--- Rhetorical and random question

--- Rhetorical and random question for the day:

Why is it that my MSN email service---the one that I pay for---only
gives me 2megs of storage space on their server, but the Yahoo! email I
have set up for this site gives me 4 megs---for free?

Bill Gates really is one greedy SOB.

--- Michele's off on a rant today.

Check out the original link here that set her off.

Kids will see the bloody truth behind their moms’ pretentious
pelts. Accompanied by graphic photographs of skinned carcasses and
animals languishing on fur farms, children will read: "Lots of
wonderful foxes, raccoons, and other animals are kept by mean farmers
who squish them into cages so small that they can hardly move. They
never get to play or swim or have fun. All they can do is cry-just so
your greedy mommy can have that fur coat to show off in when she walks
the streets."

This is just so effing juvenile. All I want to do is scream GROW THE F@#$ UP!
Not like it would do any good, but my God, would it ever be satisfying.
Michele is ticked off, and rightly so, because it's a blatant attempt
to manipulate children's beliefs. If I were a kid, however, I'd be
ticked off because it's a bad comic book. It's like one of those crappy
Disney comic books that tried (and failed) to make the adventures of
Goofy interesting. If I were a kid who'd been handed one of these
things, I'd think it was poorly done, it assumes I'm stupid, and it
makes someone I love look bad because they did something that didn't
fit in with what someone considers to be the proper thing to do. If,
when I was growing up, someone had called my beloved mommy "greedy" I
would have been tempted to slug them. I probably wouldn't have done it,
because my mother (unlike others) taught me manners, but the temptation
would have been there nonetheless. The blatant manipulation of children
aside, how ham-handed can PETA be? They're not interested in changing
minds; they're interested in shaming people into changing their
behavior. And I am SO DAMN TIRED of this type of rhetoric. So tired, in
fact, that I just shut it out most of the time. People have choices in
this world. In this case, they have the choice to wear fur or not wear
fur. I choose not to listen to anyone who is stupid enough to spread
their message by way of a comic book and thinks this is the best way to
bring people over to their side of the fence. I'M NOT AN IDIOT!
This lowest common denominator brand of rhetoric we're subjected to on
a daily basis on every level of society is just so denigrating to me as
a human being. It assumes that the idiot who's the loudest, the
boldest, and the brashest wins. In the calculations made beforehand, it
is assumed that no one in the audience has a brain, because if they did, well they'd agree with us, wouldn't they?
We're all just chumps who will buy whatever they're selling if they're
just loud enough. Do you listen to everything the drunk loudmouth
shouts from his perch at the end of the bar? No. You take into account
the fact he's at a bar instead of at home. You take into account that
he's drunk. You take into account all sorts of things. You use your
brain and you temper what's being said by who says it. It's simple.
It's called judgment. Common sense. This type of rhetoric
doesn't encourage common sense, however, in the audience. It engenders
anger, not only because of the rhetoric spewed, but because the
audience doesn't get the chance to judge the argument on its merits.
This type of rhetoric encourages steadfast opposition. Christ, people,
read some Sun-Tzu, would you? Or if that's too edumacated for you, how
about the old adage, you draw more flies with honey than vinegar?
Assume that I, your intended audience, have a brain. Also assume it's
going to take some time to convince me of the rightness of your
position. But, that would take effort, and we know how damn lazy
you people are. Not in saving furry rodents from their deaths. On that
front, the PETA people are pretty darn active. BUT, when it comes to
changing minds, they take the quickest route possible and are harming
their purpose in the first place. But they don't think that; they take
the scorched earth tack. They don't really care how they change
people's minds, just that they do. Because, you know, a mink's life is
on the line. Fifty years from now, do you think PETA will still be
around? I don't. I think they will have made themselves obsolete.
They've cried wolf so many times about so many things that no one's
going to listen to them after a time. They're the drunk at the corner
of the bar: people will blow them off in time. Even the people who
think they have something of worth to add. And just for the record, I
would wear fur. The only reason I don't is because I cannot afford it.
It's expensive. I would probably look ridiculous in it, though. A
sweatshirt, jeans and Merrells hardly qualify as worthy attire for a
fur coat.
But I've worn a mink coat once---a former co-worker had a full length,
black mink coat and for shits and giggles one day, she let me wear it
for a time. Oh, my God.
It was fabulous. So soft to the touch. Lighter than you could have
possibly imagined just by looking at the girth of that behemoth of a
coat. But most importantly it was WARM! When you live on the frozen tundra, anything that keeps you that
warm is a bonus. On the whole, however, the ten minutes I wore that
coat was a fantastic sensual experience. I enjoyed it. And if I could
do that every now and again, I wouldn't mind it one little bit.
Particularly in January. So, when we hit the Powerball, I might buy
one. I might not. It all depends on the circumstances. What is
important to me is that I have the choice to do as I please. The end
result isn't so important as having choice. So, if you're a rabid
animal rights activist, you're going to have to come up with a better
argument than I'm "greedy" to keep me from wearing one. Just letting
you know what you're up against. I'm of German descent, which means I'm
stubborn. Poor you. But all hope is not lost. If you want to have an
interesting debate and are willing to listen to differing points of
view on the matter, we'll have a chat. But if all you want to do is
throw blood at me or hand me a denigrating comic book, don't bother.
--- Both Sullivan and Instapundit have both linked to this interview.
Call me a copycat if you will, but I liked it. Gimli gets it!

Actually, I quite prefer Rhys-Davies as Sallah in Raiders (his character was dumbed down too much in Last Crusade),
but that's just me. Gimli annoys me and I want to hit him with a brick.
But, since I assume that's what Tolkien intended, it would mean that
he's done his job well.
Read the whole thing. Fascinating stuff. And very, very brave.

Posted by Kathy at December 1, 2003 03:10 PM | TrackBack