[saturday quiz] ten more to test you

1 Donald F. Duncan introduced in 1929 a toy based on a weapon used by 16th-century Filipino hunters. What is it called?

2 Which was the first credit card?

3 Name anything that happened in Britain on September 3rd, 1752.

4 In which Puccini opera do friends ply their landlord with drinks to avoid paying the rent?

5 Mrs. Thomas Smith of Ryde, NSW, Australia, produced a new variety of fruit in 1868. What is it called?

6 The city of St. Petersburg stands on which river?

7 Which is the largest Spanish-speaking country in terms of population?

8 We know that a camel with one hump is a dromedary. What is a camel with two humps?

9 What's the world’s most popular Non Alcoholic Drink?

10 What are the caves at Lascaux famous for?

Answers here ...

[gay parades] russia's view of the matter

I wrote about the Russian attitude to homosexuality here.

Bag wrote, I believe tongue-in-cheek … Quick. Set the Police on to her.

Not Saussure may have missed Bag's intent [or not] … Remember James is writing from Russia, Bag.

The link shows the homosexuals beaten up in the Moscow parade.

Russia is a country of family values and traditions. It believes that a man and a woman get together, marry and have a family, though not always in that order. There's always been deviance [using the term to mean 'differing from the norm in this particular society'] but in the acting profession and certain other sections of society.

It doesn't see any problem with what they call 'normal relations' as the model for society. It's a literal country. The doctor is dressed like and looks like a doctor. The airline pilot looks like an airline pilot. The pharmaceutical chemist looks like it, in his white jacket and mask.

A little girl looks like a little angel and stays with mama and babushka. A little boy roams the yards but not the streets. A man must be strong for his woman because there are many dangers. A woman must also be strong in her own way.

This is their society and true, it is changing, becoming more westernized.

Into this comes the foreign gay activist to coordinate a demonstration of local gays. The man is therefore on a hiding to nothing because he is directly challenging a huge society's values. I'm quite surprised he is still alive. Maybe he's on borrowed time, unless he can get out of the country quickly.

Please read nothing more into my comments than what I have stated.

[discrimination] voltaire maxim must prevail

Charles Robertson has said, upon his return:

It is, apparently, a problem that we don't have anti-discrimination legislation. But why?

I'm with him to this point. Then he adds:

It is certainly appropriate that such rules should be applied to public bodies. That goes without question - the government is paid for by all of us, and exists to serve our collective interests. Bigotry has no place there.

I must respectfully disagree. However, Charles qualifies his own remarks:

If the owner of Prejudiced Ltd has an irrational hatred of a given group of individuals, and doesn't want to employ them or trade with them - why force him or her to?

Charles then adds:

Please note: I'm not defending discrimination of any kind.

To which I reply, in his comments section:

I am. Very much so. People can say what they darned well like, as far as I'm concerned. The moment we make rules about what a person can or cannot say, it's the road to tyranny.

Having strongly asserted the Voltaire maxim, [mentioned here]I also assert the Free Jersey maxim - that if they want to shoot themselves in both feet by denying themselves access to a wider (and potentially more talented) pool of labour, and prefer to artificially constrict their own available market, isn't that a good thing as it will be harder for their business to survive?

Precisely. The only arbiter here is market forces. As for the public sector, he should have every right to bad-mouth, say, dirty Trinitarians - he just won't be promoted or given any position of note. He'll just be shunned. That's prejudice against him.

So yes - I defend discrimination because it's impossible to stop and because to try to legislate it out of existence is worse than the original offence.

And there is a self-actualizing tendency against the bigot anyway, without any legislation being required.

[language] storeroom of values

This blog tries to steer a neutral course on this issue but just had to report a conversation from today:

Lady client [seeing the post on reading maps]: What's heterosexual?

Me: Opposite of homosexual.

Lady client: You mean "normal"?

[blogpower awards] final categories posted

Annual Blogpower Awards

Categories have now been prepared and are posted over at Blogpower for your perusal.

[greener than thou] bush and the eu jockey for position

This is bad:

First some good: Angela Merkel has called for a major [ecological] deal, including slowing the rise in average temperatures by way of a cut in global emissions by 50% below 1990 levels by 2050.

However, George W Bush, who has consistently refused to countenance Kyoto, instead seems to be trying to set up a separate framework on climate change talks outside the G8.

In Washington, he said the US would hold a series of meetings bringing together "nations that produced most greenhouse gas emissions, including nations with rapidly growing economies like India and China".

"The United States is in the lead," he said. "The world is on the verge of great breakthroughs that will help us become better stewards of the environment."

I think if you look through this blog, which is generally quite pro-American, even pro-Republican, if not pro the current White House incumbents, you'll never find me refer to Bush as an environmental criminal. Now you can. Bush is an environmental criminal.

This is good

Odiyya reports that despite Bush's attempts to have it his own way:

Arnold Schwarzenegger arrived in BC today amidst a ceremonial welcome by the provinces First Nations community. Arnold was given three ceremonial gifts before getting down to business with BC Premier Gordon Campbell and signing a five point agreement on fighting global warming.

The two leaders have committed to working together on the issue regardless of the participation of the US and Canadian federal governments.

So, while world leaders squabble over who'll get the kudos and whose plan they'll use, other leaders actually get down to business.