Good News: Exercise Is Rooted In White Supremacy History

The smart thing for the editor at Time Magazine should have been to say “you really wrote a piece on this with that headline?” then hit delete and tell Olivia B. Waxman to write something that is not stupid. Because the headline is based literally on her first paragraph

The White Supremacist Origins of Exercise, and 6 Other Surprising Facts About the History of U.S. Physical Fitness

How did U.S. exercise trends go from reinforcing white supremacy to celebrating Richard Simmons? That evolution is explored in a new book by a historian of exercise, Natalia Mehlman Petrzela, author of the book Fit Nation: The Gains and Pains of America’s Exercise Obsession, out Jan. 2023.

Nowadays, at the beginning of every New Year, many Americans hit the gym to work off their holiday feasts. This momentum usually starts to fade in mid-January, according to a 2019 analysis of data on fitness tracking apps by Bloomberg. But such new year’s resolutions are pretty new—as is the concept of exercise as a way to improve bodily health.

The gyms are usually slammed from the 2nd to 8th, then back to normal.

“It’s really not until the 1980s that you start to have a consensus that everybody should be doing some form of exercise,” says Mehlman Petrzela, a professor at the New School in New York City. That’s partly the result of the women’s movement of the 1960s and 1970s, which fought for Title IX, allowing girls to play school sports. That pushed back on notions that girls and women aren’t capable of doing vigorous exercise because they’re fragile.

Title IX is raaaaacist? Who knew!

Perfect for reading on the treadmill or stationary bike, the below conversation with Mehlman Petrzela outlines the earliest ideas on exercise, delves into the history of various popular workouts, and the outsize influence of Richard Simmons.

So they want you to read a book about how exercise makes you a white supremacist while performing raaaaacist exercise? Huh. Anyhow, Waxman interviews Petrzela, and we learn

What’s the most surprising thing you learned in your research?

It was super interesting reading the reflections of fitness enthusiasts in the early 20th century. They said we should get rid of corsets, corsets are an assault on women’s form, and that women should be lifting weights and gaining strength. At first, you feel like this is so progressive.

Then you keep reading, and they’re saying white women should start building up their strength because we need more white babies. They’re writing during an incredible amount of immigration, soon after enslaved people have been emancipated. This is totally part of a white supremacy project. So that was a real “holy crap” moment as a historian, where deep archival research really reveals the contradictions of this moment.

That’s literally the only thing that’s mentioned as “white supremacy” in the article. The rest revolves around different crazes, about men with HIV/AIDS working to show they’re healthy, fads like “reducing machines”, how environmentalists in the 70’s really embraced running, where Pilates came from, and stuff that has nothing to do with raaaaacism. It probably does have something of interest. I still won’t read it, and it was a very, very silly headline. I’m pretty sure that exercise was around in the U.S. prior to the 20th Century.

Read: Good News: Exercise Is Rooted In White Supremacy History »

ZOMG: Children’s Books Could Become A Repository Of Extinct Animals Due To Climate Doom?

I wish I had saved a screenshot of an insane The Atlantic headline from yesterday, as that article was quickly taken down, and this seems very similar. Perhaps they toned down the Doom?

Will Children’s Books Become Catalogs of the Extinct?

The other night, as I began the expansive and continually growing routine of putting my 11-month-old son to bed, we sat together on the rocking chair in his room and read The Tiger Who Came to Tea, by Judith Kerr, and met a tiger who just would not stop eating. My son wasn’t yet ready for sleep and made that clear, so we read Chicken Soup With Rice, by Maurice Sendak. We encountered an elephant and a whale, and traveled through all the months of the year, braving the sliding ice of January and the gusty gales of November. Then we turned, as we always do, to Goodnight Moon, and met more bears, rabbits, a little mouse, a cow, some fresh air, and the stars.

As I slid the books back onto the shelf, they rejoined the long parade of animals around his bedroom: the moose and his muffin, Peter Rabbit, Elmer the patchwork elephant, Lars the polar bear, Lyle the crocodile, stuffed kangaroos and octopi and lions and turtles. Every night, I sing “Baby Beluga” to him as a lullaby: “Goodnight, little whale, goodnight.” (snip)

But lately, I have started to worry that I am populating my son’s imagination with species that could go extinct before he has a chance to understand that they’re real. We read about Physty the same way we do about Custard the dragon. To him, they are equally delightful and fantastical, neither real nor unreal. He sees fossils of dinosaurs, and I tell him that they disappeared millions of years ago. Even if whales or tigers don’t vanish entirely in the next several decades, in our age of accelerated environmental damage—climate change and what some scientists are calling the sixth mass extinction—I’m concerned that many of these books about the incredible, unlikely diversity of animal life on this planet will feel like fairy tales too.

Is it any wonder that kids are emotional wrecks these days, neurotic over the coming climate apocalypse, when people, such as this “climate reporter”, fill their mushy little heads with this doomsday cult crap?

Scientists predict that as many as 1 million plant and animal species are at risk of going extinct, “many within decades,” according to the United Nations. This era of “biological annihilation” is already under way: In ecosystems spanning the globe, the average amount of plant and animal life has fallen by about a fifth—mostly since the beginning of the last century. Climate change is driving these dynamics by limiting or shifting species’ geographical ranges, which alters and removes the food, water, and habitat that they require.

Is this like the prognostications of the Arctic being ice free? Or the Maldives underwater by 2018 and NYC’s west side by 2019? Remember Paul Ehrlich’s population bomb? They’re pretty much never right, but, they’ll keep preaching the doom.

Read: ZOMG: Children’s Books Could Become A Repository Of Extinct Animals Due To Climate Doom? »

Hey, Remember When Trump Was In Office And It Was Racist To Make Chinese Take COVID Tests?

I’m waiting with baited breath for the NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, etc and so on to call this racist now that Biden is doing it

Joe Biden Demands China Travelers Provide Negative COVID Test After Calling Trump’s 2020 COVID Response ‘Nakedly Xenophobic’

Joe Biden will now require travelers from China to show a negative coronavirus test to enter the United States after claiming in 2020 former President Donald Trump’s coronavirus response was “fanning the flames” of “hate, fear and xenophobia” against Asian Americans during the pandemic.

Beginning January 5, travelers from China by air will have to provide a negative Covid-19 test to enter the nation “within two days of their departure from airports in mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau,” Politico reported.

In January 2020, the Trump administration placed travel restrictions on passages arriving from China, where many experts believe coronavirus originated.

Biden called many of those restrictions racist in May 2020, claiming they were “denials, delays and distractions, many of which were nakedly xenophobic.”

“The pandemic has unleashed familiar forces of hate, fear and xenophobia that he always flames … that have always existed in this society,” Biden said.

“But this president brought it with him, has brought with it a new rash of racial messages, verbal and physical attacks and other acts of hate, some subtle, some overt, against the Asian American and Pacific Islanders.”

Now, though, it seems to be fine. The NY Times (which has 3 mentions of Trump and zero of Biden on front page) has a story on it, but, fails to castigate Biden. The Washington Post (also 3 Trump zero Biden) seems to approve of this step, and doesn’t even mention the name of the POTUS. MSNBC, which was unhinged over Trump’s China orders (2 Biden mentions, 10 Trump), only has a video on this, and, no condemnation for Biden (3:23 time watching MSNBC is torture.) The LA Times (no front page mentions of Biden or Trump) is cute

Some scientists are worried the COVID-19 surge in China could unleash a new coronavirus variant on the world that may or may not be similar to the ones circulating now. That’s because every infection is another chance for the virus to mutate.

“What we want to avoid is having a variant enter … the U.S. and spread like we saw with Delta or Omicron,” said Matthew Binnicker, director of clinical virology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn.

See, when Trump tried to keep COVID out of the U.S. from China (it was a little late, let’s be clear about that), it was The Worst Thing. Now? Smart policy.

Read: Hey, Remember When Trump Was In Office And It Was Racist To Make Chinese Take COVID Tests? »

If All You See…

…is an area perfect for a vast wind farm, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Doug Ross @ Journal, with a post on the top 20 tweets.

Read: If All You See… »

Politico Is Very Upset That Republican States Look To “Define Sex”

The most amazing thing here is that it’s actually necessary in the 21st Century for general assemblies to define what we all know and what science says

States aim to define sex, restrict care in new wave of LGBTQ bills

These are actual women

Republican-controlled statehouses passed a record number of restrictions on transgender people in 2022 — from sports to health care — and conservatives aren’t slowing down.

Take South Carolina, where the Legislature may try out a new tactic next year: defining what it means to be a woman. Other conservative states may follow.

State Sen. Danny Verdin, a Republican, filed a joint resolution this month that would amend the South Carolina Constitution to establish that male and female be defined “in the context of reproductive potential… without regard to an individual’s psychological, chosen or subjective experience of gender.”

The people against this constantly tell us we must believe all women, that we must respect them, take care of them, give them opportunity, then turn around and say that men with mental illness and dangly bits are women who can take everything that real, biological women have worked for. Anyway, Verdin is looking to get this on the 2024 ballot as an amendment. Can it pass in South Carolina? Most likely, and you could see this on many ballots in Republican leaning states.

On Capitol Hill, the Republican resolution was designed to thwart the Biden administration’s efforts to codify protections for transgender students by defining “sex” in federal law as the one a person is assigned to at birth. That measure, sponsored by Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.), isn’t likely to get attention in the Senate, but at least six states have already queued up bills focused on LGBTQ restrictions for their 2023 legislative sessions, with others held over from the last cycle or still expected to be officially filed.

Why have Democrats jumped on the bandwagon of mainstreaming mental illness and taking things away from real women? What’s the endgame? Or, is it a case of “that looks cool, let’s back it”?

“This trend of trying to define what gender and sex is is not a new one. What’s new now is that they’re trying to push it in a legal sense,” said Devon Ojeda, senior national organizer at the National Center for Transgender Equality.

The center has been working to organize transgender advocates against these bills and is also focusing its efforts on school boards and medical boards where similar resolutions could be introduced.

“These women’s rights bills are not about women’s rights,” Ojeda said. “People define women in different ways, and I think it will go beyond just excluding trans people. This hurts everybody because everybody deserves access to gender-affirming care. Everybody deserves to get to shape their identity.”

There would be no need to define it if Democrats weren’t batshit insane

Beyond defining gender, there are signs that GOP lawmakers in Missouri and Indiana want to follow Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ lead with copycat bills of Florida’s “Parental Rights in Education” law, a measure dubbed “don’t say gay” by its critics. The law bars educators from leading conversations in public school classrooms about gender and sexuality for children in kindergarten through 3rd grade.

Other conservative fronts include banning books that discuss LGBTQ themes, as well as race or religion, and banning public drag shows.

Kids do not need to be exposed to what is essentially pornography. They shouldn’t be exposed to heterosexual porn in schools, either

https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1607823152687763456

Minors cannot enter strip clubs, they cannot purchase “dirty” magazines. Why are they allowed at these drag shows, which expose them to adult sexual situations? They shouldn’t be, and, by law, aren’t. If adults want to go to this stuff, have it. Let the kids be kids.

Read: Politico Is Very Upset That Republican States Look To “Define Sex” »

Who’s Up For Climate Doom Warnings On Fast Food?

Which would soon be expanded to regular restaurants. The cult keeps culting

Now they want CLIMATE CHANGE warnings on fast food menus: Scientists say environmental impact stamps on food will lead to more sustainable choices

Labels warning you a fast food burger is bad for your health should be joined by one alerting you that your choice is killing the planet as well, scientists say.

A group of American researchers trialled climate change warnings on a fast food menu and found they encouraged people to make more sustainable dietary choices.

Showing participants a red environmental impact stamp on beef items led to almost a quarter more people shying away from them, compared to those who didn’t see the warning.

Environmental guilt was more effective than a green ‘good for the planet’ label, which only encouraged a tenth more people to choose a more sustainable meal.

Piss off. How about putting the warning labels on all the ‘climate change’ conferences?

In their study, published in JAMA Network Open, they argue such a system could have merits because animal-based food production, mostly through beef, accounts for 14.5 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

To test how effective this would be, they enrolled just over 5,000 people in an experiment, with participants put into three groups and shown a fast food menu.

It’s cute and all, but, in a real life situation, would it truly work? Would people who just want to get their damned lunch care that much? And, really, can’t these people just piss off and mind their own business?

Read: Who’s Up For Climate Doom Warnings On Fast Food? »

SCOTUS Forces LGB To Keep Title 42 For Now

In a sane world, all who want to apply for asylum should be required to do it outside the U.S., and every person showing up at the border will be turned away. And every illegal caught in the U.S. would be immediately deported, no questions asked. We aren’t in a same world

Supreme Court blocks Biden administration for now from ending migrant expulsions under Title 42

In a blow to the Biden administration’s ability to set the nation’s immigration policy, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said the government could not halt the expulsion of migrants for public health reasons under the controversial Title 42 program.

That program, which has been in place since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, must continue while courts assess a lawsuit filed by Republican officials in 19 states who say that unwinding the Title 42 policy would unleash a national “catastrophe.”

The emergency intervention from the high court came days after the Trump-era program was set to expire. The justices announced they will hear arguments about the program in the upcoming year, but limited their review to whether the conservative states may intervene in the litigation. Oral arguments are expected in February. In the meantime, expulsions will continue.

Expulsions should ALWAYS continue for those who should not be here.

The high court’s unsigned order noted that Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan would have denied the emergency request from the states and allowed the administration to lift the Title 42 policy.

Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented from the court’s ruling Tuesday, joined by Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. The court’s decision on the states’ emergency request was “unwise,” Gorsuch wrote. “The emergency on which those (Title 42) orders were premised has long since lapsed.”

“The only plausible reason for stepping in,” Gorsuch said, has to do with the states’ concerns about immigration and the situation on the border.

“But the current border crisis is not a COVID crisis,” Gorsuch added.  “And courts should not be in the business of perpetuating administrative edicts designed for one emergency only because elected officials have failed to address a different emergency. We are a court of law, not policymakers of last resort.”

I understand Gorsuch’s point, but, consider that, even though Brandon said that COVID was over, the Executive Branch isn’t really acting like it. They continue to pimp vaccines and boosters, and even voluntary masking. Type cdc.gov, and the first thing you see is COVID. All the way across. They just expanded the updated vaccines, which seem to neither stop COVID or stop COVID related deaths, to those 6 months to 5 years

Read: SCOTUS Forces LGB To Keep Title 42 For Now »

Bummer: Unchecked Consumerism Driving Climate Doom

Say, who’s going to put a check on it? Will Corporate Knights’ (they’re pretty Woke) Jennifer Ellen Good tell us?

How unchecked consumerism helps drive climate change

As extreme weather events in Canada and around the world are linked to human-made climate change, there is one story that continues to be left out: the connection between climate change and the products we purchase.

Recent research shows that across a product’s life cycle — from raw material extraction through manufacturing, distribution, use and disposal — the total embedded carbon emissions are 6.3 times the product’s weight. Interestingly, it is the product’s supply chain, or what we do not see related to making and distributing products, that is especially carbon intensive.

In the context of human history, the changes to our relationship with the material world have happened in the blink of an eye. Our ancestors lived in direct connection with the land that physically and spiritually sustained them.

Only in very recent human history have so many of us lived our lives at such a great distance from that which sustains us. Today, unchecked consumerism is helping drive a changing climate that is very much affecting all people.

Lots of whining about buying too much for the holidays, and people should make an effort to buy less. Nag nag nag.

We must challenge stories that encourage fast and “cheap” consumption and demand the telling of — and share — stories that accurately link our copious consumption to the devastating effects of climate change. We must elect leaders who will do the hard work of transitioning away from an endless growth economy based on the excessive consumption of monetarily cheap but planet-expensive products. We must demand vital product information such as life cycle carbon footprints. And we must all commit to resisting the constant appeals to consume fast and cheap, by giving less stuff, more slowly and thoughtfully.

Who’s this we? And who’s going to enforce this? Oh, right, the elected leaders who will implement laws. Jennifer doesn’t want to quite come out and say that government must force this change. That could make a few climate cult disciples a bit nervous.

Read: Bummer: Unchecked Consumerism Driving Climate Doom »

If All You See…

…is wood rotting from extreme weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Don Surber, with a post on looters doing the government’s work.

Read: If All You See… »

COVID Cult Seems Rather Upset Over DeSantis’ Vaccine Probe

The vaccine makers and all those who support the vaccines have nothing to hide, right? They should welcome an inquiry as to how well the vaccines work, right?

DeSantis’s request for COVID vaccine probe denounced by health experts

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s (R) petition for a grand jury investigation into COVID-19 vaccines, in which he decries the ongoing vaccine campaign as “propaganda” by the Biden administration, is drawing fierce criticism from health experts.

Physicians and public health experts say his request betrays decades of established procedure designed to ensure the safety and efficacy of the vaccines, and only serves to stoke further immunization fears.

DeSantis’s petition for a grand jury investigation was approved by the Florida Supreme Court on Thursday, clearing the way for what his office described as a probe into “wrongdoing committed against Floridians related to the COVID-19 vaccine.” (snip)

In his petition, DeSantis expressed suspicion over the COVID-19 vaccines’ ability to prevent transmission of the virus, as well as public statements made on the subject by officials like President Biden and outgoing chief White House medical adviser Anthony Fauci. As has been previously stated by physicians and researchers, no vaccine is 100 percent effective, but studies have consistently shown the coronavirus vaccines offer strong enough protection for recipients to prevent severe disease, hospitalization and death.

“It is impossible to imagine that so many influential individuals came to this view on their own. Rather, it is likely that individuals and companies with an incentive to do so created these perceptions for financial gain,” DeSantis suggested in his petition.

Rather than showing the data that proves that the Wuhan Flu vaccines are safe and protect people from getting COVID, the “experts” would rather demonize DeSantis and bloviate

Brian Castrucci, president and CEO of public health group the de Beaumont Foundation, said DeSantis “appears to be focused on creating fear around vaccines that have been shown to be safe and effective,” rather than protecting the lives of Floridians.

“These vaccines have been tested and scrutinized more than any other vaccine, and they continue to save lives. Vaccine safety is not a partisan issue and attempting to make it one puts lives at risk,” Castrucci added.

Um, the majority of people who are dying with COVID were vaccinated. How many people do you know who were vaxxed and caught COVID?

Joshua Sharfstein, vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at Johns Hopkins University and former principal deputy commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), said in a statement to The Hill that while there are legitimate avenues for evaluating vaccine recommendations, DeSantis’s investigation request was not an example of one.

“This is turning a matter of health and science into a political wedge issue, with the likely consequence that many people will be misled into placing themselves and their families at risk of serious illness and death,” Sharfstein said.

Right, because the vax Fascists didn’t use the vaccines as a political wedge issue, with all their mandates, firings, forced vaccinations, vaccine passports, and so forth.

Read: COVID Cult Seems Rather Upset Over DeSantis’ Vaccine Probe »

Pirate's Cove