Following this eye-widening farce, in which a mentally ill woman claimed to be crushed and psychologically violated by a haircut booking form, I bring you a vision of things to come.
You may want to bite down on something.
Following this eye-widening farce, in which a mentally ill woman claimed to be crushed and psychologically violated by a haircut booking form, I bring you a vision of things to come.
You may want to bite down on something.
Including an improbable chicken; some agreeable jiggling; a display of dexterity; and a guide to the dream cars of the 1950s.

All this and more.
Attention, Canadian citizens. A new realm of human suffering has been discovered.
In niche minority news:
Mr Kotetsu and his publishing associates, all trans-identified males, have an extensive history of lively, one might say titillated, online discussions regarding child molestation and its various sub-genres, including sadomasochism and incestuous necrophilia, along with pointers as to how to circumvent normal online proprieties and legal restrictions when sharing… content.
One of Mr Kotetsu’s associates, a cross-dressing man named Violet Rose, enthuses about “hurtcore,” a form of sadomasochism involving minors. Mr Rose chides critics of the phenomenon, i.e., critics within their own bedlamite community – those who find it a little too much – to “stop being ageist.”
Including rocking and bobbing; a history of British radar; why women take so long in the bathroom; and a brief guide to Medieval cats.

All this and more.
Including an unhappy residue; how to distract children; adventures in bicycling; and a choir made up of people who’ve had their voice boxes removed.
A reminder, should one be needed, that we live in an age of ironies.
On racially incongruous casting in period dramas:
Readers will note the unilateral nature and casual, practised arrogance of the underlying conceit. The urge to insert diversity, in one direction at least, regardless of incongruity.
As seen, for instance, in the pages of British Vogue, where Ms Hanna Flint, “a mixed-race woman, of British and Tunisian heritage,” expressed her dismay that new adaptations of works by Emily Brontë and Jane Austen have “cast the protagonists as white once again.” As if this were some kind of scandal or transgression, for which apologies and recompense were in order.
Presumably on grounds that it is somehow unfair that the Yorkshire moors of the eighteenth century did not entirely resemble twenty-first century London. Where Ms Flint happens to live.
Apparently, we must embrace “historical inclusivity,” via modish anachronism and jarring racial contrivance.
Including scenes from the machine uprising; some lively automation; a triumph of hairspray; and when you have a CT scanner and a whole bunch of animals.

All this and more.
Readers may wish to ponder the implication that a high-trust society can somehow be maintained unilaterally, simply by not caring about the number of people who violate that trust, and who do so repeatedly, whether in ways that are audacious or just wearyingly routine but nonetheless degrading.
As if pretending not to mind the evaporation of civilised, reciprocal standards – and pretending not to be alienated by primitive behaviour – somehow means that said behaviour isn’t there and didn’t happen. And that it won’t happen tomorrow, or the day after. And with ever greater boldness.
As if a high-trust society means letting antisocial fuckers act with impunity.
On high-trust societies and those who struggle with the concept.
Including an attempt to warm a car; fun with Goffin’s cockatoo; and raving in Cramlington circa 1993.

All this and more.
Come to think of it, I’m not entirely sure what loving one’s body might mean, beyond the obvious off-colour jokes. But apparently, it’s something that one is supposed to proclaim as an accomplishment, a credential of progressivism. I have, however, noted that it tends to be announced by people whose declared triumph in this matter is not altogether convincing, and whose basis for doing so is generally much slimmer than they are.
On the ideological gratification of thwarting clever children; on shoehorning pretentious racial guilt into the world of dentistry; and on not wearing knickers in a terribly radical way.
All this and more.
Including some intriguing meat; on preparing the wrong concerto; an impromptu display of vocal range; and five hundred years of the vulgar tongue in searchable archive form.

All this and more.
What struck me was the claim by Dr Nisha Verma, our adjunct assistant professor and “person of science,” that she would be “more than happy to have a conversation” – i.e., regarding whether men can get pregnant – while suggesting quite strongly that this is not in fact the case.
A Senate hearing on drug safety takes a somewhat surreal turn.
The question “what is queer food?” is, we’re told by Professor Elias, “a question that’s coming up a lot lately.” If only among academics desperate for an angle, an excuse for claiming a salary and wasting other people’s time. Academics much like Professor Elias.
Elias said she does not have a definition for what “queer food” is, but wants “recognition” it exists.
Welcome to the bleeding edge of human mental activity.
Quite how one can write “an illustrated guide to queer food,” complete with recipes, as Professor Ilias has, while simultaneously being unable to define what such a thing is, should it exist, is a question I leave to the reader.
Including breakdancing taken literally; the biology of make-believe; a collection of found cassette tapes; and a gallery of strange phenomena.

All this and more.