15 Items or Less

Posted by Reid at 6:54 p.m.

What the fuck is so hard to understand? Did you not learn to count? I see you are wearing the school's sweatpants, so this can indicate one of two things to me: you are a sibling of someone slightly more intelligent or university really is letting everyone in these days. My guess is the latter. I suppose there is one more probable explanation besides you being a complete fucktard. You could be a self-centered cunt.

But what? There is more than one of your kind? Of four express isles at Safeway, how does each one have someone with more than 15 items?

15 is far too many, in my opinion. I think it should be 9. Or, 5 even. Maybe we could have one isle 5, one isle 9, and two isles 15. I think that would make a great compromise between the word "express" and efficiency in terms of use of personnel. I also think that tills at such stations should count how many items there are and when it gets to the limit you are told to either go put back what hasn't been scanned, or take you stuff to another line. That way, we are actually enforcing the rules that have been set out for efficiency.

Now I know, it's a few minutes extra that I stand in line to buy my lettuce and carrots, what's the big deal? Really, it's not the time. It's the emergence of the worst "me" generation in history that chokes me and the lack of respect people have for other people.

A fine example of this is a survey that was conducted in the 50s and then again a few years ago. The study was looking at prestige associated with occupations. People were asked to give a score out of 100 for the prestige of each job listed. Doctor sits at the top of the 50s and the 00s list, while shoe shiner sits at the bottom of both. The interesting part wasn't the position of the jobs that was interesting, but the actual score assigned. In the 1950s, being a doctor was given a score of 97 while shoe shiner was given a score of 84. The 00s had the doctor rated as 88 while the shoe shiner was at 46.

I don't think that the change score that the shoe shiner profession received is all that surprising (I don't even know a shoe shiner these days, but my parents probably know the person from their town that shined shoes). I think the most interesting thing is the fall in the perception of doctors' prestige and the relatively high score of shoe shiners in the 1950s. Why has a scale of prestige dropped so much? Why did people used to think that shining shoes was almost as prestigious of a job as we now find being a doctor, which currently tops the list? I think it's due to a lack of respect for the fellow man (and women).

[side topic quickly: why is it an issue to call general persons "man"? In French, "ils" could mean group of boys or a group of boys or girls. I don't struggle with that concept, nor should I struggle with the word man having dual meaning in context as either a single man or a mixture of man and woman. At no point has "man" ever stood for solely the female gender, just like in the romance languages. "Elles" is specifically a group of all girls. I just don't understand why people get their panties in a knot over it.]

The respect for other people is replaced by egocentric ideas of superiority. Where is one's modesty these days? I know I am preaching to the choir with those few that read this blog, but there are a lot of people that are head-down self-centered fucktards. Take, for example, anyone who wants to get into medicine.

Medicine requires an immense amount of volunteering to get an interview. Often one or two groups isn't enough. Of course, med hopefuls know this and sign up for all sorts of groups and causes. Most of them never put in the time required to make it a success (since they've joined so many). I can think of numerous examples of people that have signed up for more than 10 groups around campus. One particular example is young man currently in medicine at Queens. He had all sorts of volunteering/extracurricular "experience" but the one he was most involved in was the "Triathlon Club". Sure, it's a club, you don't have to do everything. He went once a week to swim. Once a fucking week. Yeah, that's going to show well if/when you race with the club. I am sure they are happy to have you and your lazy ass. This is the same person that told me my guitar sucked because of its backing but it turns out his chord repertoire was limited to G, C, A, and E chords. Considering how much time he spent "practicing" I am sure it went on his med application. Could he play? No better than I can with my feet (no, seriously. I can play a G, E and A with my feet).

What's my point with all this? Here's a person so blinded by their desire to do medicine, that they are letting all sorts of groups down. He has a perception of greatness in everything he does, even if it's not up to much compared to others around him. If anyone asks you about getting into medicine, you can tell them that it's not about being smart, giving, or achievement. It's about fucking as many people in the ass, stomping on as many feelings as you can, and putting yourself as the most important thing.

Why is it such a "me" generation? Well, we come from a time when our parents gave us all sorts of things growing up, we have the internet so we can do what we want when we want, and we are told that we are the most important person. Maybe this could be blamed for that decrease in love these days. People can say they love each other, and I guess it's how you define it. My definition is long, but one of the requirements is selflessness. When in love, you are willing to give up parts of your life to help the other person succeed in theirs. Parents, in the act of loving their children, often give up social events, time, hobbies and money for their children. If a child needs to move somewhere for school, sports, or surgery, the parents will often move the whole family. These days, we are told not to pick up and move for people. We shouldn't "chase" people. We aren't suppose to pick a school based on being closer to someone, we aren't suppose to pick a career path based on wanting to spend time with a single person. We can, but our parents and friends frown upon it. There will always be a "what you could have done" hanging over your head. That's not what life, love and respect are all about.

We should respect people who have found more in their life than just themselves. There are more feelings associated with life than being a high achieving, wealthy, well respected and a powerful member of society, and yet I feel that those are the only things that most people want these days. I've reached a point where I know I probably won't do anything spectacular or influential in my life (even though it'd be cool to do). I'm going to be an average tax payer that probably has a nice little suburban family that enjoys summer time BBQing and a beer in the sunshine. I hope to have a few good friends (and obviously a wife, with the kids and all), and some enjoyable hobbies. I hope I can give up on dreams and be completely happy with my life and the people around me. I hope I can go to the grocery store and not stand in the express isle behind someone with 23 fucking items.

New Fad: Idiocy!

Posted by Johnny at 4:15 p.m.

Since 1998 [source], fathers and daughters have been having galas dedicated to "celebrat[ing] the father-daughter relationship" in the mid- and south-western US. They call them "Purity Balls" because the daughters pledge pre-marital chastity to ease their worried fathers' minds.

To me, this is just as creepy as incest and probably worse for society because it's creating taboos instead of breaking them. The Good Christian Father™ wants to control his Precious Little Angel™ and prevent her from the Dangers of Sex™ until he can transfer ownership of her to Some Lucky Guy™ who will whisk her away to his heavenly kingdom and fuck her in the missionary position once per year for five years for the sole purpose of procreation (please, God, give them boys!).

Although sex does require a certain level of maturity, both for emotional stability and physical security, this is exactly the wrong way to go about protecting your children from the actual dangers of sex. You see, sex education requires education about sex in order to succeed.

The popularity of the balls in the United States, especially among evangelical Christians, mirrors the Bush administration's support of abstinence education in US schools. The government's funding for such initiatives has more than doubled in recent years to 206 million dollars.

Abstinence education is not the same as sexual education. Telling people not to have sex winds up cultivating a thick taboo around the act, making it even more irresistible to daddy's Precious Little Whore and Some Unlucky Guy, neither of whom has the knowledge required for practising safe sex. You may say, "Johnny, what you say makes sense, but you're just hypothesizing!" Au contraire, mon cherie:

One study conducted by researchers at the universities of Columbia and Yale found that 88 percent of pledgers wind up having sex before marriage.

"Unfortunately these young people tend, once they start to have sex, to have more partners in a shorter period of time and to use contraception much less than their non-pledging peers," said Debra Hauser, executive vice president at Advocates for Youth, a Washington-based non-profit organization.

Ha! Evidence!

So, if 88 percent of people who have pledged not to have sex before marriage are going to break that pledge, what's the point? You might as well teach them about STDs, STIs, condoms, birth control, pregnancy, pap tests, hygiene, etc. so that they don't start popping out Little Whores and Unlucky Guys of their own and spreading the Clap around the Baptist Youth Choir. The other 12 percent were either too ugly or too asexual to begin with, so they probably didn't need the abstinence education.

In conclusion, allow me to present the worst corporate logo ever:

PS: NEW POST. Jesus Christ, people.

Scooter Libby & Losers

Posted by Johnny at 9:42 a.m.

Whether or not Bubba is Scooter's cell mate, whoever has that bank account is a genius.

Also, the following people are losers: Anyone who refers to Rod Stewart as "Rockin' Rod". That is all.