Showing posts with label Sly Fawkes Talks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sly Fawkes Talks. Show all posts

Saturday, May 26, 2018

Sly Says: Food Insecurity in America: What Can Employers Do?


Click to Enlarge

The United States needs to change a lot of things before we can have an overall healthy and happy population. Let's start with the absolute basics: food and shelter.
In this piece I'm going to focus on food, so I will address shelter in a cursory way. I work delivering food, which is ironic because I don't have enough money for adequate food. I drive past groups of homeless people, some of them in wheel chairs huddled together for warmth. This is so wrong. There's no excuse for it. I will address this problem in detail in another post.
Both lack of shelter and lack of adequate food lead to costly health problems that could be avoided. It would be less expensive in the long run to provide basic shelter, food, and health care to the public than it is to pay for medical crises and chronic health problems resulting from inadequate access to the necessities of life.
A while ago, a Facebook acquaintance who perpetually shares about her perpetual diets shared a picture of a fully stocked freezer. Granted, this freezer contained a lot of prepared foods, i.e. frozen dinners. Said acquaintance and her perpetually dieting cronies proceeded with the inevitable food shaming that happens when you live in a society which believes in size normativity rather than health at every size and which refuses to acknowledge that not everyone has access to the same resources. There were comments like "OMG, inflammation!" "OMG, diabetes!" and "OMG, teh OBEEEESITEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111!!!!!!!!!!" 
I stated that as a person who is food insecure, this refrigerator looked like the larder of Heaven to me, and that I did not believe in food policing.
Granted, it is ideal to eat fewer processed foods. However, time and money play a huge part in determining what people can and will eat. For instance, when I was making $40,000 per year and cooking for just two people (my son and me) I would order meal kits from services like Home Chef and Chef'd. The ingredients were fresh and minimally processed, and I enjoyed preparing them. When I lost my job due to health problems, all that went out the window.
I have diabetes and should eat at regular intervals to avoid blood sugar dips and spikes. This, however, does not happen. Because I'm rationing food (or simply don't have food) I tend to wait until I am close to passing out before I eat. Believe me, I am not thinking very much about carbohydrate content when I finally get my hands on food. I am thinking about getting some chow down the hatch so I don't end up doing a face-plant.
In spite of being a large person, which people have been conditioned to think means that I must eat 60 buckets of Kentucky Fried Chicken every day, I actually don't have much of an appetite. I eat to ameliorate symptoms such as brain fog and dizziness. Sometimes I feel hunger, but I know the sensation will pass. My hunger cues have been messed up for years and will probably never be normal again. This is thanks to developing an eating disorder at twelve years old because society taught me that the worst thing a person could possibly be was fat.
You know, I wish I had the money to afford 60 buckets of Kentucky Fried Chicken on a daily basis. I wouldn't eat Kentucky Fried Chicken. I don't like it. The amount of MSG in it would make me wheeze for a week. However, if I had the money to buy 60 buckets of Kentucky Fried Chicken every day, I'd be doing okay. That stuff ain't cheap!
Regarding the obesity and poverty connection, it isn't so much that poor people gorge themselves whenever they get their grubby mitts on food. The fact is, dieting destroys a person's metabolism and promotes weight gain. For all but a very small percentage of dieters, the weight temporarily lost through dieting returns with friends. People living in poverty are forced to be on a perpetual diet. The body goes into starvation mode and does what it was made to do: store fat for times of scarcity.
Instead of focusing on making everyone look like svelte supermodels, we as a society should be focusing on insuring that everyone has access to adequate food. Not because doing so will make everyone become a certain arbitrary kind of pretty, but because people who have access to adequate food, whatever size they may be, are healthier and happier.
I will now jump off my anti diet culture soapbox and onto my Everyday Socialism soapbox. 
You can call it "charity" if the word socialism is bothersome to you.
Since the GOP Clown Car will oppose doing the right thing for anyone but the one percent and corporations at every turn, it is up to We The People to do right by our neighbors. So, until we can vote the current mess out of office, what can we do?
When it comes to donating to non-profit organizations, you do better giving a monetary donation to a charity such as a homeless shelter rather than a non-perishable food donation. This is due to the fact that the people who work at shelters can order supplies in bulk. They are attempting to provide for multiple people. One can of corn isn't going to make that much difference.
However, in a smaller setting, individual items can make a difference.
I propose that employers set up donation boxes where people can leave food items for their co-workers to take, no questions asked. People can then give according to their means and take according to their needs. That can of corned beef hash could be a lifesaver for someone who wasn't able to afford to bring lunch. 
Employers could provide basic food items for their employees, i.e. bread, cheese, peanut butter, canned soup, crackers. They could leave a donation jar in the break room. Thus, if an employee had a little spare change, they could drop it into the donation jar to offset the cost of providing basic food items for the staff.
Restaurants and cafeterias could provide a low-cost food item free for employees who needed such, i.e. soup or a grilled cheese sandwich. 
Knowing they had access to food at work could reduce employee absences.
A person who is starving is not motivated to get up and go, particularly when they know that the more energy they expend, the hungrier they will get. Hunger doesn't inspire people to work hard. It inspires depression and demotivation. Food deprivation inspires obsession with food. People who can't think about anything but food are not going to be able to focus on other tasks.
Adequate food, adequate shelter, and adequate health care are three non-negotiables in a successful society. We need to demand these things and keep demanding them until we get them. 
Until our government stops failing us, We the People need to find ways to take care of one another as best we can.

~Sly Has Spoken~

Image copyright juliahenze @123rf.com








Saturday, May 19, 2018

New Blow For Reproductive Rights


"Trump to deny funds for clinics that refer for abortion."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-to-deny-funds-to-clinics-that-refer-for-abortion/ar-AAxrYOo?OCID=ansmsnnews11&ffid=gz
Because we all know what President Pussy Grabber thinks women's lives are worth.
There are more reasons for abortion than unwanted pregnancy.
There are more types of unwanted pregnancy than "promiscuous hussy getting busy with every dude in town," which is what the anti-choice lot tries to convince everyone that abortion is all about across the board.
The anti-choice lot always depicts abortion as being the straight-up murder of a fully formed, adorable, healthy white baby.
Let's just say for a minute that the anti-choicers are right. There are no other reasons for abortion than Promiscuous Hussies wanting to get down but not wanting to pay the piper for their Promiscuous Hussying.
The simple answer would seem to be providing birth control to reduce the number of abortions.
Nope! Providing birth control is giving a de facto thumbs up to Promiscuous Hussying.
So, let's take away all reproductive rights, like the GOP wants to do.
Are the anti-choicers going to adopt all the unwanted babies?
Yeah--we saw how that worked out in Romania under the rule of Nicolae Ceauศ™escu.
Speaking of Nicolae Ceauศ™escu, here is a passage from Wikipedia to ruminate on.
"His secret police, the Securitate, was responsible for mass surveillance as well as severe repression and human rights abuses within the country, and he suppressed and controlled the media and press, implementing methods that were among the harshest, most restrictive and brutal in the world. Economic mismanagement due to failed oil ventures during the 1970s led to skyrocketing foreign debts for Romania; in 1982, he exported much of the country's agricultural and industrial production in an effort to repay them. The shortages that followed drastically lowered living standards, leading to heavy rationing of food, water, oil, heat, electricity, medicine, and other necessities. His cult of personality experienced unprecedented elevation, followed by extensive nepotism and the intense deterioration of foreign relations, even with the Soviet Union."
A despot is a despot is a despot.
The truth is, I honestly don't think that Lord Dampnut gives a rip about abortion one way or another. I think he is kissing the asses of those who elected him and is doing what his puppet masters command. He hasn't got two working brain cells to rub together. His masters let him have his Twitter. He makes an ass of himself, which distracts people from what the evil slimeballs behind the scenes are actually up to.
Now this:
Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America said, "Abortion is not health care or birth control and many women want natural health care choices, rather than hormone-induced changes."
I've read over this several times. I'm not sure what the hell it even means.
That abortion should not be used as a primary form of birth control is accurate. Whether done as a surgical procedure or via a medication which promotes miscarriage, it is hard on the body. Saying that it is not a form of health care is, however, inaccurate. Once again, the anti-choice lot depicts all abortions as being the same kind and for the same reason. Abortions performed after the first trimester tend to be done because of severe defects in the fetus. According to these people, removal of an ectopic pregnancy would be an abortion. To allow an ectopic pregnancy to continue would kill the mother. So, tell me how removing an ectopic pregnancy or ending an unviable pregnancy isn't health care.
"Many women want natural health care choices rather than hormone-induced changes."
WHAT THE FUCK DOES THIS EVEN MEAN????
I was never able to take birth control pills because the "hormone-induced changes" put me right out of my head. Is she speaking against birth control pills or abortion here? Yes, there is an abortion method which involves taking a pill that temporarily alters the body's hormonal balance, but there are other methods of abortion as well. A D&C does not involve "hormone-induced changes." Does this mean it is a natural health care choice? I'm really not sure what the hell this woman is talking about.
I am a post-menopausal woman who is making the choice to have my reproductive organs removed because of endometrial hyperplasia. I don't want to take hormones because of the risks inherent in doing so. However, I honestly don't think that having my reproductive organs removed is a "natural health care choice." It is simply the form of treatment that makes the most sense to me because I don't want to take hormones for the rest of my life, I don't want to have to have a D&C every year, and I don't think it's wise to keep an organ which is in a pre-cancerous state. So, I'm opting to have the organ removed, but I don't think that's a particularly natural choice.
I could scratch a hole in my head trying to figure this woman's inane statement out.
In any case, one does not need to be "pro-abortion" to realize that the stripping away of reproductive rights leads to disaster. I have always been opposed to abortion on a personal level, but on a political level I realize that unhindered reproductive rights are a necessity.
I also realize that abortion is a complicated issue and it is not for me to decide what is right for another person.
Even in my own case, what was right for me in the past wouldn't be right now.
If, by some heinous twist of fate I were to be sexually assaulted and somehow conceive a child, at this point in my life it would be disastrous for me to carry that pregnancy to term. I am over 50 and have multiple health problems. I do not have the financial means to care for a child at this point. I do not even have the financial means to care for the cats that I took in years ago when I did have the means to care for them. 
There are so many things wrong with curtailing reproductive rights to this degree.
This isn't about the well-being of the adorable, healthy, full-term, white babies that the anti-choice faction think are being murdered by abortion-having hussies.
It is about controlling women.
It is odious.
I would expect nothing less from the party that would just as soon take away a woman's right to work and would like to see the world return to a time when a woman was either her father's or her husband's property.

~Sly Has Spoken~

Image copyright juliahenze @123rf



Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Sly Fawkes Talks: The Danger Lies Behind the Curtain

Steve Bannon: Clueless Don's Dangerous Neo-Nazi Puppeteer
Source: Getty Images

Sly responds to this Daily Beast piece. regarding the fact that Trump's speech sounded extremely nationalistic.

Not to defend The Rump, but I'm not surprised that his words weren't his own. He really isn't that intelligent. I've said from the start that he's a figurehead. On his own, he would be an offensive, ludicrous boor like he's always been, but in the end, not too much trouble to remove. It's the ones behind the curtain who are the true danger. I am in no way being hyperbolic when I say this.
Personally, I don't think Trump is terribly aware, if at all aware, of how nationalistic the words coming out of his mouth sounded. He is not a politician, he's a carnival barker. Further, the only person Donald Trump cares about is Donald Trump. He will do whatever his advisers tell him, including neo-Nazi and domestic abuser Steve Bannon.

~Sly~


Sly is exercising her First Amendment rights

Monday, January 23, 2017

Sly Fawkes Talks: Another of the many reasons why


Another of the many reasons why I'm a feminist
Why I marched in protest of the new fascist, woman-hating regime, even though it damn near knocked me out (but that's a story for another time)
Why I will fight for equality until the day I'm carried out feet first for the last time

Trigger warning for discussion of sexual assault

My maternal grandmother was coerced into a sexual relationship by her supervisor, who threatened her with loss of her job if she didn't comply. He knew she had two daughters depending on her paycheck. My mother told me that he even made my grandmother have sex with him while she was on her period, as if he wasn't humiliating her enough. My grandmother later had a psychological breakdown and ended up in the mental hospital for several months, putting added stress on my mother who was trying to finish high school as well as care for her younger sister.
I hope the bastard who did this is burning in whatever hell there may be.

~Sly~