Evolution

One-time F1 champion driver Kimi Raikonnen is famously bullshit-free;  while driving for Ferrari a few years back, he got irritated by the constant stream of advice and orders coming over the radio from the pit wall team, and uttered the immortal line:  “Leave me alone;  I know what I’m doing.”   He finished on the podium, driving a car that was truthfully speaking nowhere near the level of his competitors’.

And he’s back in the headlines today, posting this pic:

For those not in the know, that’s one-time F1 champion James Hunt in characteristic pose (missing only a pit bunny on his errr  arm to make it completely accurate), while on the right is Mr. Woke, Lewis Hamilton.

Now the Hamilton fanbois are going to point out that whereas Hunt and Raikonnen only won the F1 championship once each, Our Lewis has won it six times.   (In their defense:  Hunt and Raikonnen won their respective championships driving cars that were charitably called “competitive” at the time, whereas Hamilton is driving a Mercedes which has outstripped all other cars by a wide margin, for the past four or five years at least.)

Whatever.  Raikonnen is in the right, while Hamilton is left — far Left, with his BLM-kneeling and wokey T-shirts.

I wish Hunt were alive today:  he’d piss all over that T-shirt, probably while Hamilton was still wearing it.

Killjoys

“I know:  let’s put in policies which outlaw any kind of fun, lest the Terminally Sensitive be offended in any way.”

That’s the thinking behind this move, apparently:

Oxford University has cracked down on ‘vicars and tarts’ and ‘pimps and hoes’ parties in case they are deemed offensive to non-binary students.

The prestigious university body said they could be deemed ‘problematic’ and may stereotype men or women in a highly objectified or sexualised role.

Uhhh I thought that was the whole point of the thing, but nemmind.

I cannot count the number of times I’ve been to costume (“fancy dress”) parties of the kind mentioned above.  On one occasion, I recall that a “Pimps ‘n Prostitutes” party competition was won by a couple dressed as a priest and a nun, with second place going to a girl who wore her former — and very posh — private girls’ school uniform for the occasion (see below for an example).  (That she was by then in her 30s made for quite an accomplishment, by the way;  and no, it hadn’t been altered.)

Never mind;  students are endlessly inventive in their schemes to outrage the university authorities, and I’m confident that the Oxonians will come up with something good.  (If not, and they just cower in the face of such stupidity, we’re all doomed.)


Incidentally, the pic above is of the Britpop group Girls Aloud.  Here they are in another version of the uniform thing:

Just trying to help my Murkin Readers understand this whole “school uniform” thing.  That’s me:  Mr. Helpful.

Social Dictionary

Ambrose Bierce would heartily approve of this iteration of his own Devil’s Dictionary.  A sample:

* “OK, Boomer” – popular, reflexive and mentally-flabby retort of retarded children who cannot formulate a proper or logical response to an argument, question or premise. A sign of belonging to a group known collectively as “Millennials” whose main attributes include oversized thumbs, limited intelligence, hysteria, extensive knowledge of modern technology but inability to use a rotary phone, can opener or rake, hair-trigger cry reflex, navel gazing, overly-high self-value acquired through a program of low expectations, and a belief that everyone gives a flying fuck about what they’re eating at any given moment.

Much more goodness at the first link above.  (Oh, and if you don’t have a copy of Bierce’s Dictionary, hie thee to the second  link and remedy that unpardonable omission immediately.  For only 99c on Kindle… please.)

Denial Of Service

Sure, let’s have some snowflake college-dropout coffee jockeys refuse to serve their company’s overpriced shit beverage — again — and when CoffeeMegaCorp Inc. discovers the transgression, they go all “failure of training” and “re-education / retraining” handwringing, and make some token effort at rapprochement.

Here are a couple of my thoughts on the matter.

  • Refusing to serve people in uniform — be it police, armed forces or firemen, whatever — is not a “failure of training”.  In this case, it is a conscious and complete rejection of one of society’s primary institutions (to protect society’s members from the predations of others, or the apprehension and removal of said predators from society).  That such snowflakes have come to consider law enforcement as “The Enemy” and therefore worthy of such shunning is a topic for another time.
  • As I’ve said before, this bullshit does not happen in isolation.  Clearly, the refuseniks feel that they can get away with this behavior — by undergoing lip-service token “retraining” — and at some point, one has to think that CoffeeMegaCorp. is somehow complicit in this disgusting activity, whether by corporate culture, or hiring practices, over-accommodation, or perceived weakness (by its employees).

Here’s what I want to see.  Denial of service to police officers by an establishment should result in an immediate response from the police chief that his police force will no longer respond to distress calls or service calls from any or all  of the corporation’s branches — in other words, if one employee at a branch of Starbucks does this again, then the police will in essence deny police service to all  the Starbucks outlets in their jurisdiction.  (The collectivist nature of this reaction should appeal to or at least be understood by those liberal/socialist cocksuckers known as Starbucks executive management, after all.)

And if (as in the above) service is not denied but simply delayed, then the police chief should institute a policy that their response to all distress calls from Starbucks stores will be delayed, not by an equivalent period of time, but one ten times longer — i.e. if a deputy has to wait six minutes for service, then police response to an emergency will take at least an hour to arrive.

And should Starbucks file suit against the police force for this reaction, let them drag this through the court system, at their peril.

If Starbucks employees want to set themselves apart from society’s institutions (for reasons I’m not interested in enumerating), then they should be denied the protection of those institutions, permanently.  These assholes — employees and employers both — need to understand the true consequences of their actions.

And finally, if Starbucks management tries to kiss ass, e.g. “We are deeply sorry and reached out to apologize directly to them”, the police chief’s response should be to tell them to fuck off and die — in other words, no apology will suffice.

In Cold War terms, this attitude is called “massive retaliation” — where the response is actually far out of proportion to the initial incident.

And we need a lot more of this, to overcome the spoiled, self-entitlement and virtue-signaling attitude of people who are, in the final analysis, no more than flunkies (despite the high-sounding and pretentious titles created by Starbucks).

Finally, the police chief should reach out to other coffee shops in the area and negotiate a group discount for his deputies and their families  at those establishments.  If Starbucks doesn’t appreciate his officers’ business, the police officers should go where it is.

Fuck these woke shitbrains, all of them.  I’m sick of their bullshit.

Innuendo, Death Of

The Brit version of our “dollar stores” (everything for a dollar) is named “Poundland”, and every year they spice up their Christmas commercials with something a little more daring.  This year was no exception:

Needless to say, the Perpetually Offended raced to the barricades, and the usual bullshit followed.

Now it’s my turn to be offended.  I happen to love using sexual banter, innuendo and double entendre  in my everyday speech.  I think sex is the spice of life, it’s certainly the spice of conversation, and as long as you don’t get crude and crass about it, it serves as both mental gymnastics and flirting.

I remember once having lunch with a coworker who happened to be an extraordinarily-beautiful woman — I mean, imagine a face like Monroe and a body like vintage Nigella, and you’re getting close.  As it happened, we decided to have dessert, and ordered:  she a strawberry sundae and I, a banana split.  When the dishes arrived, we both made a face of distaste.

“What’s wrong?” I asked.
She gestured at the maraschino sitting atop the sundae, and said, “I hate cherries.”  Then she asked, “And what’s wrong with yours?”
I pointed at the chopped nuts scattered all over the banana split, and said, “Ugh.”  (I hate mixing crunchy with soft textures in my food.)
Then I said, “Well, I’ll tell you what we can do.”
“What?”
“If you eat my nuts, I’ll pop your cherry.”

She laughed till the tears ran down her cheeks, then threw the cherry at me, still laughing.

I should point out that this incident took place in the early 1980s, when one could say stuff like this and not get arrested for aggravated patriarchy or whatever they call it these days.  Nowadays, of course, she’d complain to HR and I’d get crucified, lose my job and never be able to find work again.

I miss the old days.  God, I miss the old days.

Oh, and as for the story which introduced this post:  as much as I enjoy the occasional finger, I don’t really care much for the Cadbury’s version.

Quote Of The Day

From Diogenes:

“It was especially enlightening to later hear a panel of four millennial black women, three of whom graduated from Ivy League schools, the fourth from USC, drone on about inequality and rampant racism in our collective capitalist system, full of white supremacy.”

Read the rest.  It’s about CNN.