“Seen In The Suburbs Of Adelaide, South Australia” by the Wooster Collective:
Can it really be true? Be still, my trembling heart!
“We’ll haveta travel undercover if we wanna stay aheada the law,” says me. “By the time we reach the checkpoint I’ll be Henri DuMarche, international financier, socialite and diamond thief, an you can be NGC 5024, a mild-mannered globular cluster.” “The guards will suspect nothing!” says Giblets. “At least not til a stray gust of wind dislodges our fake plastic mustaches at the last minute and blows our cover in fronta the feds.”
Yay, it’s true!, Giblets, Fafnir and the Medium Lobster have returned, yes indeedy, but thankfully without the eye-waterin’ purple and green and with much more pie. The deity (Pasta be Upon Him) is indeed in his heaven and all’s right with the world.
Women’s Health News: “Why is a Government-Funded Reproductive Health Database Blocking Users from Searching for Abortion Articles?”
[Pic from My Left Wing]
What to read, when to read, where to read and much more importantly, how books should be shelved – Alphabetical? Genre? Size? Spine colour? Publisher? – all are reliable flashpoints for arguments in our house. Luckily we generally make it work by agreeing to disagree: but what do you do when his or her taste in books reveals that the love of your life is a complete and utter philistine? [Via]
More lovelife negotiation this time from .au:
An Australian parliament member is suggesting that women sign “sex contracts” in order to avoid unwanted advances. Ann Bressington said this in front of Parliament yesterday, “”Perhaps this parliament could devise a contract which men could carry around in their pocket, next to their condoms. There could be a waiver should a man meet up with a woman who has had a couple of drinks before they engage in sexual intercourse. The contract may contain the name and address of the women, with her driver’s licence number, so that the man can see the signatures match, clauses that state that the woman has or has not been drinking or taking drugs – licit or illicit – and that she consents to foreplay.” How imminently practical Ms. Bressington is! [Link: News.com.au]
[Via Jezebel] Is another form needed to go further than foreplay? What about oral sex or anal sex? And will one be required to keep the paperwork for six years like tax receipts? The mind boggles.
From the archive of safe sex and VD posters from the National Museum of Health’s Flickr gallery. [Click on image for gallery]
Some people don’t have choice when it comes to sex; they must, because their lives depend on it. From an NPR report on human trafficking in Eastern Europe –
“It’s one thing when you are planning an effort like this, this is a work of journalism — I’m not going to interfere with my subjects. It’s another thing when you are in an underground brothel in Bucharest, who has this girl with Down Syndrome, who you know is undergoing rape several times a day. When this girl is offered to me in trade for a used car … I walk away … it’s not an easy thing to do,” he says.
I don’t suppose it is easy to walk away, no. Personally I’d be inclined to say to hell with objectivity and rescue the girl. But then I’m not a journalist – people suffering, to me, are a damned sight more important than a byline and a life more important than a career. By all means get the story out – but don’t let false objectivity mask physical cowardice. Anyhow, isn’t there enough human trafficking happening in the US to be going on with? And let’s not mention the fact that it’s the globalisation of cheap labour that’s enabling profit from slavery. Now, who was it pushing that again? [H/T R. Mildred]
Speaking of which: Majikthise considers the implications of US ally and serial human-rights violator Uzbekistan’s legalisation of money-laundering for international crime and politics.
Mr. Creosote lives:
‘Luxury Bangkok hotel combines luxury meal with ‘poverty tour’
BANGKOK: Somewhere in the firmament of Michelin-starred chefs there must be one willing to accept $8,000 for a single night’s work.
The only catch is that this particular dinner at a Bangkok luxury hotel has stirred up a mighty controversy, and two dozen chefs around the world have declined to cook it. Several have confessed fears of losing a coveted star in the Michelin guide, the gastronome’s bible that can make or break culinary careers.
Bangkok’s Lebua hotel, which is organizing the dinner, is no stranger to publicity – or to Michelin-starred chefs. Last year, it put on a decadent feast billed as the meal of a lifetime for $25,000 a head. Six three-star Michelin chefs were flown in from Europe to cook the 10-course meal, each plate paired with a rare vintage wine.
On April 5, the Lebua is offering another 10-course spread, this time for free. The hotel has invited 50 of its biggest-spending customers to the dinner prepared – it hopes – by three top-ranked Michelin-starred chefs.
There is one twist. Before dinner, guests will be jetted to a poor village in northern Thailand to spend the afternoon soaking up the sights of poverty. The dinner and full-day excursion will cost the hotel $300,000.
Oh well, that’s all right then. What I’d be interested to know is how much of that three hundred grand is for thr meal and how much for the poverty tour and what, if anything, went to the villagers. [Via Last Appetite]
