A Question Of Sex?

I always prefer to use gender, but you know how the British are for these things, such as calling the restroom the 'toilet', when all that does for me is conjure up images of obstinate turds floating in the bowl. Yes, our American cousins are more refined than us on more occasions than we really care to examine.

Back to the post, as I've been struggling whether to open up a can of worms on planning and international planning that can never be fully resolved. As with most things in life, it's a case of the dynamic so putting it down in black and white often leads to intellectual obsolescence quite quickly. But a start must be made and I think a warm up post on gender equality might be a good way to begin the proceedings. It's probably just as contentious.

A long time ago I realised that all the most well known chefs are male and I couldn't figure out why something so intuitive and creative could be represented mostly by men rather than women. Is this because of men's inherent superiority or some perverse misrepresentation that when it comes to running a kitchen, women are best and then leave the fellas to the superior execution of Crème brûlée and blow torches in a restaurant?

I was just ordering some food here in Beijing and had a thought because a long time ago I had the good fortune to work in one of the best kitchens in Hollywood, Los Angeles while on vacation from the marketing degree I was doing. That place was stuffed with guys too.

 

So I just noticed at Bread Talk (where they do the awesome Crouching Tiger Hidden Bacon) that all the kitchen staff are guys.

 

And all the service staff are women. I've only just figured this out so maybe I'm just late to the game but it has nothing to do with culinary superiority, it doesn't take that much skill to learn a set list of bread products (good as they are)  but it does take something I observed in a kitchen of macho Mexicans. 

Brute strength is required to cook. I know this because lifting out a tray of chickens from a sizzling oven with boiling hot oil and juice takes not only strength but endurance, doing that and a hundred other demading tasks each and every day. Maybe the reason for men's dominance in the Kitchen and as celebrity chefs is more down to a strength advantage which makes me think that perhaps we're missing out on some tasty talent out there. What do you think? Am I off-on-one or does it make sense.

Or are men simply superior?

The Pentagon's Human Sexual Energy "Research" On Children

Why is it there's always a two star General or above in these dark side of humanity situations where paedophiles are on call to the military to terrify children into sexual fight or flight emotional territory which is then tapped and measured like a commodity? 

General Schwarz something or other with the gold rimmed glasses? When we catch up with you, even if you're desking it  by now with a civvy street number at the NSA we will pay extra close attention to your case so that other MILAB victims will have the courage to come forward like Sarah Stanga and we can start to clean this mess up.

Hat's off to Miles Johnston (and the Ammach Project) who was pressed for time and apologizes for his multiple questioning in the video information.

Via Randy Maugans

Important Update: Sarah's testimony has been corroborated by Miranda Kelly at Duncan O'Finionan's blog and her testimony supports David Icke's work that Royal Family members including Prince Charles have again been witnessed at Satanic Ritual Abuse events (SRA). I must point out that to date not one of David Icke's allegations including against George Bush, have been taken to court. This speaks loudly is hard to ignore.

Professor Simon Schaffer - History & Philosophy Of Science (Cambridge)

I was reluctant to listen to Melvyn Bragg's latest 'In Our Time' discussion on The Scientific Method. I assumed it would be historically inaccurate and preaching the gospel of science. This is the one where science thinks it's a meta-theory and has metastasized into a Latter Day Saints Church of Scientific Materialism. 

This is considerably more dangerous than any other religion. We've always killed each other over the business of God but by and large have left the planet intact to start over again. Our current materialist science trajectory is a wasteland of pollution, planetary asset stripping, ecocide and nukes. The last point is the most pressing as Depleted Uranium (DU) weapon used in the Middle East by the Christian West has left a radioactive footprint greater than Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

The disposable society creates disposable humans.

Materialist science's greatest failure is its ability to grow more food than ever so that half the planet are obese and the other half are starving. With a population estimated at seven billion there have never been more hungry or sick people on the planet today. 

I don't like losing opportunities because my biases got in the way. I decided to give the Scientific Method by In Our Time a try but my suspicions were confirmed when Melvyn Bragg subjects senior UCL lecturer in Philosophy of Science, Michela Massimi on air with an inexplicable monologue of infantile scientific jingoism. This is a term I invented to describe a consumer society deluded that materialist science will shepherd humanity through another 1859 coronal mass ejection. The telegraph system was knocked out that time. It was the closest to iPhone technology we had and as we're cyclically due for another it's worth spending half a day researching who has an underground base ticket the State has been building for VIP bankers since the 40's paid for by ordinary tax paying workers.

Fortunately Simon Schaffer dissipates the early negativity by sharing Isaac Newtons principle obsession with super woo eschatology when he wasn't knocking out better Keppler algebra. The show picks up after this and becomes one of my favourites but despite Melvyn not because of him. I felt upbeat after listening and that was so very welcome as I expected to feel irritated. If the scientific narrative gatekeepers are astute enough to elegantly outline that our science is intellectually incoherent then there's a chance we can rescue science and get a better role and redefinition of it's method, its purpose and it's coexistence with the unmeasurable and the unrepeatable.

Look, I don't have a problem with science that takes care of hungry bellies at home instead of landing on the moon. I'm all for a science that levels inequalities globally instead of building more blow up science projects like the CERN large hadron collider. That kind of sick science has only one immediate beneficiary and that will be the military industrial complex's craven need for new enemies in space to plunder the galaxy when our planet is spent.

Our materialist science has to go. When it fails (as it will when the cost burden imposed on Universe is greater than Universe accepts) we need to have a conversation about the kind of science that provides what we need instead of what we want. I felt very grateful last night that the likes of Simon Scaffer are equipped to make the right kind of suggestions with examples that ordinary people can understand.

Very very rarely I have an urge to get back to the UK of CCTV. The History of Philosophy and science at UCL or Cambridge just overtook doing a Masters at SOAS in Asian Studies.

You should listen to the show. I never have anything good to say about the science establishment and so here is my type of scientific anomaly.