyana itself (population <800,000), true modern Guyanese culture is not to be found necessarily in streets of Georgetown or the villages of Demerara. Perhaps the real contemporary Guyanese face is to be found in Miami, New York or Scarborough. Or in Ottawa, writing a stupid blog.

Bastards

Re: whether all cultures are equal. The forces of darkness are discussing this topic, too. Visit the Western Standard Blog (brainchild of stunted monkey boy Ezra Levant) to check out the "discussion".

Got $100 million? How about a trip around the moon?

Reuters is reporting on a new study which measures the prevalence of men raising children who are not their own (yet who believe them to be their own) to be higher than anticipated. Clearly, this stuff has legal, social and medical consequences. But since everyone enjoys a little evolution talk, let's explore the biological perspective a little, shall we?

It is believed by some, including myself, that --in general-- human males seek out physically attractive women, and human females seek out socially well-positioned and powerful men. (Inevitably someone will angrily email me to point out that their spousal choice does not conform to this model... this is why I wrote "in general", people! Pay attention!)

This tendency is driven by the innate desire by both partners to produce and rear healthy, successful children. Since a baby gestates within a woman's body, the criteria about her that most immediately and profoundly influence her ability to produce healthy children have to do with her physical state. Sorry, but it's true. Her intellect, wit, charm and family fortune are all bonuses which contribute to the offspring's eventual genetic robustness, but are ultimately meaningless if she is physically unable to carry a child to term. This is why, as I touched on in my Toronto Star article, male ideas about female beauty are universally mapped around proxy measurements of female fecundity: youth, clear skin, symmetry, curvy shape, strong body, etc. It's the youth thing that pisses off most people, but you have to realize that men are hard-wired to be attracted to young women for their greater child-bearing potential.

On the other hand, the physical state of men is important only in two contexts: a large, strong man is historically more likely to rise to a position of high status within the group and hence will command more resources for his family; and a physically attractive man will likely have genes good enough to produce a robust fetus. But a man's ability to provide resources and attain status are historically more important, I would argue, than his genetic contribution. Proxy measurements for being a good provider include, not only size and athletic ability, but intelligence and charm. Indeed, a man's physical prowess is almost meaningless in a modern societal context.

Want proof of these tendencies in modern humans? Just scan any set of personals ads. The women are looking for stable, established, intelligent men. The men are looking for physically attractive women.

So what does this have to do with the Reuters report? Well, the evolutionary model ain't so cut-and-dry. Over the aeons, we have developed additional strategies to get everything we want. One such strategy is for a woman to seek the genetic contribution of a physically gifted man and the resource contribution of a more stable, established man. The product? The bastard children of rakish men, raised by the clueless, wealthier husbands. As a society we frown on this, but despite social efforts to suppress this behaviour, clearly a high percentage of women continue to employ this strategy, so well ingrained it is in our genes.

The equivalent male strategy is equally as socially distasteful: the "trading up" of spouses. Older, less fecund wives are abandoned in favour of younger, more fecund new-comers. Again, despite society's displeasure at such behaviour, it continues because it is an evolutionarily advantageous strategy. In some ways, it has been argued, modern Western society's distaste for plural marriage is counterproductive. Perhaps, the argument goes, it is more natural for a man of good resources to keep his ageing wife and acquire a new wife with whom to continue to produce offspring; the older woman would suffer less and her familial contributions would be sustained.

Hey, don't send me the angry emails. This is all current socio-biological theory. Blame God. Or Darwin. Or somebody else.

Unequal Cultures and Social Darwinism

Over on the right-wing blog of Darth Vadum is the predictable post about how different cultures are not equal. That's a sly way of saying that some cultures are superior to others, and an even more sly way of implying that Western culture is superior to all others. It's an idea finding traction among the hardcore neo-con set, such as David Frum, VD Hansen and Jonah Goldberg. As mentioned in this space before, part of the neo-con agenda is to foment a war of civilizations, pitting the "enlightened" and "freedom loving" West against.... well, against everyone else, but in the short term against the so-called Islamic world.

The fundamental argument in favour of cultural inequality is, of course, deeply flawed. It goes like this: some cultures value individual freedoms, etc, more than others and are therefore superior to other cultures. The problem, of course, is in choosing the criteria for evaluation. The above example of "individual freedom" is a dearly held Western tenet, so applying it will automatically select in favour of Western modalities. It's like saying White people are better than Black people because they are more white: a self-serving circular argument.

Another example: it has been argued that capitalism is better than types of economic communalism because capitalism creates greater economic wealth. While it is true that capitalism does create more economic wealth than other kinds of economies, this makes it "better" than other types only if greater economic wealth is indeed the standard by which one chooses to judge. Some people might not think wealth is all that important. And as we have learned this past century, other factors beyond wealth need to be put into the evaluative equation, such as personal happiness, environmental damage, sustainability of the wealth, population health and growth, population education and other softer quality of life measures.

This is why anthropologists and social scientists of the last century developed the idea of "cultural relativism", which does not state that all cultures are equal, despite what the supremacist right-wingers will tell you. Rather, relativism argues that there cannot exist objective criteria with which to evaluate cultures, since each observer necessarily comes from a specific cultural tradition. This does not mean that we cannot evaluate and criticize cultures, only that we must be aware that when we do so we are inevitably applying our own culturally-biased value system. In the end, any such evaluation only serves to provide pseudo-scientific rationalisation for our supremacist philosophies and policies.

Ultimately, all leanings toward cultural inequality lead to one hoary destination: social/cultural Darwinism. If one accepts, even in theory, that one culture can be superior to another, then one must conclude that the superior one must prevail in conflict and is justified in doing so. This is a position that forms the bedrock of empire, so it is not surprising to see imperial scribes, like the Bush sycophants listed above, espousing such discredited social theory. In the words of Charley Reese:

"[The USA is] the only country in the world that has military forces permanently stationed all over the Earth. All imperialism, even the American form, is ultimately based on social Darwinism, a belief not openly stated these days that we are a superior people and therefore must inevitably rule in one way or another the inferior others."

Furthermore,

"The code word we use for superiority these days is 'democracy.' It is democracy that is superior to all other forms of government, and therefore we are doing people a favor to spread it."

36%? I Can Live With That.

Let's talk a bit about Irshad Manji's over-hyped book, The Trouble With Islam:

"Manji calls her new book on Islam, 'a wake-up call for honesty and change.' She talks about bulletproof windows on her house and her 'burly' bodyguard, as well as her own 'integrity,' as she awaits reaction from, presumably, Islamists. The book, though, seems aimed mainly at non-Muslims, reassuring them that what they thought about Islam is true: 'What's with the stubborn streak of anti-Semitism? . . . What's our excuse for taking the Koran literally? . . .' It reduces the multiplicity of a vast faith to a unity — we . . . our . . . then stereotypes that unity and proceeds to rebut the stereotype. It's a good example of what the late Edward Said called Orientalism. I'd say true courageous dissent is usually not marked by self-advertisement. "
-Rick Salutin

Salutin pretty much says all that needs to be said. But if you need more, this article is pretty comprehensive.

Speaking of silly Islam stories, it seems a US judge has refused to let a Muslim woman swear on the Koran before giving testimony. Apparently he feels that truth can only flow through the Christian bible, even if the person swearing on it doesn't adhere to those beliefs. Methinks this judge misses the point entirely: the swearing ceremony is meant to ensure that the witness feels compelled to tell the truth. It's not meant to enforce one's own religious beliefs. It seems the neo-con's much desired clash of civilizations is inching closer to becoming a reality.

Have you heard about "Douchebad for liberty" Bob Novak storming off the CNN set? Makes me warm inside. Here's a graphic of what was going on inside Bob's head, courtesy of this guy:



Want to be both enticed and depressed? Here's a slideshow of the worst foods you could possible eat. Want to feel better? Look at these photos, courtesy of Brother Hrab.

I leave you with this pointless quiz. How American Are You? Interestingly, I'm 36% American! Aieee!

You Are 36% American

America: You don't love it or want to leave it. But you wouldn't mind giving it an extreme make over. On the 4th of July, you'll fly a freak flag instead... And give Uncle Sam a sucker punch!

Butt Ugliness

Back alive from camping. Well, it was "car camping" so there was never any real threat to one's bodily integrity, unless you count the restless kids next door or the inevitable long-leashed pit bull. I do have one observation from this experience, however. How best to phrase it? Hmmm. If one were to judge the entirety of the human gene pool solely by the sample one encounters while "car camping", one would be justified in concluding that the human race is a profoundly physically unattractive species. After two days of watching hundreds of people file by in their bathing suits, I only caught sight of a single attractive body, and I think she was a stripper who came down from Montreal for the day. What is it about camping that attracts ugly people? Perhaps there was a call from the wild (clearly heeded by yous truly, as well) that sucked all ugly people from the cities this weekend. Man, downtown Ottawa must have been a babe fest in their absence!

It is a truism that humans tend to seek good looking people with whom to reproduce. So it stands to reason that as a species we must be getting better looking with each generation, as presumably the lesser attractive people tend not to find mates. So imagine taking a time machine back 10,000 years. Butt ugly times, my friend. Butt ugly times.

RIP Peter Jennings, Ottawa's most respectable ex-patriate son.

Off To The Woods

"The genius of you Americans is that you never make clear-cut stupid moves, only complicated stupid moves which make us wonder at the possibility that there may be something to them we are missing." - Nasser, Gamel Abdel (Courtesy of Kulpreet)

• My week of doing things I never planned to do continues. I drove a car alone through downtown Toronto earlier --and enjoyed it-- and later today, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going camping. Yes me, slave to wireless. Mind you, my Treo is loaded with a few episodes of Justice League, just in case I go into tech-withdrawal. And of course if there's a mobile signal out there, I will be blogging from the woods, 'cause that's who I am.


• What's in the news? Oh yes, The Monkey President has ironically stated that he approves of the teaching of "intelligent design" (the new name for Creationism) in public schools. Some of his apologists are saying that the President meant that the philosophy should be included in religion class and not necessarily put forward as a viable scientific alternative to Evolution in biology class. Poppycock. I know, you know and they know that he meant just that: he does not believe in Evolution, which is the foundation of modern biological science. Just another Republican attack on science, a la Climate Change.


• So some brown folks are being prosecuted for selling over-the-counter cold medication to meta-amphetamine cookers. It seems they didn't understand the drug lingo. You know what's really a bitch in this story? The fact that it's a crime to sell a legal product. This isn't like restricting cigarettes and alcohol to those over 18; now, the law in some regions requires store operators to essentially be able to identify potential criminals! Sheesh. Enough with this retarded War on Drugs, one of Reagan's many addled legacies.


• Brother Hrab sends us this story about an Australian academic coming right out and saying Australia should henceforth limit its immigration only to Whites. Wow. Well, I'd much rather have the issue out in the open like this, rather than muttered at racist dinner tables around the country. Now is the time to see what the majority really thinks. The irony, of course, is that White Australians have no more valid a claim to that country than does any other group, especially the Aboriginals.


• Mind you, Australia is suffering from a serious man shortage. Is it possible they only want white men, though?


• The anti-immigration movement, always simmering in Western nations, is finding new life on the Internet and now especially in the wake of terrorism-related racism. This site is particularly concerning for its attempts at concealing its racism with seemingly reasoned discourse.


• I have not commented on the London shooting of the Brazilian fellow who was mistaken for an Arab terrorist. What more can be said? London police have a recent history of anti-colour prejudice, so it's not surprising that this happened. Perhaps the fellow should not have run. Perhaps he was justified in doing so. I don't know. What I do know is that Brother Hrab is correct in pointing out this interesting parallel: "It's the Iraq invasion in miniature -- a country that had nothing do with 9/11, utterly destroyed; a man with no connection to the bombing,executed."


• Want to hear erie sounds from Saturn? Click here.


• I don't know what more to write about the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. But there's much more to the story than the mainstream is currently aware of. Many images have been censored.


• Check out this bad writing contest.


• Brother Hrab points us to this interesting development. American TV will (rightly) broadcast an interview with a Chechen leader, against protestations by Russian officials that the Americans are abetting terrorism! Now, what do you think would happen if Russian TV sought to interview Osama bin Laden? Hmm.


• Because I care, I leave you with this.
  

I Have Crossed Over

It's true, dear friends. After 22 years of not using my driver's licence, this week I rented a car for the first time ever and drove by myself for the first time ever. And I enjoyed it! I particularly enjoyed the gridlock traffic of downtown Toronto: I found it... soothing. By the way, the car was a Volkswagon Golf.

I guess I'm --sigh-- growing up. After all, these days I'm even drinking beer by myself! I used to hate beer!

Ass Pickles

Back from my sister's magnificent wedding in New York. Photos are forthcoming, so do stay tuned. In fact, I'm considering disposing of my new expensive studio headshot (see last post) and replacing it with a drunken shot of me stumbling about at the reception. No, seriously.

I've mentioned my prediction for the 2008 US federal elections several times in this space, but I want to note it again so that when this improbable scenario comes to pass, you'll all remember that I called it first. Forget Hilary Clinton. Forget John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. The next President of the USA will be Al Gore. He might do it as an Independent or as a Democrat, but his win will be decisive and he will inherit the economic and security problems created by BushCo, for which history will incorrectly blame him.

I'm in Toronto right now so don't have access to all the stuff I've been saving to post here. I will however, share with you a letter printed in Sunday's Toronto Star in response to my recent article:

If Raywat Deonandan, an international health consultant and epidemiologist,
really believes that high-level competition does not develop any useful skills,
we can only hope that he peddles his consultations internationally and does not
publicize that he is from Canada.

He places no value on the perseverance and teamwork necessary for
professional athletic success. He dismisses the '92 Blue Jays as "a bunch of
American millionaires." That group was definitely not "a bunch" but a team,
which not only achieved great success but also brought incredible joy, civility
and a bonding camaraderie to our city as we celebrated their championship runs.
The real beauty of athletic brilliance surpasses national borders.

Many of us fall short of our dreams but the skills we learn along the way
help us to forge healthy lifestyles, provide leadership in our communities and
become team-oriented problem-solvers. Is there any coincidence that
extracurricular activities (especially team activities) are a prized addition to
a university application?

The skills necessary to be a high performance athlete can only be
produced through years of diligence. Sidney Crosby didn't "just become" a super
hockey player. As for your prized spelling skills, apparently there's Spell
Check.

-Peter Artkin, Unionville

Man, someone needs to extract the pickle from his ass. My article was satire, buddy. Know what that is?