When things are investigated, knowledge is extended. When knowledge is extended, the will becomes sincere. When the will is sincere, the mind is correct. When the mind is correct, the self is cultivated. -- Confucius
Politically correct ideals are garbage: true wisdom comes from decades of deep thought and neutral observation. Only a so-called sociopath could ascertain wisdom from this crazy world in a neutral way. Cool thoughts- uncorrupted by modern politics, social norms, or societal ideals- are required for wisdom. Questioning everything, and going against the grain on all universally accepted norms is the path to true intelligence. The Gods notice this.


ARA: Animal Ridiculous Activist

What is an animal rights activist? Someone who is active in their attempts to help animals, right? The ways they try to accomplish these goals- however- has become not only highly ineffective, but more like a complete joke.

They can't even agree on what they are called for one thing. Animal rights activists- animal rights advocates- animal welfare advocates... They fight constantly over the differences of their meanings and moral standings. The 'welfare' people think it is okay to cage animals as long as they are taken care of properly. The 'rights' activists want all animals loose and free to roam. Details like these make good fodder for group-splintering.

The major groups are well known among many activist-types for being corrupt, money-hungry corporate-style entities which do little actual good for animals. The average animal 'charity' CEO makes over 104 grand per year (stats are PDF downloadable here). Just like most human-related charities, the ones that are supposed to help animals rake in buku-bucks, but don't seem to be doing anything effective.

This coaxes many well-meaning animal lovers to distance themselves from the well known organizations. Most of these folks turn to the internet to 'spread the word' about their particular causes. There are social sites, petition oriented sites, and animal groups that are online only. The vast majority of these self-styled rebels utilize Facebook and similar sites like Bebo and MySpace to try to garner support for their causes. On Facebook, for example, I have seen groups called "My dad will PTS[put to sleep] my dog if I don't get a thousand members on here by next month," and "Justice for Betsy the mutt in a Turkish pound". There are thousands of such groups, each with hundreds to thousands of members. It is also common to see Facebook members who have a list of several hundred groups they support. As if they could possibly help out, or even keep track of, even a miniscule portion of them. Some FB profiles have laughable names on them as well. I have seen "Tom Cat", "Annie Whale", "Carmen VeganFight", "If Animals Could Type", and similar names. Many activist types place disturbing pictures of animal cruelty in their photo albums. One can only assume they are hoping someone indifferent to animals will happen upon their page, see the pictures, and become so horrified that they will start supporting the cause as well. Somehow I doubt this scenario has ever played out.

The petition sites are even more absurd. Click on this petition to protest this or that cruel practice! Even the most ridiculous, nonsensical, and poorly spelled petitions seem to get at least a few hundred signatures. One prolific petition maker on the Change.org site starts all of his petitions with "Hi." and ends them with "Thanx. Bye. Matutinally Yours, XXXX" Whatever 'matutinally' means; it is all so silly, but he gets lots of signatures for his stuff. Most petitions are rife with misspellings and grammatical errors, and do not always make sense. Will the president act upon such notes sent to him? Doubt it.

What few if any seem to realize, is that when you add your name to an online petition, it ends up becoming one on a list of signatures on a PDF document which is e-mailed to the target. When the target receives the email- if they even open attachments, much less ones that are named as a petition- all they have to do is delete it as easily as they do any other email. All of the campaigning, emailing, asking others to sign it, the 'cross-posting'- all is gone in an instant. This is the case with Care2's Petitionsite as well as most other sites centered around petition signing. If you use one of the rare few sites that utilize an email program in conjunction with the petitions, then each signature gets sent out as an individual email with that person's name on it. So 100 signatures means 100 emails to the target with the same message but different signatures. Much more effective indeed, but one problem persists: they are still spelled wrong and do not make any sense most of the time. If a public official gets a one paragraph email which is vague and cites no supporting data, it will only aggravate them to say the least. If only sites like Change.org had spell check and a grammar tool. Not to mention a rule that each one has to have at least 3 sources.

Unfortunately Change and the few sites that are starting to copy it have their own agendas. Change has an obvious fascination with gay rights, not to mention their constant stream of articles about the vague concept of "human trafficking". Human trafficking means what exactly? Whatever you can imagine it to mean, Buddy, because it never really says. Hookers that are under 18, in India, who may just want a better job if you look into their big eyes but we never asked them really...? The incessant, vague, imagine-as-you-go concept of "trafficked" humans and the phantom sister cause of "sex slaves" is a core cause on that site and others like it. And the animal activists eat it up, hook line and sinker. They hate nearly all fellow humans, but feel sorry for these 'abused' humans. I had three petitions on Change that were active for a long time, and when their time ran out I quit that site so no one would think I am gay, among other reasons.

So the people who sympathize with animals get onto the net and look up as many horrors as they can that have occurred around the world. They then swing into action: clicking their names onto online petitions- which will tell them so-and-so's! If enough people sign their names onto it, a public official just may say "gee, a lot of people support this action- I better do it or I will lose my position!". As if public opinion ever mattered to government officials before...

Even more absurd than clicking on petitions is the clicking to support causes. Every time you click on this site, we will donate one ounce of dog food to a certain shelter... Each click saves 2 square feet of rainforest... And each click gives the activists one calorie of exercise so their fingers will stay slim. Yup- the ever-present Clicksalot Armchair Warrior: the slacktivist.

N p holmes, wikimedia commons

...perhaps the intl. symbol for slacktivists should be a crow CAWing; maybe a petition should be started to bring this idea about...

Over 90% of animal advocates, by my estimation, are nothing more than slacktivists. People too lazy or scared to really help animals or other causes are slacktivists: slackers who pretend to be activists, but not wanting to get out of their chairs and go outdoors to help animals for real. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the so-called animal rights movement is nothing more than an army of slacktivists: click-click-clicking away to help animals (at least, in their minds).

So what is a real activist; what do they do? First, they get out of their chairs/ their house. They then stop animal cruelty, abuse, and neglect wherever they can. This begins in their own neighborhoods and extends to their entire towns, and as much as they can into the county and the nearest state parks, and so on. People who like animals are everywhere, and if they would all start helping them at home and fan out, their presence would become ubiquitous. They then need to act brave and stand up to animal abusers twice their size. They should physically save animals from death and abuse by any means necessary. I would not encourage people to act upon the suggestions that sites like 'huntsab dot org' recommend, but it shows how a thinking true activist can really help animals. While the slacktivists click on their silly petitions, real activists get cats and dogs neutered and spayed- any intact ones they find, if their owners approve or not. Real activists get their walking sticks caught in leghold traps. Real activists educate people about the protein myth and convert carnivores to vegans by example.

In the meantime, the animal rights community has its own fads and p.c. campaigns. For example, they viciously support pit bulls as friendly loving pets that deserve special rights and so on. The facts that these dogs are a fighting breed with scissoring jaw bones, and that they have a propensity to attack kids without warning, is conveniently ignored. These are dogs and they have been known to be nice to kids. Just like pythons, tigers, and piranhas. Eventually the instincts set in and they attack. But we won't think about pit bulls, because we are ARA's. Simultaneously, the animal folks lay a blanket of scorn over the people who say the exact same thing about wild cats such as tigers, lions, and even servals. Wild cats are too unpredictable and dangerous, and should never be kept as pets, they say. But wild or fighting breed dogs- well, that's okay. Just because. Because they are hypocrites.

I personally feel that wild cats should never be kept as pets nor bred, and by the same token, neither should wild dogs or fighting breed dogs. All pit bulls, chows, rotweillers, akitas, wolves, dingos, hyenas and certain other breeds should be banned. As should all tigers, lions, cheetahs, and other wild cats. Not to mention all primates and other dangerous pets. You can actually buy cobras, coral snakes, cottonmouths, copperheads, rattlesnakes, and even poison dart frogs online. The Amish also like to hold auctions of exotic animals in their areas. Allowing a geek to stroke his own ego by owning these exotic and deadly pets should be second fiddle to public safety.

As long as the animal activists support these geeks with their poisonous critters and the insecure wannabe gangsters who trot around their vicious pets, then there will be a market for them. The animals will live miserable lives in tiny enclosures, and the public will be at risk from these hazardous animals that should be living only in the wild. But sympathy for the animals should not outweigh the common sense of the humans who sit in judgment over them.

In the meantime, "cross-posting", forwarding "far and wide", and writing of particular abuse cases on social sites is nothing more than preaching to the choir. While creating atmospheric pollution by the way. The blatant laziness disgusts me. If only all of these millions of so-called activists would get off of their asses, leave their homes, and DO something- then animals just may have a chance.

related posts on this site: 
good example of an ARA here.
Tony the Tiger case analysis
Animal Welfare Advocates

Pit bulls

(c) james platt

Of Fatsos and Toothpicks...

I, for one, grow tired of people trying to tell each other what to look like. It seems like the fat vs. skinny feud will never end. The fat people keep whining about the skinny people being sickly looking, and the skinny people keep up an ongoing discrimination campaign against the fat population. Why keep fighting over this? Everyone should worry about their own weight- no one else's.

I am not skinny, and I am not very fat. I am stalky, as in naturally muscular. Now that I am 40 I have developed a gut, but not as big as the guys that appear pregnant. I estimate that I could stand to lose 30 pounds, as I weigh 240. I already eat as healthy as I can afford, and have been exercising more lately. So when I get to it I will reach my ideal weight. In the meantime, does any skinny person have any business making fun of me or looking down upon me?

They certainly do it, and I can only imagine how the very big people feel. People who are overweight are not generally pigs. I say generally because some are. I have noticed that some enormous people in the grocery store fill their carts with candy, donuts, and pop. The candy aisle always seems to be full of fat people too. I also noticed when I was a Walmart door greeter that many of the larger people have no trouble walking into the store, but they demand an electric scooter to shop in. Most customers needed them; some really didn't. The people that didn't need them though did not bother me. It is their business, and I do not care how much they weigh or if they want the exercise of walking the store or not. It wasn't my body to worry about. When I was a convenience store cashier I sold addictive, cancer-causing drugs (tobacco) to people. When I was a bagger I handled and bagged meat packages without comment, knowing it was going to clog their arteries and give them cancer. I did my job and did not waste my energy judging people.

Just the same, I didn't dwell on the validity of anyone's claim to need a scooter. I listened to several people's stories of how the other Walmart in town refused to let them use one if the door greeter there didn't think they appeared handicapped enough. One man was refused one at the other store, came to mine, and I gave him one without question. Then he told me about his knee replacement surgery. I don't have X-ray vision so I did not judge, unlike my counterpart at the other store. I gave them out to all who asked....

The skinny persons' concept of overweight people being lazy sugar addicts is not always true, though they seem to think so. A few really do have thyroid problems, though I really think most use that as an excuse. Some have handicaps that prevent them from getting exercise, such as arthritic knees, emphysema, or very old age. Who am I, or who are you, to assess, judge, or question anyone else's medical condition? If they are that overweight because of sheer laziness, then are you going to pay a shrink to help them? I didn't think so.

The skinnies need to stop being so arrogant and leave the bigger people alone; let them be happy. By the same token- and anything less would be simple hypocrisy- the fat people need to stop haranguing the skinny ones. They can barely conceal their envy when they insult slim, pretty girls or feign concern over a model's health.

Slenderness is healthy and natural. We aren't cave people anymore and do not need to store up fat for the poor hunting and gathering over the winter months. There is no need for excess stores of body fat. We get energy from our food, and the fat is burned off when we exceed that and exercise too much, or do not eat enough. Have you ever seen a skinny person complain that they were starving? Of course some are, including American children in Appalachia and other rural areas mostly. But I am talking about happy, healthy people who are simply not overweight at all. No fat, small clothes sizes, attractive, energetic: the envy of the fat crowd.

Have you ever heard of a model collapsing from lack of fat stores to use for energy? What exactly is so sick about her, why is she so disgusting and unhealthy; a bad role model even? Because you can see she is beautiful, successful, happy, full of energy, and gets paid to stand in front of a camera. Must be rough...and all you have to do is go on that newest fad diet right? (See my diet plan in sidebar). In the meantime it is envy, pure and simple.

Anyone who has perused the pro-anorexia websites can see that most of the people on there are quite healthy looking and attractive. Anorexia is not eating much to stay slim, bulimia is eating and then vomiting on purpose to stay slim. I for one have never heard of a pro-bulimia site. They do have problems with what you could call acid reflux city. That is a problem, maybe even a mental problem as well. But the anorexics, they are just eating less to start with. If they overdo it, well, it is no worse than a fat person overdoing it and clogging their arteries to induce a heart attack.

I do not promote anorexia, but I am saying it is not as ghastly as fat people claim. The politically correct vilification of them combined with the politically correct disgust and shunning of fat people combines to make for an interesting situation. Very few people are left in the middle, which leaves most people openly hating one another based upon size difference.

Sounds like an evil social experiment. Maybe the CIA started all this nonsense...

(c) james platt

How's the Weather? Who Cares.

This society seems to delight in the indulgence of mass stupidity. How long has it been since you heard an urban myth? No more than a week I am sure. Besides those, how many prevalent ideas are outlandish bullshit? Hard to say, but most would be my guess. For example: communists stand in bread lines, Iraq 'did' 9/11, the US govt. prints money, the sun is a nuclear fireball, etc.

The one that annoys me most frequently is when someone refers to their state's weather as unique:
"That's a Georgia storm for you!"
"Here in Iowa the weather changes every five minutes!"
"It's a New York winter."
Ad nauseum.

It seems that everyone in the Midwest, each state individually, says the same thing about their home state: that their weather changes frequently (daily, every 5 minutes, whatever). So what is going on in Nebraska while something else is going on in Iowa and something else in Kansas and something else in Missouri? All of their residents claim to have unique, ever-changing weather.

But I beg to differ. A quick glance at a radar map will show that all of those states encounter the same weather, sometimes simultaneously/ sometimes a few days apart. This is because of the fronts that are longer than the states are tall generally, and move as one unit across them. Recently I seen a line of storms that stretched from Texas to Canada. Many states were affected. How did the unique-weather people explain that one?

After all, the clouds are conscious and can tell from up there where the state lines are somehow. They stop at the borders and act differently after crossing them. This keeps a Georgia storm a Georgia storm, and makes Iowa weather uniquely patterned a little different than the Nebraska weather. It all makes sense. As much sense as this drawing:


While certain regions have slightly different weather due to topography, there is no state that has its own weather patterns, except perhaps Hawaii and Alaska as they are so far away from the mainland.

I suspect that the unique-state weather people are lame-brains who want to make it sound like their place of residence is a unique wonderland of rough conditions, but they deal with it. Just like the remains of a coon someone found on a beach became "the Montauk Monster".

Give me a break.

(c) james platt