Digital Cabinet

Polevaulter Donkeyman's rants, raves musings and flame wars

Posts Tagged ‘Flipocrisy

As if Viagra was never invented

leave a comment »

The Indian market has recently been invaded by a “vagina-tightening” gel 18 Again



Cue predictable outrage from Jezebel

Jesus, India — couple this with your vaginal whitening cream and you’re really starting to give us a run for our pussy-shaming money. Time to step up our game, America. Did you really think we could coast on Vajazzling forever?


One wonders though, do Jezebel and Madeleine Davis have the same reaction towards Viagra? Do they prefer wet noodles inside of them? Are Viagra ads a form of cock-shaming? Is it OK to make men feel inadequate? No mention of that of course. What do you expect from Jezebel?


From an Indian newsmagazine

American author Naomi Wolf writes that while one could look at the appearance of fine lines, wrinkles, grey hair and the loosening of skin on an older woman as a mark of experience, the proud scars of what one has lived through — advertising for ‘female’ products almost always projects ageing as a disease that needs to be fixed.


And advertising for ‘male’ products don’t project ageing as a disease that needs to be fixed? I have yet to see young men in ads for Viagra and Cialis.


Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

August 19, 2012 at 21:20

Posted in hypocrisy

Tagged with

Radical Feminism, thy name is Collective Punishment

leave a comment »

Julie Bindel on radical feminism:

She says that while the booklet’s insistence that lesbianism could be a choice was controversial, debate was equally heated around the suggestion that men were the enemy. “We were trying to challenge the excuses used by some heterosexual feminists as to why they lived with Nigel or John,” she says. “They said, ‘Oh, but my man is OK,’ as a way of refusing to look at the fact that some men really do hate women.”

“Being a heterosexual feminist is like being in the resistance in Nazi-occupied Europe where in the daytime you blow up a bridge, in the evening you rush to repair it.”

I also suspect that it is very difficult to spend your daily life fighting against male violence, only to share a bed with a man come the evening. … why some feminists then block out the possibility of sexual relationships with their political sisters and instead turn to men for intimacy is beyond me.


So:

  1. All men are Nazis
  2. All men are equally responsible for the crimes of some
  3. All men are violent towards women
  4. The Resistance in Europe collaborated with Nazis; they blew up bridges in the daytime and repaired them in the night (that doesn’t make sense does it? Unless it was part of a Keynesian stimulus)


I don’t agree with Rush Limbaugh on a lot, but I do think “Feminazi” applies to radical feminists.


Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

August 16, 2012 at 12:25

Agent Haddon Goes Wild for Taxes

leave a comment »

Author Mark Haddon has come out for higher income taxes on the wealthy like him:

“I’m a wealthy person. Austerity measures introduced by the coalition have caused real suffering to many people, but my comfortable life hasn’t changed in the slightest. Why have I, and people like me, been asked to contribute nothing?” Haddon told the Sunday Times he had annoyed his accountant by insisting on paying all tax that was due rather than seeking to avoid it. “I should be paying more tax,” he said.

(emphasis mine)


Mr. Haddon clarified on his blog:

also, for the record, all those on twitter and in the guardian comment columns who suggest that i simply send an extra cheque to the HMRC are missing the point. i am talking about a systemic, moral and political problem not personal feelings of guilt. and, in point of fact, i do send an extra cheque, but i send it to oxfam. some people think that’s wrong, too, but you can’t please everybody…

(emphasis mine)


Some questions for Mr. Haddon:

  1. What in your mind is the optimum marginal tax rate you should be paying?
  2. Why did you not cut a cheque to the HMRC based on your desired rate rather than paying only what was legally required?
  3. Did you take advantage of any deductions such as the personal allowance?
  4. Do you take any advantage of tax sheltered schemes such as Individual Savings Accounts, Pension Funds, National Savings Accounts, and other such devices?
  5. Would you release your tax returns (present and past) to the public?
  6. Do you take a deduction off your tax/taxable income because of your charitable contribution to Oxfam?
  7. Given that you do send an extra cheque to Oxfam (and your language makes it seem you see it as an adequate replacement for the tax you should be paying to the HMRC but don’t), if your tax rates are increased, would your contributions to Oxfam decrease? Do you think that higher tax rates would decrease contributions to charities by others?


To be charitable to Mr. Haddon there is a collective action problem here. He does not want to contribute alone to the HMRC, since his individual contribution would be minuscule given the total tax revenue. But that does not get him off the hook. His desire to pay more tax implies that the government spends wisely, so it speaks volumes that he does not trust the government enough to voluntarily give it more money, in fact he trusts Oxfam more. Is his call for higher taxes just a signal to all the “right-minded” folk that he is one of them?


And one final point. Mr. Haddon talks about the systemic, moral and political problem of low taxes and high austerity. But his solution is not to convince his fellow 1%-ers to contribute to charity to alleviate the hardships of people he claims to care about; it is to use the power flowing from the barrel of a gun, to force others to adopt his moral positions and to live as he prescribes.


The last word goes to Mr. Haddon:


P.S. Title of the post alludes to Agent Z Goes Wild, a children’s book by Mark Haddon.


Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

August 14, 2012 at 11:58

I Would Do Anything for My Country, But I Won’t Pay a 75% Marginal Income Tax Rate

with one comment

Will Smith (while promoting Men in Black III in France):

I have no issue with paying taxes and whatever needs to be done for my country to grow. I believe very firmly that my ability to sit here—I’m a black man who didn’t go to college, yet I get to travel around the world and sell my movies, and I believe very firmly that America is the only place on Earth that I could exist. So I will pay anything that I need to pay to keep my country growing.


Interviewer:

Do you know how much in France you would have to pay on earnings above one million euros [under new French President Francois Hollande’s proposal]? Not 30%. 75%.[1]


Will Smith:

75?! Yeah, that’s different, that’s different. Yeah, 75. Well, you know, God bless America.


(Interview at 0’20”)



Hat tip: Ed Krayewski at Reason


This Meat Loaf fella seems to have multiple disguises.


Footnotes


[1] Indigestion for ‘les Riches’ in a Plan for Higher Taxes.

Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

August 10, 2012 at 23:52

Ideological Turing Test

leave a comment »

Who said the following:

How does one argue with someone convinced that the routine massacre of our children is the price we must pay for our freedom?

In the Red Corner:

John Yoo, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General and author of the Torture Memos, who wrote (emphasis mine):

we understand that al Qaeda seeks to develop and deploy chemical, biological and nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Under these circumstances, a particular detainee may possess information that could enable the United States to prevent imminent attacks that could equal or surpass the September 11 attacks in their magnitude. Clearly, any harm that might occur during an interrogation would pale to insignificance compared to the harm avoided by preventing such an attack, which could take hundreds or thousands of lives.[1]

In the Blue Corner:

Adam Gopnik, of The New Yorker, who said on the occasion of [Osama Bin Laden’s] death:

Fear is the terrorist’s best weapon … [The fear] is so out of proportion, very often, to the real threat.[2]

Read the rest of this entry »

Mr. Gupta, have you met Mr. Gupta?

leave a comment »

 
Mr. Gupta, have you met Mr. Gupta?


Note:

  • Text on the right on green background is from Liberty is not libertinism by Kanchan Gupta, written on February 9, 2009. Text reproduced in the following table in the left-hand column.
  • Text on the left on white background is from Mini skirts, Jamaatis and their dark world by Kanchan Gupta, written on July 8, 2012. Text reproduced in the following table in the right-hand column.

 

Kanchan Gupta on[1] the Pink Chaddi Campaign Kanchan Gupta on[2] the dress code[3] called for by Jamaat
A … point that merits elaboration is the disdain which the charlatans who pose as emancipators of women … have for local community sensitivities, which are often casually referred to as local culture and tradition No less telling is the implicit worldview of the Jamaatis. The world they crave for is not splattered with colours and cultural diversity; it’s a joyless world where women are made to disappear …
There really is no need to fashion our lifestyle after Sex and the City. Recall … how faces were blackened of women who refused to don the burqa.
Just because … lip-locking …raises no eyebrows in the West does not mean the East must ape the mating game. Frivolities apart, there’s something darkly and deeply sinister about the Jamaat’s attempt to impose a dress code …
What is material and important is whether those around the individuals … are comfortable with it; if they feel discomfited or outraged, then their sensitivities must over-ride the presumed right to make a spectacle of yourself in public. … what is being sought is to titillate the imagination of the lowest common denominator of Kashmiri society, the rage boys of Islam … in the guise of protecting faith-based, culture-centric sensitivities.
By idolising deracinated men and women who have scant regard for moral values … we are promoting everything that is antithetical to our culture, our tradition. In the absence of that resistance[4], time will come when Jamaatis – whatever their organisational loyalty and affiliation – will demand that women be barred from wearing “mini skirts and other objectionable dresses” anywhere in the country as it hurts Muslim sensitivities

 

Alternative titles considered for this post:

  • That was then, this is now
  • Gupta vs. Gupta
  • On Miniskirts and Pink Chaddis

Note: I am, in no way, implying that Mr. Gupta supported the Sri Ram Sena. He in fact refers to them as “a bunch of goons masquerading as soldiers of Sri Ram Sena” and states that he does not defend “Pramod Muthalik’s hooliganism”. The question however remains: why give more importance to one community’s sensitivities compared to another community’s sensitivities? Of course, it could be that his opinions on the issue of personal liberty vis a vis community sensitivities have evolved. However I received no answer when I asked him that.

  1. PolvolterDnkymn
    @KanchanGupta Great post. Have you repudiated “What is material … is whether those around … are comfortable” http://v.gd/VqSvni
    Sun, Jul 08 2012 11:52:14

 

Footnotes

[1] Gupta, K., Liberty is not libertinism, Feb 9, 2009

[2] Gupta, K., Mini skirts, Jamaatis and their dark world, Jul 8, 2012

[3] “Some tourists, mostly foreigners, are seen wandering in mini skirts and other objectionable dresses which is quite against the local ethos and culture. We have simply requested foreign tourists moving around to respect Kashmiri culture.” — Jamaat spokesman Zahid Ali said (emphasis mine).

[4] … the political will and courage to call [the Jamaat’s] bluff and stand up to [the Jamaat’s] bullying …

Spot the Difference

leave a comment »

  1. In 2012:
  2. In 1990:
  3. Context:

    Helms ran for reelection in a nationally publicized and rancorous campaign against the former mayor of Charlotte, Harvey Gantt, in his “bid to become the nation’s only black Senator” and “the first black elected to the Senate from the South since Reconstruction”. In the primary, Helms had two opponents, George Wimbish (as in 1984) and another; Helms won with 84.3% of the vote.

    Helms aired a late-running television commercial that showed a white man’s hands ripping up a rejection notice from a company that gave the job to a “less qualified minority”; some critics claimed the ad utilized subliminal racist themes. The advertisement was produced by Alex Castellanos, whom Helms would employ until his company was dropped in April 1996 after running an unusually hard-hitting ad.

  4. Answer:

    The Indians and Chinese are not asking for any special treatment. They are only asking to be treated equally (This is not to say that affirmative action is all bad; after all, blacks were treated horrendously in the past).

    Why does President Obama not think of Indians and Chinese as worthy of equal treatment?

  5. Take it away Prof. Landsburg

Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

June 28, 2012 at 00:18

A Tale of 5 Men and 5 Women

leave a comment »

The Colbert Report invited Nancy Pelosi as its guest on the episode of Feb 22, 2012. During the interview Stephen Colbert brought up the all-male witness panel for the hearing regarding the contraception mandate in Obamacare (around the 18′ mark). Nancy Pelosi had this to say

But it isn’t up to 5 guys sitting around the table in Washington D.C. to determine what that size and timing [of family] would be.

Does she think it is appropriate for women to comment on men’s health issues? If not, did she know that Drs. Jennifer Crosswell, Tracy Dana, Rongwei Fu, Helen Koenig and Ashley Maltz and Ms. Christina Bougatsos tell healthy men not to undergo PSA screening? Would she tell them that it isn’t up to 5 women sitting around the table in (wherever they sit around a table) to tell men whether or not to get the PSA screen?

More importantly it isn’t just up to 5 guys or 5 women or whoever else to determine what the size and timing of the family should be. That is a decision that belongs to the parents and parents alone. Getting a mixed-sex witness panel would not change that.

Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

February 26, 2012 at 10:56

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with

Fuck/Marry/Kill

leave a comment »

I came across a game called “Fuck/Marry/Kill” on Jezebel where it was applied to the sons of Mitt Romney. It seems the rules of the games are that given a picture of a person you have to choose whether you want to fuck them, marry them or kill them. It seems like this is a popular game amongst American feminist blogs so I thought I should try it out too. However killing is bad, mmmkay? So I will replace “kill” with pretend that they don’t and have never existed.

So here we go

  • Dianne Feinstein
Ignore

Pretending that she doesn’t exist because she is ugly as fuck

  • Barbara Boxer
Ignore

Pretending that she doesn’t exist because she is ugly as fuck

  • Mary Landrieu
FUCK!

Cute and Hot!! Definitely a FUCK!!

Ignore

And that is why she doesn’t make the marriage grade. Strictly a pump and dump.

  • Barbara Mikulski
Ignore

Pretending that she doesn’t exist because she is ugly as fuck

  • Debbie Stabenow
Ignore

Pretending that she doesn’t exist because she is ugly as fuck

  • Amy Klobuchar
fuck

Crazy Eyes. Strictly good for one fuck only. Next time she may want to disembowel you.

  • Claire McCAskill
Ignore

Was probably quite pretty when young. But marriage is dangerous. Ex-husband was murdered. Let us just pretend that she does not exist.

  • Jeanne Shaheen
fuck

Not pretty enough to marry, not ugly enough to ignore. Lets just put a brown paper bag on her face and give her a pity fuck.

  • Kirsten Gillibrand
Marry

Damn, now that is hot. And hasn’t deteriorated to Landrieu’s extent. Marry.

  • Kay Hagan

Looks like a horny suburban wife. Bag-on-face fuck.

  • Patty Murray
Ignore

Just looks weird and creepy. Pretending that she doesn’t exist.

  • Maria Cantwell
fuck

Looks haven’t completely disappeared as of yet. Fuck.

I would have done Gabrielle Giffords too but then Jezebel may have thought I was misguided and inflammatory.

Update: Jezebel calls for Congressman to buy an indulgence from the Gabrielle Giffords Hunger Action Fund.

Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

February 24, 2012 at 21:55

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with

A Tale of Jeremy and Ken

leave a comment »

Once upon a time a naughty boy named Jeremy said a very naughty thing

And all hell broke loose

On CiF

  1. Should Jeremy Clarkson apologise?
  2. Clarkson’s just Clarkson – would you have cared, pre-YouTube and Twitter?
  3. Clarkson is a rebel with a cause. That cause is Jeremy

Source and over the rest of the Grauniad.

Here is what Karl Turner MP had to say

And here is what his boss Ed Miliband MP had to say

Now another naughty boy, Red Ken said a very naughty thing — “Hang a banker a week until the others improve.”

And all hell broke loose. Or did it? On Cif and over the rest of the Grauniad.

The Honourable Member for Kingston upon Hull East, do you have anything to say? What about you, the Right Honourable Member for Doncaster North?

Update: The Honourable Member for Kingston upon Hull East has replied

Written by Polevaulter Donkeyman

February 18, 2012 at 01:41

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,