Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Oh really?’ Category

The SMH is at it again.

This is what I’m getting at:SMH front page clip showing an article about eliminating bingo wings (for women) in the Life & Style sectionSMH front page clip showing an article about eliminating bingo wings (for women) in the Life & Style section
(more…)

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

At least, that is what this paragraph in this Guardian article would seem to suggest:

Another piece of good news is that the gel appeared to cause few if any side-effects, which is extremely important because it will be used by women who are healthy.

SRSLY?

Read Full Post »

An article in the Sydney Morning Herald today states that a healthy diet will cost a “typical” welfare-dependent family of four approximately 40% of their average income.

This, presumably, is a bad thing, because 40% is a significant proportion. A large chunk of the rest would probably be covering your accommodation. You’re not left with a whole lot more.

There’s not really a lot of analysis about what this means for how less-well-off families might make decisions about purchasing food. Nothing about how the cost of a healthy diet might be reduced.

There is, however, this statement at the end of the article:

The convener of the food and nutrition special interest group of the Public Health Association, Andrea Begley, said she supported a food tax and subsidies for lower-income families, particularly given rising obesity rates among lower socio-economic groups.

Because the solution to high cost of healthy food is to make the other food options even more expensive, in a paternalistic example of social manipulation?

I’m all for assisting people to eat a healthier diet if that’s what they want to do, especially if what’s stopping them is the high cost. So subsidies might be good. However, I’m not in favour of this kind of paternalistic “let’s force them to spend nearly half their income on the food we think they should be eating” attitude. That implies a certain level of judgmentalism, and I’m seriously not in favour of that!

(Oh, and gotta love how they throw in the OBESITY EPIDEMIC BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA at the end.)

Read Full Post »

Shorter Amy Alkon: I didn’t get to scream in public when I was a child, so neither should anyone else.

SRSLY.

Of course, Ms Alkon is basing this on her recollection. I’m sure that, like most people, she doesn’t remember very much before the ages of 4 or 5, probably not daily events even after those ages, and I’d be fairly surprised if she didn’t do her share of screaming in public at age approximately 2. But even if she’s right and she never did, she clearly doesn’t understand the concepts of “community” and “family” and “parents having a life even when they have small children”.

Read Full Post »

Ohhh, the hatred of young women. It burns, it BURNS!

The “Heckler” column in the Sydney Morning Herald is a reader-written column, where readers are encouraged to write about things that annoy them.

A few years ago, there was a 750 word limit (maybe it started at 700), and then it went through a period where it seemed to have lost another 50 words every time I looked. It’s now at 450.

This means that there’s not really enough room for someone to say anything other than: “This thing that other people do really pisses me off”, but then, I guess that’s the point of the column.

Sometimes, they can be really funny. Sometimes they just fall flat.

At other times, they expose the writer’s biases beautifully. Like today.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Quelle surprise.

Whatever happened to the “not alarmed” part of the catchphrase?

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: