I'd never heard of Bodyworlds before, but Mod Laurie at Testosterone Nation recommended one of the videos (this one, from the Los Angeles exhibition).
Visually, very cool stuff: I've always liked seeing how complex things go together -- including the human body's musculature. Like Laurie, I like the athletic poses, too, especially the one with the baseball bat. Kinda irks me that even the dead guys have better lats than mine, but there we are.
Even Freud asked: What do women want?
Prodos interviews Betsy Speicher on what men need to know about women.
Then check out this video on Neil Strauss, his involvement with Mystery Method (includes appearances by Mystery himself). You might wish to take a look at the book they're talking about, The Game.
I mean, ask yourself: What about the famous "rape" scene in The Fountainhead? What's going on there? Every credible explanation I've ever seen of that one has been from a woman. Every one. Can you do any better?
I didn't think so.
I've found (on the internet, naturally) some old videos of the legendary Eugene Sandow, posing. No steroids were involved in creating this guy's physique. Two videos here, from 1894. This one's from 1903. Wow.
This Russian guy, Alexander Vishnevskiy, obviously has used a methylated substance or two, but he's got an interesting posing routine. Looks like he's put some elements of yoga and mime into his routine, too, and it works. I don't know if he won his contest (I don't follow competitive bodybuilding), but his voluntary muscle control is admirable.
Of course, there is inspiration to be drawn from the female form as well, and a nice jumpstart for such inspiration can be found here.
No comparison of stature intended (Sandow is the model for the Mr. Olympia trophy/statue, and he sure deserves to be) but...damn, I have better legs than Sandow. I never thought to say so before, but then I never noticed it before today, either. Nice thought to have in mind, though, as I walk out the door for a session of squats and calf raises...
Courtesy of The Discovery Channel Canada.
Albert Hoffman's 1943 discovery of LSD was accidental, also, but probably not as widely useful as safety glass or Velcro...
(Hat tip to Dean Esmay)
Jesse Walker on how to make a half-assed appeal to pro-liberty voters (he uses the word "libertarian," but then he's writing for Reason's Hit & Run):
The short answer -- and this applies to Republican candidates too -- is: (a) Don't be as bad as the other guy, and (b) Be actively good on at least one important issue. As far as Democrats in particular are concerned, I have three specific pieces of advice:
1. Be good on the issues where the left is supposed to be good....In general, don't be afraid to condemn an ill-conceived intervention abroad, and don't forget that freedoms exist that do not involve the word "reproductive."
2. When you talk about tolerance, mean it. I'm glad to see you sticking up for gays and religious minorities. Don't wreck the effect by picking on smokers and gun owners.
3. Don't be a slave to the bureaucracy.We have airline deregulation today because consumer groups, liberal politicians, and left-wing muckrakers wanted to break up the old airline cartel. But in the years since then, few Democratic leaders have emulated their example and looked for ways to shrink the state. In the presidential races, the two significant exceptions are Gary Hart and Jerry Brown, and of course they both lost. (When Brown ran in '92, he called for abolishing the Department of Education. Sounds a lot better than No Child Left Behind.)
So that's all I ask. When Republicans are bad on civil liberties and foreign policy, be an alternative. Extend your social tolerance to folks to the other side of the culture war. And if you can't be as pro-market as Hayek, try at least to be as pro-market as Jerry Brown.
Two words: never happen.
These two guys have too much time on their hands. Or maybe it just doesn't get cold soon enough in Maine.
Either way, if you don't enjoy this, you have no sense of wonder.
(Hat tip: Paul Hsieh at NoodleFood)
Forty years after Swedish babe Gunilla Knutson urged American men to "Take it off...take it all off" with Noxzema Medicated Instant Shave, we have filmmaker Emily Bergstrom approaching the topic with a different twist.
A more, shall we say, Lysistrata-inspired twist.
Gentlemen, you'll want to watch this and go find your safety razors. You don't want to be Stubble Boy!
(No, they don't really want you using a safety razor: the whole NoScruf.org thing is a viral marketing campaign for the five-blade Gillette Fusion cartridge razor, which I as a confirmed single-blade badassguy will never, ever use. But it's still funny, and very, very well done.)
Why there are shaving videos on the internet, I have no idea. But there are.
This one shows a guy getting a professional barber shave in Djerba, Tunisia, complete with a manual epilating performed at the finish.
On this one, you can perhaps pick up some ideas on why men take up wetshaving. This kid hasn't much facial hair at all and yet he still manages quite a bit of red, irritated skin after using his cartridge razor (looks like a Schick Quattro to me) and some Edge gel. He needs some kind soul to take him by the hand, introduce him to safety razors and brushes, and improve his life considerably thereby.
Hey, somebody should have helped me, too, when I was even younger: my father shaved with an electric. Never did the whole taught-to-shave-by-Dad routine. I can't even remember whether I first shaved with an old Norelco double-header or with a Trac II double-blade cartridge -- but I do remember being dissatisfied with both. I tried a Gillette Adjustable safety razor when I was almost 30...didn't know how to use it and tore my face and neck to shreds.
Now, of course, I use a safety razor every day, and I love it.
Funny shaving commercial here.
And as a reward for making it this far, enjoy Eva Longoria shaving her legs.
Finally, would any discussion of shaving and popular culture be complete without reference to the famous shaving/bathtub scene in A Hard Day's Night? Of course not. As George Harrison tells John Junkin, "Honestly, me mind boggles at the very idea: a grown man and you haven't shaved with a safety razor." Junkin's response? Well, you'll just have to watch the scene to find out.
This Christian Science Monitor story will probably open quite a few eyes: Transdniestria? Where the hell is that?
But I have to admit that, while I had heard of the region named Eritrea, I was surprised to discover that it had not only become an independent nation but enjoyed UN membership. East Timor officially split from Indonesia a few years ago, and Montenegro recently voted to split from Serbia. How many micro-states are there? To make the question more interesting, how many micro-states and non-recognized states are there?
I knew of Transdniestria, not because of my geopolitical savvy, but because an anecdote related in The Game takes place there. A friend of mine, raised in the Soviet Union, told me that there was no such place.
But what are Monaco, Andorra, and San Marino if not micro-states? How about the Vatican, Singapore, and (before July 1997) Hong Kong? Micro-states all, and they have been around for some time, so I guess they're "viable."
And what about the biggies, by which I mean Palestine and Taiwan? Not micro-states -- at least, not Taiwan, but: How many other states recognize them? Taiwan is certainly viable and has been since 1949. Palestine...well, they certainly get a lot of press, don't they?
I don't think much of the idea of "self-determination of peoples," not much at all. To me it smacks of tribalism at best, racist determinism at worst. Or maybe they're the same thing. But in general I wish these micro-states well. If nothing else, some visionaries see that as a trend anyway (James Dale Davidson and Lord Rees-Mogg in The Sovereign Individual believe that China, India, and probably Canada will break up in the near future).
I read somewhere that Moldova gets much of its electricity from Transdniestria. I want to visit there. I want the visa stamp in my passport.
"We have a socialist party and a theocratic party because so many people refuse to consider or admit that certain things they support, free lunches and forced prayer, are incompatible with freedom."
That's from Gus Van Horn, and he's really right about that "refuse to consider" business. A further problem, though, is that "incompatible with freedom" just doesn't strike many Americans as a problem these days. Too many other things are as important, or more important, than freedom.
Good comment about bloggers as the pamphleteers of the day, too.
Think you know how to shave your face? Think again, punk.
Do you recognize and properly employ the following terms?
hydristics
lubricity
frequency
velocity
binary mixing and buffering
"rolling steel"
volatility
V2 ratio
reduction
subduction
Yeah, I didn't think so, pal.
Here's how it is:
Even the elementary wet shaver needs to possess some understanding of the V2 ratio, hydroplastic buffer, 3X cutting forms and the concept of wet mix.
Yeah. So there.
Charles A. Roberts of Enchante in Austin, Texas, is the developer of Method Shaving, which he outlines in Wet Shaving Systematics: A Primer on the Roberts Method of Wet Shaving (RMWS). It's his book, 75 pages long, on shaving. I kid you not.
Now, I'm not full of contempt for Charles Roberts. I'm not even mocking him, really. Well, not much...But in 75 pages of discussing his Method, he doesn't tell you how to shave according to his method. To be fair, he doesn't really claim to do so (and it is something he teaches in person in Austin). But I've seen more detailed discussions of actual Method Shaving practice on blogs and discussion boards than Roberts provides in this book, and he refers to it as a primer when it really is not.
That's one thing. For another, he gets a few facts wrong (the Schick Injector, according to him, came about in the 1970s; sorry, Charles, but mine was made in 1939). And the whole thing needs a bit more editing.
But there's a manner of attitude which irks me. No, I don't fault Roberts for being opinionated. Not at all. But take his subtitle, in which he refers to the "Roberts Method of Wet Shaving." That's my beef, really, because throughout his book he doesn't do that. Nope, if you don't shave his way, you're not wet shaving. Period. Doesn't matter what you've read on Badger & Blade or on Shave My Face.com or on Shaveblog. Nope, it's my way or the highway with Mr. Roberts, and oh, there's only one appropriate shaving brush, too, available from him for over two hundred bucks. Otherwise you just ain't a wetshaver. Sheesh.
I mentioned above that I'm not full of contempt for Charles A. Roberts. Actually, I bear no contempt for him at all. He seems to be an interesting guy and I would like to meet him, actually ... and I'm interested in trying some of his HydroLast products, too. I would even recommend that you read his book if, as I do, you have an above-average interest in shaving (I have a barbed-wire beard paired with sensitive skin, and my entire neck region requires shaving, from my firm jawline down to my well-developed, manly pecs).
I share Roberts' admiration for King Camp Gillette, too -- in fact I use Gillette Super Speed safety razors from the Forties and Fifties with pleasure. I did enjoy reading the book. You probably will, too. But it has a hell of an undertone I recognize from my Catholic upbringing, and from those, eh, other monotheists much in the news these days: There is but One True Way, and the path is narrow, and those who stray from it shall be cast into the Lake of Fire.
I'm not interested in another church. I think Charles Roberts has worthwhile ideas to offer, but I'm with Bruce Lee: take what works for you, discard the rest. In the end, it's my shave, and it's my face against that steel.
Good reading: short profiles of Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Orianna Falacci.
The Ali profile appeared in The Sunday Times, and begins with a reminder: "A letter staked through the heart of the dying film director Theo van Gogh began: 'Open letter to Hirsi Ali.' " That kind of thing will get your attention.
Ali wrote the script for van Gogh's film Submission, and was until recently a member of the Dutch Parliament until stripped of her citizenship. She's moving to the United States, and Holland's loss is America's gain, I say.
Ali is compelling. But if her fervour is her strength, it is also her weakness, alienating the very liberals she should court. Throughout our afternoon together, she brands those who fail to stand up to “the historical mistake of radical Islam” as “the appeasers”. And she uses “appeasers” pointedly. When she was forced to leave her flat, she reflected: “My neighbours confirm the critical view that very few Dutch were brave enough to stand up to the Nazis.” True, perhaps, but not a way to win friends.She is surely right that “appeasers” so fear being called “racist” they would rather let Muslim women in Europe live in submission. But the modern-day Nazis are not just the Islamo-fascists. There are plenty of whites keen to attack innocent Muslims. And the “appeasers” would claim these are the people they are trying to protect. Still, if Europe is no longer big enough for Ali, we are all in trouble. It is sad that the home of the Enlightenment can no longer cope with her right to free speech.
Note her judgment of Tony Blair, too. I'm afraid that Europe is not big enough for Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Daughter of Europe Orianna Fallaci on the Ayatollah Khomeini: "What a pity that, when pregnant with him, his mother did not choose to have an abortion."
Says it all, does it not?
It doesn't get any better than that. It just doesn't, but there's more in this New Yorker profile.
...is oft done with music.
I swear, by everything that is holy, I did not sanction this in 1978 -- nor since: William Shatner's interpretation of "Rocket Man."
As I've mentioned before, Shatner does have an approach -- Free Enterprise was funny, and Shatner made it so. In this scene, he raps Marc Antony's funeral oration for Julius Caesar. And there's this song, in which he actually does the job.
But "Rocket Man?"
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
(Hat tip to Jonah Goldberg at The Corner)
(Earlier posted to SoloPassion)
Most insightful piece I've read yet on the Italian soccer crisis.
Until this week, I didn't even know there was an Italian soccer crisis.
I did know the name Juventus, though...
(Hat tip: Hit & Run)
Keep in mind that according to some, we have in this country a two-party political system, one such known as the Stupid Party and the other, the Evil Party. So I thought I'd take these two quizzes. First up was the Republican Loyalty Quiz:
Your score is 3 on a scale of 1 to 10. You are a solid Democrat. You are not as fiercely ideological or uncompromising as others in the party, but nonetheless remain a reliable supporter. If you could have your way, you'd like to see Democrats leaders take a slightly more accommodating approach on certain issues – and dial down some of their nakedly partisan and bitterly divisive rhetoric.
So, heh, from the Republican perspective I'm a reliable supporter of the Democrats...well, anyway, since I am nothing if not fair and balanced, I then took the Democrat Loyalty Quiz:
Your score is 5 on a scale of 1 to 10. You are a moderate. You agree with Democrats on some issues and Republicans on others, while rejecting the blind, naked partisanship of both sides. You base your vote on issues rather than ideology and principle rather than party, which makes you the quintessential swing voter the media loves to fawn over.
That "issues rather than ideology" business is a clue as to what's wrong with political thought in this country. Still, I take pleasure in knowing that the Stupid Party sees me as Evil, and the Evil Party thinks I'm Stupid. I am Diversity, brother.
Yeah, we all know how politically moderate we Objectivists tend to be, but this quiz was fun: The Politcal Cartoon Rorschach Test.
My result:
You are a moderate. You agree with Democrats on some issues and Republicans on others, while rejecting the blind, naked partisanship of both sides. You base your vote on issues rather than ideology and principle rather than party, which makes you the quintessential swing voter the media loves to fawn over.