I'm done with yogurt...and so are you.

 Oh, just the act of physically swallowing.

No reason. None whatsoever.

Der Schatten has long been put off mayonnaise. Now, it seems, that I must be done with yogurt.

According to the Smoking Gun,

A 28-year-old victim was shopping with her daughter in the store’s cereal aisle when she was approached by Garcia, who worked in the store’s dairy department. After accepting Garcia’s offer of a yogurt sample, the woman immediately thought the sample tasted “gross and disgusting” and, cops reported, “said it tasted like ‘semen.’”


In a handwritten statement, the woman said, “I spit it out on the floor many times cuz I was upset.” The woman recalled that when she talked to manager Catherine Flores, “she told me was a Greek yoghurt. People love it has lot of protein on it.”

The woman paid for her groceries and returned home, where she told her boyfriend about the incident. She told of how Garcia had “just come with one sample just for me,” and that “he was so pushy to tell me how taste it.” The woman and her boyfriend eventually returned to the market, where they summoned police.

I wish I were kidding. A woman is approached by a dirty hippie in a Farmer's Market, with a puddle of goo and told "eat it" "eat it". And, she does. Despite the fact she has no idea what it is (beyond what's she told), that the guy only has one sample (pardon the pun), and that she's in front of her daughter, and is meant to be a role model of positive, responsible behavior.

So, what does she do?

She eats the shit, naturally.

As much as I wish ill on any psychopathic asshat that does this to folks, you have to think that deep down, way in our visceral past, that people like this --the ones that ate the strange mushrooms-- were the very ones that didn't live to reproduce and spread stupidity genes. Ah, the modern society, thwarting Darwinism for 160 years, eh?

Anyway, if you'd like some horrifying reading materials, please check out the pdf (also from Smoking Gun), of the complaint sworn out to form the basis of the warrant. Disgusting.

Enjoy your Taco Bell "queso"

-d.s.

READ MORE » I'm done with yogurt...and so are you.

For no particular reason...

The death of my favorite American city, New Orleans, produced a series of calamities. Among them were already-destitute people reduced to looting grocery stores to survive.

Obviously not all looting was condoned or necessary. But, sometimes it can be morally justified. That said, here are some random images after the fact of people trying to protect what they acquired in this dystopia in our borders, and on our own coastline.

Again, no reason particularly. Just got to thinking about the complacency and mind-fucking incompetence that let a city of a million people die. 

-d.s.

READ MORE » For no particular reason...

Hunger Hurts, But Starving Works...

Sounds like a Neil Gaiman quote from one of his more memorable characters (Sable a/k/a Famine from Good Omens). Alas, those were not spoken by him, but by one of these manufactured "reality" television "celebrities" from the UK, Kenneth Tong.

"The words lunch, breakfast, and dinner should now mean nothing to you, you have eaten enough for a lifetime. Stop. You are disgusting."

You know what else is disgusting? Kenneth Tong

The full interview, available on Huff Po by Johann Hart, is a textbook display in misogyny and sociopathy, but this little excerpt should clue you in on what you're dealing with:

"Why concern yourself with other people's problems?... When I had problems, who was there for me?" He says that being a sociopath is a good thing - it "can make you highly successful in business, and I am going to make a fortune with my Size Zero pill."

****

Ah, the Size Zero pill. Tong tells me that fat women are "disgusting", and any woman over a Size Zero is fat and therefore "worthless." (Men are different: men only have to be rich.) He leans forward, and says evangelically that all women should become "managed anorexics", and his pill will make it possible. I ask him which doctors and scientific studies he has consulted to make his claims. After a long pause, he says: "Um... I've had personal trainers since I was twelve." Kenneth, personal trainers aren't doctors. What medical personnel have you consulted? He says he spoke to the doctor in his gym when he hurt his hand. What's his name? "I don't know." What did he say? "He said 'Mmmm, yeah, all right'."

****

But he then adds this doesn't matter because anorexia is a "subjective" concept.

 You know what else is a "subjective concept", Kenneth? Active Euthanasia and Suicide.

Choose one.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing this fucktwit has to say, and probably the only honest one, is that he is totally, 100% untouchable. Per Mr. Tong

"Truthfully, when you are as wealthy as I am, you can say, do and think anything without penalty, as you have no one to be accountable to."

And you know what? He's right. Zero is the new 4 in Tong's world. Managed Aneroxia (a term he coined himself) can be accomplished. And all those crappy, disposable women out there, can just get with the program, because they are too mouthy, too deceitful, too fat for Kenneth Tong.

Okay, Kenneth, since you're so qualified to judge people let's discuss a few things you could work on...it's only fair.

1. Your lips appear to have been wrapped around a few cocks too many

2. Whomever you paid to shit on your hair did a terrific job

3. "loaded" people can afford LASIK

4. Real mean work on shoulders, not just arms and neck

5. Your hairline is receding

6. Considering you're a 5'4" Chinese man, it appears as though you're dipping into the HGH, in any event.

h/t Monkeygirl.

-d.s.

READ MORE » Hunger Hurts, But Starving Works...

Me and the Yankees: A follow-up

Three weeks ago I wrote, but yesterday just published, a seemingly-confused mental and emotional vascilation regarding the secession of South Carolina 150 years ago. As my undoubtedly-better half has occasionally commented, my spiel on Reconstruction is (besides being incredibly boring to most) "Yankee Outreach". And she should know, being born a Jayhawker, both geographically and in temperment.

Occasionally, it goes beyond boring and into pedantry.

The point of the thing, I suppose, requires two elaborations. The first is part of my general disdain for all things imperial. The United States government treated its own as imperial subjects, and a whole lot of innocent people, who shared the misfortune of geography, suffered for the sins of a comparative few. The counterargument is to be made that a whole lot of people suffered in the antebellum South because of the misfortune of the color of their skin. To the extent of racism (which is still an ongoing problem in every corner of our little country), that is perhaps true. But, the larger point is that the persons complicit in the slave trade, North and South, were never the ones who suffered. It was the poor, the iceberg class --9/10ths below the surface-- that did the fighting, bleeding, dying, and post-war suffering. Those who truly profited moved along, bid their time, and bought their pardons. Where was "Reconstruction" for the flesh marketers in the North, and the Northern profiteers off the inhumanity of slavery? There was none. To the victors go the spoils, including, I suppose the ability to continue to demonize another part of the nation for a century and a half, without confronting the "winner's" own remarkable, blinding hypocrisy.

James Henry Hammond Slave Owner Brad Delong        

Worth your read; Berkeley's Econ 113: Economics of Slavery

The second point, and one which I was probably a bit inarticulate in expressing, is that of the many many people drafted, bought/sold, and who otherwise fought for the South, very few of them were lifting a rifle to support continued subjugation of other human beings. The nation is, and has, always been at war between the pastoral South and the industrial North. The Constitution is, if nothing else, an intrinsic muddle of the those competing interests. Regionalism has always been stronger than our nationalism. Having traveled extensively, to 92% of the United States, I can definitely vouch for the proposition that our regional differences outweigh our national similarities...there is as much difference between the American Southwest and the Northeast, as there is between the United States and Canada. Folks in Portland don't have the same regional concerns or characteristics as those in Omaha. Charlotte is nothing like Chicago. We are about 7 discrete nations held together by a common tonge (increasingly irrelevant), a common currency, and the threat of government-sanctioned violence to hold the whole thing together.


If nothing else, the average kid in the South was fighting to protect his backyard, and his home, or because his government drafted him to do so. I dare say the missionary zeal of violence to prove a point was much more likely to be found in the North. And what were those points? One is obvious: Our fellow human beings deserved better than to be enslaved by the landed gentry and large growers in the South. And you know what? Every 17 year-old kid who slapped on some Navy Blue and went to march into our hostile Southern terrain, to die in heat and humidity, awash in deadly animals and insects, died for a worthy cause -- theirs was a just war.

The second point is less obvious: to those Yankees who marched down here to prove that a "more perfect union" can be achieved by force, and by bloodshed; or those who were led to believe so by their government, they were wrong. That portion of the equation is a bankrupt premise, because they were fighting to preserve, not a "union" or the "republic" but, America's growing empire and its growing economic hegemony. While Lincoln's private correspondence was a bit more forthcoming about this point, American history has yet to fully recognize that fact.

Lest there be any doubt that it was an imperial war to preserve territorial and economic Empire, I do challenge you to read exactly what happened with "reconstruction", and how the otherwise-nonculpable citizens of the American South were treated by their victorious overlords. To the kids in Heather Gray, who recognized that they were being invaded and occupied, to the extent hey fought to protect against the inevitable "Nation-building" that would occur under Reconstruction, not a damned one of those kids is to be faulted, just as those who fought for imperial purposes were in the wrong.

Like I said, it's complicated.

READ MORE » Me and the Yankees: A follow-up

Florida prosecutors pick on cripples; grandstand wildly.

About a month ago, I wrote a scathing piece on the chilling effect of private corporate censorship by Amazon against the creeper who authored the "The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover's Code of Conduct".

Therein, I argue that 'tis better to provide legal, if not socially acceptable, fora for pedophiles to learn how to curb their appetites and stay within the law, than it is to permit unpopular, grotesque, but-legal speech to be chilled by any entity; much less a private one.


Seems like the author of that book, Philip Ray Greaves II, is back in the news today. This time for a reason that should pretty much anger anyone who gives a shit about criminalization of speech, police entrapment, and the politicization of the law.

Yep, he looks like a creeper too.

Obviously, not the most popular client to have...

From MSNBC:

Polk County sheriff's deputies arrested Philip Ray Greaves II hundreds of miles away from Florida at his home in Pueblo, Colorado, and charged him with violating Florida's obscenity law.

Polk Sheriff Grady Judd said his office was able to arrest Greaves on Florida charges because Greaves sold and mailed his book, "The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover's Code of Conduct," directly to undercover Polk deputies. Judd says Greaves even signed the book.

Read that again, and process it. What Florida did was solicit Greaves to sell his book in their jurisdiction, where it is deemed criminal obscenity and indecent. Now, the problem is, the book isn't a crime under federal law, nor was writing, manufacturing, or selling it (or its contents) a crime in Colorado, where Greaves lives and where he was presumably minding his own business now that the furor has died down.

There is entrapment, and then there is entrapment. Normally, it is not entrapment if the police solicit someone to do something which is criminal. The reason being is that they are just taking (allegedly)  advantage of the defendant's proclivity towards committing a criminal offense. If someone is trying to do a murder for hire, drug deal, extortion racket, etc. entrapment wouldn't be a defense.

But here, the man writes a vile book, and is literally solicited to commit a crime that he likely did not know was even criminal to begin with. Even worse, the "crime" alleged by Florida is ordinary commerce...that he engaged in legally in Colorado, using the Federal interstate mail system...legally. Even worse than that, the "crime" is repulsive speech whose sale is criminalized in Florida. Just speech, that's it. And interstate commerce, apparently.

But, how do we know it's grand-standing and not a legitimate prosecution. I dare say the presser released by the Polk Co. Sheriff's Department says it all.

"If he will waive extradition, it's my goal for him to eat processed turkey on Christmas Day in the Polk County Jail," Judd said. * * * "If we can get jurisdiction ... we're coming after you," Judd said. "There's nothing in the world more important than our children."

 Yea, that's pretty much what I think of Sheriff Judd...

Lookit. This is repulsive, vile, stomach-turning...you name the adjective. But Florida is on rotten-ass ice here. 1. Colorado shouldn't even extradite him, as this was not a crime. 2. There are serious pre-emption issues here as well. The State used the feds to entrap a guy into a state level crime that is not a federal crime. The crime revolves around commerce. Well, Skippy, this commerce is interstate. Good luck with that one. 3. It's criminalization of speech for fuck's sake, and may be revisited by some very high courts very soon. 4. While communities have a right to police and protect THEIR CITIZENS, the 1st Amendment doesn't cease to be relevant. More important, Florida has no interest in this political prosecution because the crime was manufactured by Florida and brought into their jurisdiction...by Florida officials themselves. 5. Notice is going to be a big big problem. Generally ignorance of the law is not an excuse; however, when the criminality is the exercise of a fundamental right, and the commission of the crime involves participation in interstate commerce, how on God's earth could Greaves know he was engaging in criminal behavior?

 

Besides, perverts always look like pervs. Every lil' kid has built-in molester-radar.

Nevertheless, Greaves is an easy punching bag. Just like the Feds go after Assange because they cannot go after the N.Y. Times, Florida attempts to prosecute another person extra-territorially, who also committed no crime. Why? Because it's ass-fucking lazy, it's cheap populism, it's interference with legitimate law enforcement, and it's a helluva' lot easier than investigating and prosecuting the real problem here: Real Florida pedophiles who have committed unspeakable, unforgiveable violence against real Florida children.

This shit is just window-dressing.

-d.s.

READ MORE » Florida prosecutors pick on cripples; grandstand wildly.

Notre Dame Fightin Irish: Home of the Pansies?

Ok, I normally don't blog very much about football. I do love college football, though, and love it because A) Being an atheist, it's the only religion available to me. B) I played the sport from the time I was 5 until I was a freshman in college and got too dinged up, C) I am an Alabama alum, home of the most national titles in the sport, and D) It's a cultural thing, really.

That said, this post doesn't really have much to do with football. Actually, it's more about how the mighty have fallen, or how perceptions of toughness (and actual toughness) may not exist on the vaunted field in South Bend, Indiana. Home of the Notre Dame Fighting Irish.

Touchdown Jesus wants Notre Dame to stop acting like pussies.

So, that brings me to this pitiful story...

Notre Dame’s leading tackler, linebacker Manti Te’o, has a broken nose but should be OK to play this Saturday when the Irish visit Southern California.

Coach Brian Kelly said that Te’o had his nose set on Sunday, is doing well

Huh? What? Please tell me that a reporter (preferably an idiotic student reporter) asked this question. Or, please tell me that it was a joke? A slow news day? For chrissakes, it's football. Te'o is 6'4" 240 pounds. He's a middle linebacker, notorious for being the nastiest position on field. And there was even a question that a broken nose would keep him sidelined? Really?

Put it this way: little boys break their noses in little league and pee wee and rough-housing all the time. What do they do? Certainly not hold press conferences, and certainly not even raise the question that their activities, a full week in advance, would perhaps be impeded.

Pictured: tougher than a college football linebacker?

-d.s.

READ MORE » Notre Dame Fightin Irish: Home of the Pansies?

Let's not get all ban-happy, shall we?

UPDATED: According to the Washington Post, the offending title is no longer available on Amazon.com. Moreoever, some further digging through the Twitter-sphere reveals that, in fact, the author does have a candid chapter about sexual encounters with children and does provide information on evading detection of illegal sexual conduct. This brings the entire argument below to a grinding halt. A how-to manual, which incites or furthers illegal conduct, is not protected speech. Let this be a reminder that, when wrong, I will gladly 'fess up. (Although, to be honest, I don't know how people had the stomach to pay for this e-book, much less read its entire contents).

* * *

Ok, so let's discuss censorship for a moment. But, before we get there, let's discuss a certain self-published title on Amazon, as well as what it does and does not do, and what it does and does not purport to do.  

There is no easy way to get around the title: "The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover's Code of Conduct". The book in no way, form, or fashion advocates or serves as a how to for creepers at NAMBLA, rather, it serves a different purpose; to keep persons with pedophilic tendencies inside the boundaries of the law. That, by definition, would include no pornography involving children, no inducement, no enticement, and no remotely inappropriate behavior. These are very good things, I would think.

What the book does aim to do is to provide boundaries for those sexually attracted to children. This is where the issue gets thornier. By implying that there are boundaries that may or may not cross the line, it does -- arguably -- promote some very borderline, creepy behavior: Behaviors that are perfectly legal, but, on the part of society, are just too close for comfort.

Holy shit! He's not going to defend pedophiles and NAMBLA is he?

No, I'm not. Pedophilia is disgusting, vile, violent and one of the most harmful things that I can imagine which plagues our children and tears the fabric of our society asunder. The interpersonal damages are incalculable, and very real. I've counseled children and adult survivors of childhood sexual and physical trauma. I've seen what it does. Personally, I've had two members of my family who were raped as children (let's call it what it is, shall we?).  Some bounce back, others do not. No one deserves it. Moreover, I do not believe in "child love"; besides being an exceptionally derange notion of normative behavior, it is easily of one of the more exploitative attempts to justify manipulation of guileless children.

That said, I am decidedly for the publication of something that will keep pedophiles in line, and establish non-exploitative, non-sexual lines of communication among pedophiles. As the literature plainly shows, pedophilia is one of the most enduring, persistent and difficult to treat mental illnesses out there. Pedophiles often do not seek pre-emptive treatment because of the deserved social stigma. And, even when they offend, and are subsequently caught and punished, they reoffend at staggering rates. Why not set some self-limiting behaviors on the darker impulses, some that come from within? We cannot change one's thought processes or general sexual attractions, however, we can damned sure change the behaviors. At the end of the day, that's what we're all after isn't it?

No, Atticus! WHY?!?!

This finally brings me to the legal part of all this. First of all, Amazon can choose not to publish this book, and it is decidedly not censorship. It is a corporate decision made for the benefit of the bottom line. The First Amendment does not safeguard against private business decisions made by private companies; they remain free to publish what they will, when they will. It's just good ole' fashioned capitalism. However, I highly doubt many people are queuing up to defend the pedophiles here, should that be the case.

No, the greater issue of concern is when our polity, we as individuals, call for pre-emptive bans on sales, and bans on publication, of certain topics which do or might offend us (and, let's be honest, pedophiles are offensive and rank about as low as possible on the social foodchain). Being creepy and legal is within the boundaries of the law. Giving someone a private platform to be legally creepy  is also within the boundaries of the law. 

What is more harmful then? Operating within the boundaries of the law to hopefully curb destructive tendencies of pedophiles, or society volunteering to curb our own civil rights? What is more violent to our society? Disagreeing with and calling for bans on these materials, or operating within our rights as consumers to not support merchants who provide a platform for unpopular or marginalized opinions? 

Aristotle thinks it's a close call, but only because the "unpopular opinion" comes from those who are attracted to children.

So, let's not be mentally lazy; we can't conflate the publication of a disgusting tract with illegal conduct such as sexual assault or child pornography. The issue here is not that the guy wrote a book advocating illegal behavior, or inciting others to engage in illegal behavior, because he didn't. The guy wrote a book in which frankly illegal urges are discussed. Change the subject matter, and pretend it's something else: Like someone discussing their secret desire to steal, or cheat, or lie, or defraud the IRS, or their violent propensities: and, then discusses how others with the same urges can act legally to stay within the boundaries of society. To call for ban-action is to condone mind crime. In America we don't have to like people's thoughts, but we certainly don't preemptively ban those thoughts unless they are furthering, inciting or assisting illegal conduct. 

There's no illegal conduct here. There is some disturbing subject matter, which is legal, but not illegality itself. So, what's a pissed off consumer to do? Easy. Don't read the damned thing. Don't buy the damned thing. Don't support Amazon.com. Write letters expressing your ire, and why you will not be patronizing them. Here, I've given you a headstart:

Mr. Jeffrey P. Bezos , Founder, Chairman, Chief Exec. Officer and Pres
Mr. Thomas J. Szkutak ,Chief Financial Officer and Sr. VP
Mr. Diego Piacentini, Sr. VP of International Retail
Ms. Shelley L. Reynolds, Principal Accounting Officer, VP of Worldwide and Controller
Mr. Sebastian J. Gunningham, Sr. VP of Seller Services

Lord knows, Amazon publishes plenty of shit I find vile, violent, repugnant and harmful: The Turner Diaries, Mein Kampf, the "Left Behind" series,  Anna Coulter, Jonah Goldberg, Robert Bork, etc. So, I exercise my rights in return: I just don't buy the damned things. It really is that simple.

Everything else is just an angry red howler monkey screeching at an uncaring universe.

-d.s.

READ MORE » Let's not get all ban-happy, shall we?

Men: Avoid attending childbirth...

It's science...and utterly vile...

The males of you who have attended the birth of a child have learned a couple of valuable lessons: 1. No matter how highly you think of your penis, it's nothing compared to what a woman's body can handle. 2. Seeing a human being in the stirrups, with the fun bits opened like a side of beef, is not beautiful or life affirming, it is horrifying and nauseating...John Carpenter couldn't make up something this disgusting. 3. Your presence isn't really required, and, in all probability, you're just distracting baby mama from the task of squeezing out the little greased horror.

Now, recent research suggests that it may actually be harmful to your parenting down the road...

Dr Ives is working on a treatise named The Moral Habitus of Fatherhood, but let’s not hold that against him, because the rest of what he says makes eminent sense. He describes the dogma of “equal involvement” in childbirth as, “false, modern rhetoric”, and argues that men who feel a sense of duty to become actively involved in pregnancies are left disenchanted and self-doubting as they realise that they can offer little more than passive support to their partners.

In short, he seems to suggest what many a hapless father could have told you: that being a useless spare part in the delivery room whilst your wife and various nurses yell abuse at you for standing in the wrong place is not the ideal start to fatherhood.

So, there you have it...rather than throwing up in your mouth for 12 hours, you should let baby mama do what she's genetically predisposed to do: Give birth. You need to make sure the house is ready, get her comfy for coming home, do the whole protector bit, and, by all means, not look at the grisly sight of an episiotomy-torn vagina.

It's okay to look now...just make sure you avert your eyes when the placenta comes gushing out...

.

READ MORE » Men: Avoid attending childbirth...

News from the Homeland: Nothing seems to change edition

A

Angles and trajectories...not just for Lee Harvey Oswald kids!!!

You've heard of this incredibly idiotic geometry teacher in Corner, AL (whoo hoo, Birmingham!!!), who decided that it would be a great idea to teach children the concept of angles and triangulation by imagining shooting the President of the United States.

T

 This story needs more "what the fuck"?

I  wish I were joking, but alas, it really did happen. Naturally, the Secret Service investigated the matter. Perversely, the teacher was cleared, and no action is being taken for this idiotic nonsense. Leave it to my home state though to corner the market on crazy. But, maybe it's not so crazy after all.

Given our illustrious history and past experiences with black people, maybe there are other areas (besides assassination) that present  perfect teaching moments, especially in the sciences.

For instance, have children calculate the pounds-per-square inch of the water used by the Birmingham Police department:

Or, have the Vet Students at Auburn University name this species of animal and the hazards associated with it.

Perhaps, we could calculate the foot-pounds of pressure the atmosphere generates from a short 6-8 foot drop?

We can't leave out the future entrepernuers, so why not a mock business scenario on the cost-benefits of having an "exclusive" business model? 

How about mapping exercises featuring certain demographic characteristics? Bonus points if you include a railroad track!

C'mon Alabama, as a proud resident for the better part of 30 years and a home-grown product, I have faith that we can turn that pesky 20th century around, and give our children the education they deserve. Let's do this (with Jesus''s help of course...a White, Baptist Jesus, naturally).

.

READ MORE » News from the Homeland: Nothing seems to change edition

Admiral Akbar knows it's a trap...

And, so should should you, dumbass...

That's a fully operational Death Star....

To be fair, she set him up; but, to be equally fair, he is a real, real big ole' dumbass. 

Gotta love this dumbassery. Nevertheless, with the level of "trust", these two had, this wasn't going anywhere. But, if it did, we know where it would have headed: to the wonderful world of alimony, child support, and Billy drinking, sobbing, quietly in his mom's basement.

. 

READ MORE » Admiral Akbar knows it's a trap...

Fat Chick fail...

 I may not be a lover of the heavier women, but this shit has gotten out of hand...

Fatty. Lard ass. Shamu.  Porker. Heifer. Fat chick.

The last bastion of discrimination seems to be two-fold. The first is against the "redneck" or native Southerner, the second is against fat people. Studies repeatedly show that overweight people are far more likely to be passed over for promotions, not get the job, get paid less, or be thought of as intellectual inferiors. And, now, for those of us who aren't overweight, or don't qualify as fat, we have our very own dating site!

 Hell yeah, sign me up...

Beautiful People.com (no, I am not, and will not, link to that POS), is for those of us who place the primary indicator of interpersonal attractiveness, as the the only meritorious qualification. That is to say, beautiful people only can apply, and --the number one rule-- NO FATTIES. Well, how do they enforce that you ask? Easily....They review everything you post, everything you do, every picture, and other user feedback to determine if you're fat and/or unattractive. If you tip the scales, then, tough shit Wilbur, back to the trough for you.

The international site BeautifulPeople.com threw out members after they posted photos "revealing that they have let themselves go," according to a company statement.

"As a business, we mourn the loss of any member, but the fact remains that our members demand the high standard of beauty be upheld," said Robert Hintze, founder of BeautifulPeople.com. "Letting fatties roam the site is a direct threat to our business model and the very concept for which BeautifulPeople.com was founded." 

"We responded to complaints by moving the newly chubby members back to the rating stage. This is the same as having them re-apply," Greg Hodge, managing director of BeautifulPeople.com, said in a statement.

The company said it "expelled" 1,520 users from the U.S., 832 from the U.K., 533 from Canada, 510 from Poland, 425 from Germany, 402 from Italy, 323 from France, 220 from Denmark, 176 from Turkey and 88 people from Russia. In the e-mail, it gave users suggestions for boot camps and workout facilities to get themselves back in shape.

Whaddya' mean, boot camps?

So, thus is born an incredible amount of hubris, lingering hatred, corporate-enforced discrimination, and maintenance of an invidious status quo. The venal, shallowness of this company and its patrons cannot be overlooked. Here's hoping no one winds up in a wheelchair, or gets disfiguring dermatological disorders, or otherwise winds up in a state where the fleeting beauty of their youth dissipates and leaves behind everything else; which, incidentally, make us all human.

Pssst. If you don't find someone attractive, you can always say no...it's worked that way for a long time.

 

READ MORE » Fat Chick fail...