Sorry. You came to the wrong place if you were expecting a post about Spongebob brand baby carrots. Like Spongebob, those carrots are supposed to be presumably harmless to the at-least-semi-average human of youthful age.
Instead, I’d like to chat about other foods that children don’t usually like. For example, chilies. Here in the non-southwestern US, folks have a tendency to use fewer ingredients that impart a noticeably strong flavor and/or punishment to their tongues. Needless to say, chilies are a tougher sell in this climate than in others, especially to kids who don’t want to eat anything that doesn’t contain chocolate or breast milk.
And so some brilliant nomenclaturist discovered the world’s hottest chili. It is around 250 times hotter than a jalapeno, which puts it a lot closer to pepper spray than to anything you normally put in your mouth on purpose.
Seriously, I’m not joking.
Food heat is measured in scoville units. Jalapenos range from 2,500 to 5,000 Scoville units. Pepper spray is two million Scoville units. This chili weighs in at one million.
And they decided to call it a “ghost chili.” Does that sound like something your child would pick up in the store and bite into because it sounds cool?
I thought so. On the other hand, maybe that will teach them a very important lesson. For example, they can learn to avoid vegetables.
With apologies for the bad pun, the resulting tongue damage is why the younger generation has such bad taste. It’s not Bieber’s fault for once.
You may remember recent reports that a second grade teacher had to prevent a parent from distributing vagina cookies to the class. I can’t deliver the story any better than the original, so here are a couple of excerpts:
Autumn Lily Speaker comes into the classroom with a pan full of treats. [...] “I decided you can use these to teach the kids about the woman’s vagina today”. Baffled and completely caught off guard I slowly peel the aluminum foil off the pan to behold a plethora of sugar cookie and frosting vaginas. Not just any old vagina, but ALL KINDS OF VAGINAS.
[P]erplexed I give the parent the most professional look I can muster and quietly reply “I’m sorry Autumn, but I can’t give these to my students. This just isn’t appropriate.” [...] Autumn bursts with the fury of a thousand angry Andrea Dworkin’s and starts yelling in front of the class about how ‘I should be proud of my vagina’ and ‘I am settling for a women’s role in life’. Utterly bemused and frozen from shock all I can do is stand and stare at the woman as the word ‘vagina’ is yelled in front of my second grade class about 987,000 times.
It gets worse from there. In a subsequent email, the parent implies that the children should learn how to pleasure the vagina and expresses hope that the teacher will be beaten by an abusive husband.
News of the altercation eventually landed on Huffington Post and I’m surprised that HuffPost would feature a story that opens the floodgates for criticizing feminists. I spent many years on college campuses and this incident reminds me of V Day. “V Day,” or Vagina Day, is the campus feminists’ replacement for the standard February 14 holiday. The feminists distribute vagina lollipops instead of vagina cookies and they urge “pride in your vagina” and the pleasuring thereof. (In other words, the mother sounds like she just came from campus.) V Day’s centerpiece is the performance of Eve Ensler’s “Vagina Monologues,” a piece that includes some value but also some pedophilia; however, proceeds are often donated to women’s support charities, which must be said in its defense. Also to be said in its defense: Roseanne Barr performed the piece in her underwear a few years back, so there’s obviously some sweet stuff for the men too… in addition to the lollipops. (Cool down. This is a humor blog, remember?)
Long story short: this is what a lot of college students are being taught and the cupcake incident illustrates the unintended consequences of this well-intended V Day programming. Just because it works in theory doesn’t mean it will work outside the university with young children, or with older children, or with adults, or with dead people. (I take that back. Maybe it would work with dead people because they lack brain function.) It’s not the real world’s fault that the intellectual idealist’s ideas fall flat when removed from the academic cloister. Them students don’t remember the lesson right when they leave skool and then the kiddies hafta suffer. The adults too.
The feminism that helps protect women on campus seems to have led at least this one mother to wish domestic violence on another woman. The Women’s Studies professors would be so proud.
Once upon a time, an anti-drug crusader named Jim Davis decided to write a comic strip to warn children about the dangers of addictions.
Yes, I mean Garfield.
However, Mr. Davis missed the boat. He depicted a feline lasagna addict who couldn’t resist anything edible; Davis could have easily added an illegal dependency to the character and still had him be believable. Problem is, Garfield displays intelligence and humor and everything else you don’t want people associating with dangerous behaviors.
And then there’s Odie.
“Odie” is an extended spelling of O.D., which in turn is short for overdose. Odie was supposed to foreshadow the dangers of addiction: mental incapacity, constant drooling, hyperactivity, and the unending potential for someone to cry out O.D. if he does something really bad. Instead, Davis characterized Odie as friendly, innocent, and often more likable than any other character in the comic strip.
That’s not how you talk people out of using drugs.
I believe in honor. It’s honorable… and the Honorable one sitting in front of the courtroom sees it that way too. Sometimes, that’s the person who’ll decide whether you win your case.
Therefore, in the interests of honor and your future legal undertakings, I’d like to offer some advice that might be useful to you or your witnesses as you partake in the glorious art of litigation:
1- If you’re asked a question, the correct answer is not “YES! uh… wait a minute let me think about that.” You should know immediately whether you spend four hours per day submerged in a fish tank with your pet Goldy. Your hesitation sounds sillier than your act of communion with that poor little goldfish.
2- The defendant is not schizophrenic. The defendant also does not suffer from any of the other psychiatric conditions you’re listing. You majored in statistics; you should know the odds of your diagnostic pronouncements being seen as credible. Hint: it starts with a zero.
3- Do not accuse the defendant of committing a crime that occurred seventeen years ago unless you just learned that information today. The police wanted that information seventeen years ago and now they probably want you just as much for not giving it to them.
4- When the judge starts laughing at you, you should stop talking.
5- When the judge falls asleep, that’s the time to inform everyone of all those pesky incriminating details.
6- You should know BEFOREHAND whether you’re a credible witness. If you’re describing someone’s character and can’t produce any information from the past ten years, you look like an idiot. On second thought, you ARE an idiot.
7- Your lawyer is your friend. (Did you ever think you’d read that sentence?) Do not lie to your lawyer. If your lawyer doesn’t know the weaknesses in your case, no attempt can be made to ever-so-ethically brush them under the rug. Telling your lawyer also helps when your opposition brings up those pesky little details; all that smooth courtroom talk has to be prepared in advance.
8- Don’t be squirrely. Only authentic squirrels can do that without looking guilty. Sometimes.
Once upon a time, a wicked criminal stole a loaf of bread to fill his family’s stomachs.
The arrogant and self-centered thief failed to look beyond his own desires. The shop owner needed to sell that bread for a profit to feed his own family. Unfortunately, no one feels sad for a capitalist.
Moreover, the shop in question was Le Subway Cafe. Therefore, our thief deserves even less sympathy. Ask not what the restaurant chain puts in its bread or whether our thief might not also be guilty of attempting to poison his family.