Gun Crime in Chicago and Knife Crime in Britain have same Root Cause

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 16th, 2014

Week in Review

Chicago is adrift in a sea of blood.  Despite their strict gun laws there is an epidemic of gun violence in the city.  And the reason for this, say those on the left, is the availability of guns elsewhere.  Guns that are brought into Chicago and get into the hands of innocent young kids.  Forcing them to leave their peace-loving ways.  That’s the problem.  Get rid of all the guns and those kids will stay peace-loving and as pure as the wind driven snow.  For without guns there can be no violence.  Because what person would never think about picking up a knife (see Impose tougher sentences for knife crimes, says top judge by David Barrett posted 4/16/2014 on The Telegraph)?

The most senior judge in England and Wales has called on magistrates to impose tougher sentences for youths who carry knives.

Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, the Lord Chief Justice, said more severe punishments could help cut the “prevalence” of such crimes.

In a ruling at the Court of Appeal in London, Lord Thomas said: “Given the prevalence of knife crime among young persons, the youth court must keep a very sharp focus, if necessary through the use of more severe sentences, on preventing further offending by anyone apprehended for carrying a knife in a public place and to securing a reduction in the carrying of knives.”

Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, has previously expressed his concern about knife criminals being handed cautions and other non-custodial punishments.

Mr Grayling brought in new measures in December 2012 which were designed to impose mandatory jail sentences on anyone who uses a knife or offensive weapon to threaten and endanger others.

Britain has very strict gun laws.  It’s like Chicago writ large.  So people can’t go to a part of Britain where there are lax gun laws.  Buy guns.  And taking them to another place in Britain that has strict gun laws.  Even their police don’t carry guns while walking a beat.  They do, however, have units that carry guns.  In response to rising gun crime.  But it’s the knife crime that Britain is struggling with.  And much of the knife violence in Britain is due to the same cause of the gun violence in Chicago.  Gangs.

Is knife violence preferred over gun violence?  Perhaps.  No doubt it is more difficult to stab an innocent bystander in a ‘drive-by’ stabbing.  But because knives are so easy to get almost any gang member can carry a knife.  And anyone with mental health issues can easily pick one up in most any kitchen.  And cause harm.  As in Calgary and Regina, Canada.  And in Murrysville, Pennsylvania.

It’s not the guns or the knives that are causing people to harm others.  These people are just determined to cause harm.  You can try to take away every conceivable weapon but if they want to cause harm they will find a way to cause harm.  Which is what we should be doing.  Trying to prevent them from causing harm.  Not just trying to prevent one way they can cause harm.  With guns.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Condom use falls and HIV Infections rise in South Africa

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 6th, 2014

Week in Review

The left is intolerant of so many things.  Cigarettes.  Sugary beverages.  Hamburgers.  And our lack of exercising, our insufficient consumption of fresh fruits & vegetables and our unwillingness to buy electric cars.  So they have implemented a lot of taxes, subsidies and regulations to alter our behavior.  To make us behave more ‘correctly’.  And they are always telling us what we should and what we should not do.  Except when it comes to sex and drugs.  No.  Here they pass out free birth control.  And make marijuana legal in Colorado and Washington.  Despite all of that unfiltered first, second and third-hand smoke.  Odd how these things pose no risk to us unlike drinking a large sugary beverage.

And it’s just not in the United States.  All around the world those on the left are telling their people how to live correctly.  Except, of course, when it comes to drugs.  And sex.  Because kids are going to have sex no matter what we say.  And if we tell them they shouldn’t it’s only going to make them want to have sex more.  Although it is funny that argument doesn’t hold up for cigarettes, sugary beverages, hamburgers, etc.  No.  For these they can roll up a newspaper and whack us across the nose all day long.  Figuratively, of course.  But when it comes to sex it’s more of a, “Whoa, now, let’s not say anything hasty here.  For who are we to say what is right or wrong for an individual?”  But with rising HIV infections perhaps we should be telling our sons and daughters that something bad can happen from having sex.  And they would be better off if they didn’t have so much of it before entering into a monogamous, long-term relationship.  For if we did and they did over 10% of our populations would not be infected with HIV (see Condoms rebranded in South Africa as HIV infections rise by AFP) posted 4/3/2014 on Yahoo! News).

South Africa is seeking to rebrand its free condoms to appeal to young people after a new study showed rising HIV infections and flagging contraception use, the health department said on Thursday…

South Africa has the world’s highest number of people living with HIV, a crisis that has seen millions of people placed on a vast state-sponsored treatment programme.

Around 6.4 million people — 12.2 percent of the population — were living with HIV or AIDS in 2012.

During the Eighties we didn’t know any better about HIV.  But we do now.  Even young people.  It’s why we give them free condoms.  Because of the risk of HIV (among other risks).  So it’s frustrating to see risky behavior in young people.  Especially those living in a nation with the highest number of people living with HIV.  When 12.2% of the population lives with HIV or AIDS it can’t be a secret that HIV is a serious risk.  But young people still engage in risky behavior.  Which is useful to those on the left.  For it helps them win elections.  For they are the cool party that doesn’t think drugs are all that bad.  And that a little promiscuity isn’t going to kill you.  “You’ll be fine,” they say on the left.  “As long as you don’t smoke a cigarette, drink a sugary beverage or eat a hamburger you should be able to enjoy all the sex and drugs you want to.  Because sex and drugs can’t hurt you.  Only those other things can.  Well, those things.  And global warming.  Those are the things to worry about.  Not catching HIV or AIDS.”  At least this is the message they’re giving our kids.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“Figures don’t Lie, but Liars Figure”

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 5th, 2014

Week in Review

There’s an old saying by Mark Twain that goes like this.  “Figures don’t Lie, but Liars Figure.”  Which basically means you can make statistical figures say anything you want them to say.  For example, here are two statistics that make it sound like black fathers are better parents than white fathers (see Harper’s Index posted April of 2014 pm Harpers Magazine).

Percentage of white live-in fathers who help their children with their homework daily : 28

Of black live-in fathers who do : 41

Almost half of all live-in black fathers help their children with their homework.  While only 28% of white live-in fathers do.  So black fathers are better parents than white fathers.  At least, these statistics would seem to say so.  But it’s what these statistics don’t say that will change the conclusion these two statistics appear to make.

First of all, children who receive more help with their homework will do better in school.  For their children will be doing their homework if their dad is there helping them.  So the homework is getting done.  And if children have trouble understanding something their dad is their clarifying and explaining things.  So these children are going to do better in school.  And a larger percentage of them will graduate from high school.  As students who work hard and do their homework are more likely to graduate than those who don’t.  So, do the statistics for high school graduation rates show that black live-in fathers are doing a better job helping their kids with their homework?  No.  According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics (see National public high school graduation rate at a four-decade high by Lyndsey Layton posted 1/22/2013 on The Washington Post), high school graduation rates were 83% for whites and 66.1% for blacks.

Learning abilities are the same for both blacks and whites.  So you can’t say that whites are smarter than blacks.  So is there something else that can explain the difference in graduation rates?  Yes.  The inability to make kids do their homework.  For if they’re not doing their homework they’re not progressing through high school.  And many just drop out.  But according to the statistics more black live-in fathers are helping their kids with their homework than white live-in fathers.  So how is it that blacks have a lower high school graduation rate?  Because of something the statistics don’t show.

According to Census data (see Social and Economic Characteristics of Currently Unmarried Women With a Recent Birth: 2011 posted on census.gov), the percent of out-of-wedlock births was 29.2% for whites and 67.8% for blacks.  Less than a third of white children are born out-of-wedlock.  While just over two-thirds of black children are born out-of-wedlock.  To single mothers who struggle to both work and raise their children.  Leaving them little time to help them with their homework. And because these mothers are single and working their children may be home alone.  And more likely to get into trouble.  Not do their homework.  And drop out of school.

So the higher rate of children born out-of-wedlock would explain the lower high school graduation rates for black children.  While the percentage of black live-in fathers helping their children is skewed.  For it’s only 41% of the 32.2% (100% – 67.8%) of black fathers who stayed in the home to help raise their children.  While it’s 28% of the larger 70.8% (100% – 29.2%) of white fathers who stayed home to help raise their children.  (Assuming born in-wedlock means the same as live-in father.  Of course a child could be born in-wedlock only to see his parents divorce later making his or her mother a single mother.  However, with child support and alimony payments a percentage of these single mothers would not have to work and thus be able to spend more time with their child.  So a divorced mother probably would not have to struggle as much a single mother who was never married.  Especially if the divorced parents are older when they start their families and the husband has an established career providing the financial resources that allows the divorced mother to stay at home with the children).

Crunching these numbers for 1,000 fathers you get about 131 black fathers and 779 white fathers (blacks are approximately 13.1% of the population and whites are approximately 77.9%).  Of these 131 black fathers about 42 (32.2%) are live-in.  And of these 779 white fathers about 552 (70.8%) are live-in.  Bringing us to approximately 17 (41%) black live-in fathers who help their children with their homework.  And approximately 154 (28%) white fathers who help their children with their homework.

So, if you look at the total number of live-in fathers helping their children with their homework (17 and 154) the number of white live-in fathers doing so is approximately 793% greater than black live-in fathers.  Or for every black live-in father helping his child with his or her homework there are about 9 white live-in fathers helping their children.  Which sounds like white fathers are spending more time helping their children with their homework.  Which they are because there are more white fathers than black fathers.  In a random sample of 1000 fathers there would be approximately 6 white fathers for every black father.  Based on the demographics of the population.

So we have looked at statistics in numerous ways.  Proving once again that “figures don’t lie, but liars figure.”  Or that you can make statistics say anything you want them to say.  So you should always be suspect when people use statistics to support their argument.  Because there is a lot of interpretation the number crunchers make with the data.  A lot of assumptions.  And are often a selective and subjective in their use of the data.  Especially when it’s the government uses those statistics to justify new spending, new taxes, new regulations, etc.  Because these are the people who truly figure with the numbers.  They did it in the days of Mark Twain.  And they still do it today.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

University encourages Women to be Sexually Active with Consent Kits

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 23rd, 2014

Week in Review

Hardcore feminists hate the institution of marriage.  Unless it’s same-sex marriage.  Then marriage is the greatest thing in the world.  But when it’s the union of a man and a woman that’s another story.  For all that the institution of marriage does is reduce the woman to a second-class citizen.  A piece of property.  Human property.  A cook in the kitchen.  A maid.  And a whore in the bedroom.  To serve their husbands disgusting sexual desires.  Some militant feminists have gone so far as to call sex in marriage rape.  Except for same-sex marriages, of course.  Then it’s a beautiful expression of love between two people.

To make these feminists happy all married women should deny their husbands any sexual pleasure.  They should be sexually abstinent.  They should be asexual.  So they are not a sexual object for their husbands’ depravity.  But on the other hand, if they’re single women then they should explore every part of their sexuality.  To enjoy every sexual pleasure there is no matter the social norm or taboo they break.  To objectify whatever part of their bodies to pleasure a man. Outside of marriage that’s called empowerment.  While inside a marriage it’s called rape.  Unless it’s a same-sex marriage, of course.  Feminists at a university are even helping young college women objectify, I mean, empower themselves (see Consent kits given to Vancouver students by Ada Slivinski posted 3/19/2014 on Vancouver 24 Hurs).

Bright pink boxes created by the Women’s Centre at Simon Fraser University are being distributed to spread the word about sexual consent and counter what is often termed “rape culture.”

Louise Mapleston, who represents the centre, said the initiative is about “making sure that when people have sex, they are feeling comfortable and they’re 100% excited.”

The package contains a condom, lubricant and a sexual Mad Lib, in which students can fill in the blanks of what form of sexual interaction they would like to engage in…

The Women’s Centre is run by a collective of volunteers and staff. The group self-identifies as pro-feminist, sex-positive, pro-choice, trans and intersex inclusive and anti-racist.

What form of sexual interaction they would like to engage in?  Would this work in marriage, too?  Would the sex inside of marriage not be rape if the wife filled out a sexual Mad Lib first?

Sex inside a marriage is a beautiful expression of love between two people.  Casual sex with a random person is not.  It is a physical experience only with no emotional connection.  It’s just a hookup.  Where guys can go from woman to woman depending on their tastes for the night.  The girl next door?  A cheerleader-type perhaps?  Black?  White?  Asian?  Hispanic.  So many options.  Thanks to all of those women empowering themselves.

And for the woman looking to get married and settle down to raise a family good luck.  With the hookup culture so prevalent guys can satisfy their lust and then hang out with their friends.  As the hookup culture has objectified women like nothing else.  It’s so bad that a lot of men see no need to get married.  For whenever they feel a sexual urge all they need to do is to hook up with some random woman.  Satisfy that urge.  And get back to something they enjoy.  Hanging with the guys.  As the hookup culture has made women good for only one thing to a lot of men.  And it’s not marriage.  Or even spending time with a woman in a nonsexual way.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Turning People into Potheads is Good for Colorado’s Treasury

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 15th, 2014

Week in Review

First it was alcohol and tobacco.  Getting people hooked on these items to solve all of a state’s funding woes.  Then it was the lottery.  States needed to get their people hooked on gambling to solve all of their school funding needs.  Then it was casino gambling.  Because the lottery alone was taking enough money from the people to solve all of a state’s funding woes.  And now it’s marijuana (see Colorado made $3.5 million in taxes and fees on first month of marijuana sales by Nick Allen posted 3/11/2014 on The Telegraph).

Colorado, the first US state to legalise cannabis for recreational use, made just over $2 million in tax revenue from selling the drug in January, according to its first officially released figures.

The amount was not far behind the $2.7 million the state recouped in excise taxes on alcohol in the same period and is expected to exceed that in subsequent months.

More than $14 million worth of the dug was sold over counters to recreational users in the 30 days after cannabis shops opened on Jan 1…

In Colorado the first $40 million in tax revenue will go towards school construction and Mr Hickenlooper wants additional revenue to be used for projects including anti-drug advertising aimed at children, campaigns against driving under the influence of cannabis, and public health projects.

Another $2 million taken away from the taxpayers.  To add to the $2.7 million from alcohol sales.  On top of what they got from tobacco sales.  And what they got from the lottery.  Each step down this road was supposed to be a cure-all.  But it never was.  For once they got a new tax it wasn’t long before they said they needed yet another new tax.  Because the previous tax just wasn’t adequate to cover their spending.  Which just begs the question.  What are they doing with all of that money?

So we have people dying from lung cancer.  We have people dying from liver disease.  We have people becoming impoverished because they’ve gambled all of their money away.  Now Colorado is going to turn a part of their population into potheads.  Who will suffer the same ailments as tobacco smokers do.  As well as suffering some lost cognitive ability.  And some will end up wards of the state.  Filling hospitals and nursing homes.  Suffering from costly diseases. And yet the state cheers this new money.  And dreams of future revenue as more people pick up this unhealthy and dangerous habit.  Giddy at the thought of every new person lighting a marijuana cigarette for the first time.

The worst thing about the state using these people to fund their out of control spending is the regressive nature of these taxes.  Alcohol, tobacco, the lottery, casino gambling and marijuana hurt the poor the most.  Those who have the least money to spare now have to give more of it to the taxing authority.  The very people these progressive-thinking people are supposed to help.  Who instead use them for their selfish needs.  And don’t care a whit about the lives they destroy.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Free Birth Control and Abortion on Demand creates a lot of Harm for Women

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 9th, 2014

Week in Review

According to the left an unborn fetus is nothing but a lump of cells that can be vacuumed out of a uterus anytime during a pregnancy.  It’s just no big deal.  An abortion.  Because ending a pregnancy is so trivial they can do them in abortion clinics that don’t meet the same certifications as hospitals or medical clinics.  So it would follow that if ending a pregnancy is no big deal that it must be no big deal for the woman getting an abortion, right?  Well, as it turns out it is a very big deal.  Such a big deal that a man is going to jail for tricking his girlfriend into getting pregnant.  A pregnancy she ended with a ‘no big deal’ abortion (see Man who sabotaged condoms guilty of sexual assault, top court rules by SEAN FINE posted 3/7/2014 on The Globe and Mail).

Men who sabotage condoms may turn an otherwise consensual act with a woman into sexual assault, and women who lie about using birth control have been left with some uncertainty about whether they, too, could face charges, under a Supreme Court ruling yesterday on deception before sex.

The court was unanimous that Craig Hutchinson of Nova Scotia was guilty of sexual assault for poking pin-sized holes in condoms because he hoped to keep his girlfriend from leaving him by getting her pregnant. His fraud carried such a risk of harm it nullified her consent, four of seven judges said. (She did become pregnant, but left him and had an abortion.) The risk to a woman who does not want to get pregnant is as serious in its way as the risk of HIV transmission from a partner who committed deception by failing to disclose their disease, the majority said.

“The concept of ‘harm’ does not encompass only bodily harm in the traditional sense of that term; it includes at least the sorts of profound changes in a woman’s body — changes that may be welcomed or changes that a woman may choose not to accept — resulting from pregnancy,” Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and Justice Thomas Cromwell wrote, supported by Justice Marshall Rothstein and Justice Richard Wagner…

Peter Sankoff, a specialist in criminal law at the University of Alberta, said that psychological harm could in rare cases be a foundation for a future sexual assault claim by a man, say, whose condoms were sabotaged by a woman so she could have a baby. In a series of tweets, he said he knows many men who experienced an unwanted child, and as a result “spiralled downward” psychologically.

Others, including Michael Plaxton of the University of Saskatchewan law school, Sonia Lawrence of York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School, and Luke Craggs, the lawyer for Mr. Hutchinson, disagreed, saying the court would limit charges to cases where there was bodily harm.

“My preliminary view is that the decision seems to have been carefully written such that women who lie about birth control don’t have the same jeopardy,” Mr. Craggs said in an interview. Mr. Hutchinson was found guilty at his trial and sentenced to 18 months in jail, but had been free on bail awaiting the Supreme Court ruling.

So if a woman poked holes into a condom there would be no crime.  Because it’s her body.  Even though it will change the man’s life greatly if she tricked him into having a baby with her.  For he must now provide financially for that child.  So her deception is okay while his deception is not.  So harm from deception is based on how the woman feels.  If she wants a baby and tricks her boyfriend that’s okay.  If she doesn’t want a baby and gets an abortion without telling her husband that’s okay, too.  And whatever the man wants, does or says is wrong.  Okay.  Got it.

Impregnating a woman against her will is wrong.  No one is going to argue in defense of that.  But if that woman gets an abortion where is the harm?  Unless abortions are a big deal.  And are very traumatic to a woman.  Or can cause some long-term health problems (say increase the incidence of breast cancer from interrupting the hormonal changes going on in her body).  Or leave her with an emotional scar years later when she thinks about the child that she aborted.  If these are real harms then wouldn’t all abortions be harmful?  If so then there should be no abortions at all.  And if a woman doesn’t want a child then she shouldn’t have sex.  That would ensure no harm would ever befall a woman caused by an unwanted pregnancy.  And she could never commit a potential crime by lying about being on the pill.

People used to be like that.  Responsible.  But providing free birth control and abortion on demand sure has changed that.  And opened up women to all sorts of harm.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

The Democrat War on Women leads to Young Single Mothers and Abject Poverty

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 19th, 2014

Week in Review

Doctors don’t just treat symptoms.  They order tests and procedures to find the cause for the symptom.  Because if they don’t the underlying problem may get worse.  Causing greater medical problems for the patient later.  Or worse.  This is how medicine works.  Because it’s not a government bureaucracy making medical decisions about the patient.  Now contrast that to how government programs operate.

When a government program shows symptoms that something isn’t right what do government bureaucrats do?   Address only the symptoms.  By throwing money at them.  While never addressing the underlying cause for those symptoms (high chronic unemployment, families below the poverty line, rising federal debt ceiling, etc.).  Instead they just politicize those who are struggling.  And blame everything else but the underlying government policies for their suffering (see Why you can’t “bootstrap” yourself out of poverty by Nicole Goodkind posted 1/17/2014 on Yahoo! Finance).

When money is at its tightest, cost-saving choices are often impossible to make, digging impoverished Americans deeper and deeper into the pit of day-by-day living…

A car…is a necessity for many jobs but the down payment can be insurmountably high. And even after the down payment poor drivers still face monthly payments, high gas prices, and the fact that low-income car buyers pay 2% more for a car loan than affluent people. Low-income drivers can also pay up to $400 more annually than wealthier drivers to insure their cars (for a car of the same model and with the same driver risk).

A lack of capital can also make it impossible to afford the security deposit on an apartment causing those in poverty to live day-to-day in expensive hotels…Those in poverty who are able to rent or buy homes are also more likely to get household appliances through rent-to-own companies and end up paying more due to added interest.

…banks often charge large fees for those who don’t have a minimum amount of capital in their accounts—this makes cash checking establishments, who charge incredibly high interest rates on pay-day loans, the only choice for many.

Ben Hecht, CEO and president of Living Cities, an organization that works to revitalize impoverished areas, joined The Daily Ticker to discuss why it costs so much to be poor.

“Many of us are salaried employees and many poor people, if they’re working, are hourly employees,” explains Hecht.

If you’re an hourly employee who needs to apply for benefits or even see a doctor, you’re missing out on vital pay, Hecht points out…

One of the biggest disadvantages that those in poverty experience is a lack of broadband Internet. “One of the fundamentals about poverty is a lack of access to economic opportunity,” says Hecht. “And we all know that the number one factor in economic opportunity is education and we know that in today’s world much education, even in public schools, is done online.”

A lack of broadband access is not why kids are doing poorly in school.  It’s because they spend too much time online with their social media.  Or spend too much time having fun with sex and drugs instead of doing their homework.  And those who do buckle down and study are being taught things like global warming and the unfairness of capitalism.  Instead of the math and science skills high-tech employers need.  It’s so bad that they have to hire foreigners in the visa program to fill their high tech—and high paying—positions.

What is this about being able to take time off with pay to run errands if you’re salary?  Every salary job I had didn’t work that way.  You were hourly until you reached 40 hours.  Then you were salary after 40 hours.  So if you worked only 36 hours because you took a half day for personal business you got paid for 36 hours.  But if you worked 65 hours to bring a project in on time you got paid for 40 hours.  Because you were salary.  And were expected to put in the hours necessary to get the job done.  The hourly guys laugh at the salary guys.  For if they work 65 hours they’re paid for 65 hours.  With 25 of those hours paid at a time-and-a half premium.

Banks have employees who don’t work for free.  And how does a bank pay for their employees?  In one of two ways.  From the interest they earn in lending your money.  Or the fees you pay when you don’t deposit enough money to lend.  Just look at the numbers.  If someone has an average balance of $3,000 the bank can earn about $4.62 a week on that by loaning it out.  Whereas if someone has an average balance of $25 the bank can only earn about 4 cents a week.  And 4 cents a week isn’t going to help pay anyone’s paycheck.  Even if you have 100 depositors.  Which would give the bank about $4 each week to pay their bills.  While having 100 $3,000 depositors would provide $462 each week to help pay the bills.  So they must charge fees for low balances.  Or lay off workers.

The reason why people can’t save for down payments and security deposits is because they don’t have the job skills to earn a larger paycheck.  Either they didn’t graduate from high school.  Or they are a young single mother who became a mother before getting higher-paying job skills.  For the path to a higher paying job is to graduate from high school.  Go on to college.  Establish a career.  Go to church.  Then get married and start raising a family (see Strong families steeped in Conservative Values and Traditions do Well in America posted 1/11/2014 on PITHOCRATES).  Whereas the people most mired in poverty are young women who have children out of wedlock.

The system isn’t unfair.  The system works very well for those who do what’s best for their future instead of what’s the most fun right now.  We need to take care of the children born into poverty.  But we need to address the cause of this poverty.  The breakdown of the family.  And the abandoning of our culture and traditions.  Those things that made America great.  For the left can talk about the War on Women and Christian oppression all they want.  But it is their libertine attitudes that are putting young single mothers into poverty.

We need to listen to the wise words of Cary Grant in Operation Petticoat.  When the women came aboard the submarine accompanied by a ‘wow’ from the crew Grant’s character said, “Mr. Stovall, Lt. Holden’s influence upon you is starting to worry me. I suggest you “wow” less and “tsk tsk tsk” a little more.”  As a society we need to ‘wow’ less and ‘tsk tsk tsk’ more.  Promote marriage and family over the casual sex that so often results in abject poverty.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Democrat War on Women has given One in Six People Genital Herpes

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 18th, 2014

Week in Review

Liberals say there’s nothing wrong with women being sexually active.  In fact, it’s empowering.  Young women naked on their backs with their legs spread pleasing men.  That’s the way liberals like their women.  Strong.  Independent.  Not enslaved in a marriage.  But out there having fun.  Enjoying life.  And to keep these young naked women on their backs liberals have given them free birth control in Obamacare.  And access to abortion when that fails.  So they can have all the casual sex men want to have with them.  And all of it consequence free (see New genital herpes drug shows promise in trials by Tracy Miller posted 1/16/2014 on the New York Daily News).

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, one in six people between the ages of 14 to 49 have an HSV-2, or genital herpes, infection.

The currently approved drugs to treat genital herpes don’t fully eliminate symptoms and only partly reduce the risk of spreading herpes, Dr. Anna Wald, professor of allergy and infectious diseases at the University of Washington School of Public Health, told LiveScience…

The study found no serious side effects associated with this dose of the [new] drug, though previous research found high doses of pritelivir were toxic when given to monkeys, LiveScience reported.

The new drug will undergo more tests and “is still a few years from the market,” Tyring said.

Well, consequence free for five out of six people.  Which means if you’re in a group with three couples one of the six will have genital herpes.  Which isn’t too bad.  Unless you’re the poor bastard that has casual sex with that one.

A 14 year old girl is not thinking about getting married and raising a family.  No.  She’s thinking about empowerment.  At least, one in six is.  Imagine this girl in her twenties.  When she is thinking about getting married and raising a family.  And how much fun that will be trying to meet the father of her future children when she has genital herpes.  That’ll put a damper on her finding her Prince Charming.  And her fairy tale wedding.  Which is the biggest thing in a woman’s life.  As any guy getting married will tell you.  They’d be fine with eloping to Las Vegas.  Not their fiancés.  They want the $4,000 wedding dress.  And the big church wedding.  One thing she never dreamed of having?  Genital herpes.  Which she got thanks to liberals who told her to live life and empower herself.

And yet it’s the Republicans that have a war on women.  Go figure.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Mom and Dad get a Big Assist from MTV in the Battle against Teen Pregnancy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 18th, 2014

Week in Review

Parents can’t tell their kids anything.  For they know everything.  Thankfully for parents they got a little help from MTV.  Who kids will listen to even when they won’t listen to their parents (see Study: US reality shows contributed to record decline in teen pregnancy by Nicholas Tufnell, wired.co.uk, posted 1/13/2014 on ars technica).

A study from Wellesley College and the University of Maryland finds that MTV’s Teen Mom and 16 and Pregnant contributed to a record decline in US teen pregnancy…

In an effort to find the “causal effect of specific media content on teen childbearing rates,” Kearney and Levine began an empirical investigation by studying Nielsen ratings (a US audience measurement system) as well as data, trends and metrics from Google and Twitter. The researchers then examined the impact on teen birth rates using Vital Statistics Natality microdata.

The figures revealed that Teen Mom and 16 and Pregnant often had extremely high ratings and a very dedicated following, causing many to search and discuss the themes explored on the shows. Specifically, searches and tweets on birth control and abortion spiked each time the show was broadcast, particularly in areas where it was popular.

Teen abortion rates also fell over this period, which Levine and Kearney see as further evidence that the shows are partly responsible for a reduction in pregnancies.

How about that?  MTV got something many have failed to do.  To get kids to listen to their parents.  For the fall in teen pregnancies AND the fall in teen abortions means one of two things.  Either kids acting irresponsibly in spreading STDs with active sex lives got more responsible when it came to birth control.  Or they are just having less sex.  Like Mom and Dad would have tried everything within their powers to get them to do.  And here’s a television show that Mom and Dad no doubt couldn’t stand tipping that argument in their favor.  Thank you MTV.  For telling our kids that Mom and Dad were right all along.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Democrats War on Women makes Women Dissatisfied with their Vaginas

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 5th, 2014

Week in Review

Some people with big noses get nose jobs.  To reduce the size of their noses.  Pretty much the first thing you look at when you see someone with a big schnoz.  So one can understand the anxiety some people may suffer after a life of undo attention on their proboscis.  And a lifetime being called ‘big nose’.

Women are especially prone to getting plastic surgery to correct what they view as defects.  A tummy tuck so they look slimmer and more appealing.  Face lifts so they look younger and more appealing.  Boob jobs.  For a bigger rack to give the guys something to look at.  And to look more appealing.  In fact, anything that men see a lot they want to use surgery to make it look more appealing.  Even things that take some disrobing to see (see Designer vaginas are ruining our idea of what women’s bodies should look like, doctors warn by Anna Hodgekiss posted 12/31/2013 on the Daily Mail).

Women are getting increasingly distorted ideas of what their genitalia should look like, with many wrongly thinking their bodies are ‘abnormal’.

New research has found that those who looked at ‘designer vaginas’ were more more [sic] likely to consider them ‘normal’ and ‘ideal’ when later comparing them to unaltered genitalia…

The number of labiaplasties performed by the NHS has risen five-fold since 2001, according to the study’s Australian authors.

The surgery involves reducing the size of a woman’s labia minora to make them more symmetrical and smaller than the labia majora…

Generally, there are no health reasons to have the surgery – it is only for the sake of appearance. So the researchers wanted to know what drives women’s perceptions of what looks good…

‘This is due to airbrushing, lack of exposure to normal women’s genitals, greater genital visibility due to Brazilian and genital waxing and the general taboo around discussing genitals and genital appearance…’

Sarah Calabrese, a clinical psychologist at Yale University, added: ‘[These findings are] especially disconcerting given that for many women, the narrow and unrealistic range of vulvas presented in mainstream U.S. pornography may be the only images that they see,’ she said.

‘The vulva is unlike most other body parts, which remain visible even when clothed; while a woman can look around and see the size and shape of other women’s waists, breasts, and so on, they don’t have the same opportunity to view other women’s vulvas and therefore are less likely to have a realistic sense of the natural diversity of vulvas in the female population.’

The Democrats/liberals keep saying Republicans/conservatives have a war on women.  Because they don’t want to hand out free birth control.  And provide access to abortion.  While Democrats do everything within their power to make it easier for a woman to go out and have a lot of casual sex.  Apparently liberals everywhere are, too.  Turning women into such sexual objects that they watch pornography to see how men want a vagina to look.  And then have surgery to get their vagina to look like what would please a connoisseur of pornography.  Yet it’s Republicans/conservatives that have a war on women.

But the bigger question is why are women trying to make every part of their body so appealing?  Well, who finds women appealing?  That’s right.  Men.  And why do women look their best for men?  To attract a guy.  And it’s just not for a hookup (i.e., casual sex).  For there probably isn’t a guy who would refuse to have sex with a woman after getting her naked regardless of what her vagina looked like.  For if a guy is looking at a woman’s vagina he’s probably thinking it’s the most beautiful thing he’s ever seen.  Because he’s about to have sex.  And nothing short of an earthquake or a tornado is going to get him to say anything that might spoil the mood.

No.  Women try to attract men to find Mr. Right.  For despite the Democrat war on women with their free birth control and access to abortion to keep them free and single women want to get married.  They don’t want to live alone.  Just being sexual objects for men to enjoy.  So desperate to find Mr. Right they will go to any length to make their looks ideal.  Based on pornographic images.  Something else Democrats fight to protect.  For there probably isn’t a pornographer out there that votes Republican.  Yet it’s Republicans/conservatives that have a war on women.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

« Previous Entries