News Flash: Life isn't Fair

Here is a list of things that are arguably unfair and yet, reality:

You can be judged forever by something you did when you were 23.

Some women get smacked around by their partners.

Some are sensitive (or over sensitive) about that fact for a long long time.

Some people think all spankings are bad.

Some people think its unforgivable/unprofessional so be videotaped being naked and talking about spankings

Bar Associations are strict

Law Firms Google their potential hires

That's reality. You make choices and there are consequences and often those are unfair but unshocking as well.

And whether its immature and stupid to appear in soft core porn before launching your legal career is up for debate I guess, but it is DEFFINATELY immature and stupid to think that nobody will ever see it.

There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding about breast feeding and what can be seen during it.

The aereola of the mother, the critical boob portion that must be concealed at all times in a civilized society (be it by tiny bathing suits or pasties in a strip club with booze or the bustier Janet was wearing before she scarred us all by crashing into Justin Timberlake's hand and ripping it off with her remarkable brestical manipulation), is in. the. baby's. mouth.

Now, if you sit there and STARE STARE STARE you might get to see it! (Woo hoo! Nipple! It's darker than the rest!) But the bulk of the time, if you glance at a nursing mother and child you have about the same clevagey view that you'd get in any bar at any time.

Only, you know, not purely for your asthetic enjoyment. It's startling to see it out of context. But that doesn't make it *wrong.*

Its like when you're six and find out that your beloved first grade teacher has her OWN kids and doesn't live at the school. It's quite a shock and feels all weird to see her at the mall splitting a cinnabon with them. But you get over it. She's the same person, you're not ACTUALLY seeing anything exotic, just something that isn't for you. Same beloved teacher but in a new context. Its an opportunity for growth, for growing up even.

Historically, as I understand it, the legal prohibition against beastiality is based not only in it being icky but in the fear that it could breed monsters. Our Pilgrim forefathers feared a race of centaurs (or whatever).

We know better now, but its still icky.

Oh, and while its decidedly icky (could basically be torture for a small enough animal, teaches larger ones dangerous behaviors) its not as bad as pedophilia for pete's sake. Why must everything be as horrible as possible? Can't we have degrees of awful?

For the record, if I'm ever publically mamed and some photo editor somewhere tweaks a picture of me so people don't see (or don't THINK they see) my girly bits I'm ok with that.

A harmless effort to protect the modesty of a stranger who can't give permission and might well die strikes me as an attempt at decency and kindness in the middle of an orgy of obscenity and hate.

Darling, who do you think TURNS them into little monsters? Pixies? Casual passers by?

You don't get to chew out YOUR OWN KID for being spoiled.

And you don't get to blame them for the things the other parent is guilty of doing. And if you're arrogant enough to record yourself being an ass IN THE MIDDLE OF A CUSTODY BATTLE you're probably a real piece of work.

Then again, anyone releasing that tape is as bad or worse.

Of course, making the circuit of chat shows to 'apologize' ups the appalling self-absorption factor yet another notch.

Will it affect the way I see their work? Only time will tell I guess. Those sorts of things are viceral.

The only thing I know for sure is how bad I feel for that poor kid.

It would deffinately be preferable for there to be a note somewhere that it was edited or to make the editing plain. It IS an insubstantial alteration, but you'd like for there to be some higher standard for journalism than for pimple cream.

On the other hand, I can understand the urge to use a moving photo and have it look as good as possible. It was a judgment call and sort of a sloppy one -- I'm just not seeing the oppression and outrage.

I think its sort of cool in a "good for the goose, good for the gander" way. It levels the playing field a bit. Now these women have the same opportunity that the men have had to explore their sexuality a bit before they commit to one partner.

It's by no means an ideal solution, but its certainly an improvement.

Teenagers can obsess about anything of course... but it seems far more likely that she'd see they CHOSE to have her and that she was very much wanted.

(Still not her Father's to tell though)

Religion certainly IS a handy excuse for lynching, but its hardly the only one.

Emmett Till was tortured to death to preserve the honor of a white woman in 1955. In America.

He wasn't the first. He wasn't the last. And it had nothing to do with religion.

This isn't alien third century behavior. And the means of changing it is not more violence.

I'm beginning to think that schools shouldn't teach sex ed at all.

They should teach biology and epidemiology and basic hygene.

If in the process kids figure out how their naughty bits work and how to make responsible decisions... well, that's just the risk we take when we educate children.

Look at the hate-on you brought to a screeching halt with your silly "facts".

People are busy hating Muslims. Why ya gotta go an' ruin it?