Why do some people have such a problem with this? I think I can answer my own question: It's due to their own sexual repression. Everything is pornographic to them (for example,) because they're basically sexless themselves.

Once again, religion poisons everything.

I think jazz is like motorcycle racing: thrilling for participants, but often dull for spectators. That's been my experience, at least. In high school, I played some jazz (at the 11th- and 12th-grade levels,) and it was fun while it lasted. I never listen to any, though, because it says nothing to me about my life. Neither does most of the classic rock that we're all supposed to like.

I'm not a music fan as much as I am a *songs* fan. I grew up actively disliking most kinds of music. I eventually started listening to music because Michael Stipe and Billy Corgan and Morrissey and so many others were singing songs that spoke to me. I could relate to it. I had found guys (and gals) that sounded like me.

I could go on for a while, but I'll just dispute Amerigo's assertions about musical mortality: People break down in tears at rock (not pop) shows because they connect so powerfully with the songs. That sort of thing ought to be immortal... but what did people like me do before the 1970s or thereabouts?

I think I'll use the racing analogy when I speak to my bass guitar teacher tomorrow.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned dysgenics yet. Do I need to explain how it's relevant here? Look at who has litters of children, starting in their teens...

Gandhi was facing an opponent usually unwilling to use deadly force. He didn't have any good advice for the Nazis' victims. Sometime in the 1930s, Hitler suggested to Churchill (or somebody else in the British government, yes, I know Churchill wasn't PM yet) that they should kill Gandhi, and then ten of his friends, and then a hundred, and then...

***

China's sex imbalance is one way to bring down the population, though it's not the best way.

Do you know what the Left is? I like NPR, but I certainly don't find the "extreme Left" on there.

She could take the rag off her head and do her job. Nothing bad would happen (though she would probably claim it was "God's punishment" if she lost.) Then she might realize that there's no reason to wear the thing. This is how change happens. Religion nearly shuts down critical thinking, but sometimes it happens anyway.

Once again, religion poisons everything. I don't know how much stock I put in the USA Today cover story (on the 11th of Feb.) that portrayed Mexico as a country joining the fully-developed world, but it did make mention of how things have changed since family planning caused birth rates to peak in the 1970s and decline ever since. Birth control programs get great results everywhere, as far as I know.

"Antisocial" means destructive. The LW should have written "Asocial." Also, one of the anonymous responders used "disinterested," which means unbiased. They should have used "uninterested."

So many people have such a hard time with their families. I avoid this problem by simply refusing to participate in conflicts. I don't care what they do, and I don't care what they think of me. My parents have given to/taken from me in equal proportion, I guess, so I say we're even. I just hope I don't clash with my brother over my parents' late-life issues. I hope they drop dead without too much fuss, unlike their parents.

I think part of the problem can be solved by becoming unavailable. If my brother marries his awful girlfriend, I'll simply always be unable to spend too much time in their proximity. How hard can it be?

There's no reason why religion should get a free pass. Superstitious, ludicrous drivel should not be respected in any way. That includes its symbols, including those worn by anyone of any age. Once again, I don't like the idea of the state exercising this much control over people's lives, but at the very least its official institutions (especially those dedicated to education, of all things) should be purged of superstition.

The Algerian election cancellation of 1992 won the praise of women's groups, because they knew what Islamic rule meant for them. In the resulting civil war, Islamists targeted women who didn't wear Islamic garb, and the government forces targeted those who did. The same war also severely damaged the country's economic progress. It could have been another Tunisia (a place where hijabs are discouraged, by the way,) but unfortunately it was not to be. I have mixed feelings about that whole affair... though maybe not. If the Islamists had been quickly and thoroughly annihilated, the damage would have been minimal.

Religion poisons everything.

That's what the first president of Tunisia called the Islamic headgear. Part of me hates to see the state interfering in people's lives like this, but then I think that it's the duty of various institutions to drag people into modernity, for everyone else's sake if not theirs. Remember, children growing up in superstitious environments don't have the autonomy to decide whether or not to wear the bedsheets.