Asking For It

Here we go again:

A Belgian sports journalist has sparked fury after making a crude comment about a young reporter’s top on Twitter. Sven Spoormakers posted a picture of Belén Mendiguren interviewing cyclists during a race in Argentina, adding the caption: ‘Is it cold in Argentina?’.
The comment prompted a backlash from fellow journalists who took aim at the Belgian for ‘objectifying’ the young reporter. Spoormakers, a former junior cycling champion, initially defended his comment but later backed down and admitted it was ‘offensive to a lot of people’.

Here’s a pic of the “reporter” in question:

I remember our band’s favorite question when faced with an outfit like this:  “Is it cold, or are you just pleased to see me?”

A more pertinent question would be this:  “Why did you put that top on this morning?”  And don’t give me that “It’s so hot!”  bullshit;  she wore it to attract the attention of the men she wanted to interview, and any other reason is a fucking lie.

Sorry, love;  if the goods aren’t to be looked at, don’t put them in the window.  And as for all the other scolds:  FOAD, and take your “fury” with you.

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.

Unnecessary

A couple of Readers (or maybe their wives) have sent me emails concerning last Saturday’s post, which pictured the interior of a 1950s-era Mercedes 300S.  To combine and paraphrase their messages:  “O no Kim, that old car looks dreadfully unsafe!”

Whereupon I publish this  response (courtesy of Mr. Free Market):

Would Flogging Be Appropriate?

Try this bullshit:

An Iowa middle school principal has apologized for being “overly strict” after he confiscated pizzas that were delivered to a class for an end-of-the-year party over fears that it could make students from other classes feel left out.

The principal apologized for his actions in a note to parents later that day, writing that he overreacted in an attempt to be fair to all students.
“That applies to everything from the chances they have to learn in the classroom to rewards and recognitions by our teachers and staff.”

I know what I would have learned from this particular classroom:  authority figures suck.

And by the way, if you read the whole thing (after first moving guns and/or throwable objects out of reach), you’ll see that the self-righteous prick’s “apology” was no such thing.  And:

The situation was made right Friday after Mr. Hoffman said he threw another pizza party for the class and several local businesses also volunteered to donate pizzas for the school’s nearly 750 students.

…thus negating all the incentive for performance — if everyone gets a prize, why bother trying harder?  (No doubt that’s  the lesson they’re trying to teach the kids.)

As His Excellency The Instapundit says so often:  putting kids into the public school system is no less than child abuse.

Wrong Direction

Now there’s this little trinket:

Amazon is selling a bracelet that gives you an electric SHOCK you when you eat too much fast food, bite your nails or spend too much time on the internet

Hmmm… I have an idea:  how about selling one of these little behavior-modification devices which is triggered when you’re spending too much time browsing the merchandise at amazon.com? 

No?

Then fuck off and die, you corporate fucking nanny pricks.  And take your little Stasi girlfriend Alexa with you to the crematorium.

Down The Toilet

Every so often I get a Red Curtain Of Blood (RCOB) descending over my eyes that is so massive and so intense that I frighten small AND large children.  Well, it’s a damn good thing that there were no children around when I read this  little suggestion:

Janet Street-Porter argues that Notre-Dame shouldn’t be rebuilt… – and that the money should go to ‘more worthy causes’

And what, exactly, are these “worthy causes” of which she speaks?  You know  what they are, but let her tell you herself:

‘If you go less than 10 miles to the suburbs in Paris, large parts – they’ve had some money poured into them but it’s a problem the government can’t solve.
‘People are living in poverty, illegally, there’s drug dealing, gang warfare, and parts of Paris that the police won’t go to.
‘So where are these billionaires, why aren’t they coughing up for that? What about all the poor people in Calais? Where’s all the money to help them?’

Right there is the liberal mindset.   After admitting that Gummint has poured money — not “some”, by the way, but countless millions — and the problem is still insoluble, Our Girl Janet wants wealthy individuals to pour still MOAR MONEY (their own money, duh) into the festering garbage dumps at Calais and the banlieus  surrounding Paris, despite the repeated failure of state money to solve the problems.

Trotskyist bitch.  Take from the rich, and pour it down a shithole, just so you  can feel better that Something Has Been Done.  Marxism in a nutshell:  intentions are more important than outcomes.

And by the way, Janet, you rancid old tart, it’s not about the money, nor even about the French:  it’s about a priceless part of Western heritage and culture (I know, all the stuff that Marxists hate).  And the truth of my statement is that it’s not only the French who visit Notre-Dame Cathedral in their millions each year, but people from all over the world.  Good grief, when I was there a few years ago, I never heard a single word of French spoken among the teeming crowds who were braving a bitterly cold and rainy day to visit the place.

And good for the French billionaires who’ve stepped up to the (collection) plate and pledged hundreds of millions of dollars towards the rebuild.  Civic spirit, generosity, and respect for a nation’s heritage and culture are always to be commended

Lastly, I should also point out that were it not for France’s iniquitous and punitive income- and wealth taxes, said billionaires would have been able to give even more  of their own money towards the project.  But let’s not quibble about a few hundred million here or there, right?