Too many people eating too much meat?
The Stream has the most hilarious, but eminently practical, article “There Aren’t as Many People as a Lot of Environmentalists Think: Some Elementary Calculations” in which is demonstrated with scientific precision (1) how big a bag we’d need to hold every person’s blood, (2) how big a hole we’d have to dig to bury the bodies, and (3) how cruelty is rife in the animal kingdom because so many animals eat meat and what to do about it.
This article is, of course, shows the effect of environmental policy taken to its natural extreme.
…So far, so good. But, we’re not quite done. Environmental activists don’t like people eating meat. This is why you see back-of-the-envelope calculations to show how many cows or pigs the average cowboy chows down over a year or a lifetime. The total is meant to discourage you. Funny thing about these mathematical exercises: they’re always done for men and not beasts.
Now meat-eating beasts outnumber men by scads and scads. I don’t have an exact figure, but a walk in the woods or a glance at the National Geographic channel is enough to confirm the fact that animals that eat other animals eat more meat than men do. Some of these animals even eat us! Never mind that. Tautologically, meat-eating beasts eat meat, which is, as environmentalists assume, bad. So we need to quantify just how much adverse influence non-human meat-eating animals have.
Sexual normality is now abnormal
Best way to introduce this is via the headline, inspired by a BBC television show: “Transgender girl says she is rejected by straight guys for ‘having male parts’“. Alternatively, it could have read, “Mentally disturbed young man appropriately rejected by the sane.”
The boys, who were originally attracted to Claire, did not call after finding out that she is trans.
“That’s it, silence,” says Claire. “Like nothing from them again.”…
She says: “In a lot of ways, I don’t like telling a guy. Once I tell him all respect goes out of the window.
“Straight guys just can’t get over you having the male parts…”
This sad drama is being picked up everywhere. Another headline: “Unlucky-in-love transgender woman reveals she’s rejected by straight men because she still has ‘male parts’ – despite being chatted up all the time.”
In that article, the young man is quoted as saying, “I had to shave twice a day. I would never wish for a woman to go through this.” Of course, women don’t normally have to go through this (except in rare cases), but men who pretend to be women do.
These stories paint this young man as the aggrieved party, as if he deserves pity not for his unfortunate affliction (and surely irresponsible mother), but because he was rejected by sexually normal men. In turn, it is the sexually normal men who are the bad guys in the story. They will not freely give their Anthony-Kenedy-esque wuv. It is they who are hurtful, cold-blooded, vicious.
I’m accepting congratulations for predicting this very thing in the year leading up to gmarriage. Any encomium will do.
Does this not remind you of something? Yes! Just two months ago I wrote: “This Week In Doom: Rejecting Sex With HIV+ Is Now Discrimination“.
Throughout these articles, those with HIV are painted as harmless victims suffering unwarranted, unreasonable discrimination. Not only is their HIV not their fault, but if you refuse to engage in immoral acts with those who have HIV, it is you who is at fault. You are the one with the problem.
As far as the current story goes, there is some good news. “I’m an abomination, that’s what my dad told me I was.” Harsh words, yes, but not inaccurate. Do not forget that it was this man’s free choice to mutilate his body (with the connivance of the medically trained, and albeit not yet irreversibly). That we are unwilling to speak the truth is why we are doomed.
Set your DVRs now: “Young, Trans and Looking for Love airs on Monday 23 November at 9pm on BBC.” I remind the reader the BBC is no small source. The mainstreaming of casting the normal as abnormal is accelerating.
Prediction: the young man in this pseudo-documentary will find a male lover as a result of his publicity. This unlucky fellow (the new lover) will be feted and praised in many follow up stories. He will be said to be enlightened, a hero of equality. That he is in fact a Charlie Sheen wannabe will not be noticed. Anybody want to bet against me?