Kenjitamura Online Alias Site for Political and Sexual Oriented Content

Latest

Back After Long Absence

Well, started to visit new forums and I spent an excessive amount of time on a post that I feel should be shared wherever just to help recoup the amount of wasted effort that was put into it. I wrote this post in response to a woman that wanted a reason why she should try to lose weight:


The concern isn’t about the weight. It’s that if someone is overweight it’s a strong indication that they’re not being very physically active in their life and/or not maintaining a good diet. Extra energy, an upbeat attitude/more positive outlook on life, greater ability to concentrate, increased productivity are the reasons to be exercising and eating nutritionally; the weight loss is one of the less compelling reasons to try and stay healthy. That a person also gets a better self-image, more self-confidence, and a generally more attractive figure are just perks that come along with the experience.


With the knowledge that there do exist people that stay thin while being less active and simultaneously indulging in lots of junk food seems to have caused a misdirection as to what the problem is. Because of their appearance they tend to receive less public criticism and it has led to the misconception held by many overweight people that the goal is to be thin to avoid criticism and it obscures the real objective. That knowledge also tends to foster a feeling of resentment towards people that don’t have to work to stay thin and a feeling of victimization in overweight people for having been subjected to extra public scrutiny for their lifestyle based entirely on an inference made by a stranger from examining their physical appearance.


Truth be told however, being overweight does tend to be an indication that a person is being more sedentary and possibly over-eating, or eating less nutritional diets, than they should to remain healthy. But this is true for much more Americans than just the overweight ones. A person being thin is not an indication that they are healthy or living a healthy lifestyle.


There also seems to be another misconception floating around. Overweight people seem to be jumping to a conclusion that a person that can eat all they want, be sedentary, and consequentially not get overweight is normal and considered fortunate. But because humans store fat as energy reserves, in my opinion, based on our historical background it means the people storing excess fat more efficiently are the ones that in the past were considered the fortunate ones. Prior to being an agrarian race humans were hunter/gatherers and prior to being hunter/gatherers they were scavengers. Humans that lived as hunter/gatherers or scavengers would have most likely gone through extended periods without food and with a necessity to be able to preserve energy in times when food was not available. Our species would devote the majority of our waking hours in the pursuit of food just to maintain an existence.


Jump forward present day and in developed countries we are people of convenience opting to drive a car to a destination only a few miles away and frequently choosing to eat inexpensive and quickly prepared food which tend to have more calories and less nutritional value. Food is also easily procured and it provides the added dimension that people inadvertently choose to eat larger portions and forget, realistically, what an adequate amount of food is to have at a meal.

Why I maintain the belief I’ll never have to think about it when I’m told to “[just] think about it.”

mental_disconnectReminder: Japanese comics/manga are read from right to left.

I am fond of going back and occasionally looking at these window excerpts from “One Piece”. I’d always thought that because One Piece is targeted towards a shounen audience I wouldn’t find it enjoyable, I thought this all the way up to just within the last year. But, as I read the manga I found that even after 700 chapters Eiichiro Oda has maintained a seamless progression of events that aren’t plagued by inconsistencies, or hurried attempts at rationalizing newly introduced characteristics, in his world. After he introduces a new element to the manga he opts to let the story continue on for a couple hundred chapters with only brief and occasional mentions of the new story device before he even starts to develop it in the manga’s story. It makes for a very natural feeling of development while reading.

Aside from the enjoyable storytelling implementation, there has been another aspect of the manga to keep my attention. Between the legally accommodated slave trade, the ruling class Tenryuubito, the revelations that corrupt individuals come from all backgrounds, the divisiveness between factions despite sharing many of the same ambitions, and the inability of the ruling forces to differentiate between well-meaning groups that are only outlaws in name and full-fledged criminals, it feels to me like the whole story is an allegory to the complex political relations of our world. I might try to elaborate on this suspicion later but right now I don’t care to write several pages for a blog post today.

My comments concerning Phyllis Schlafly became a little too jocular; I got caught up in demonstrating the flip side of Poe’s Law

Before the election they were already popping the champagne and outfitting Romney’s pants with a disinfectant exterior, so he could tolerate the idea of sitting on any of the furniture in the White House used by the Obama family, and then a couple days after the election it looked like their bubble had finally burst and they got a clue. I think this woman is one of the people trying desperately to affix a patchwork mending over the old bubble because she can’t look forward into the future without the comfort of knowing everything needs to be done her way or not at all. Or, at least I think that’s the impression I got of her, I’m not totally sure as I can’t be bothered to look up from texting on my obamaphone right now. Anyone else going to make it to the party at the Clinton’s fifth tax payer funded beach front summer home later tonight? I hear Gore has us hooked up with some choice supplies and we already have the DEA bankrolled as part of the security team so they’ll be looking the other way.

Response to reconstruction comment

Once again I started writing a comment that went over the character limit so I’m just going to post it on here.  I was reading an article about the racist comments Scott Terry made during the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference and then I went to view the articles comment section.  There was a person suggesting that people who believed the North should have forced reconstruction down the south’s throats, even after Lincoln’s assassination, were correct.  His reasoning was that it may have helped the south reach a more civil position on racism than what it has today.  I didn’t feel as convinced that the North’s reconstruction efforts would have been championing a racial equality agenda even if it did continue.

I’m not so sure the North was as indiscriminate towards minorities in their thinking and policies as the country makes them out to be.  I need to research it more but your comment made me remember an exchange of dialogue in Gone with the Wind between Scarlett (southern plantation girl) and the newly settled carpetbaggers.  The carpetbaggers remarked that they were having trouble finding dependable nurses to look after the children to which Scarlett suggested they use a “darky” for the job.  She suggested it because prior to the civil war there was a different social hierarchy perceived by the plantation gentry than what most people today would think.  There was the southern gentry that put themselves on top, then black house hands like maids and nurses, followed by “crackers” which today might be called “white trash”, and then finally black plantation hands.  The book suggests that southern plantation owners held their indoor servants in higher esteem than “crackers” which was the term they used to describe white people with low social status.  Back to the nurse matter, Scarlett herself was raised almost exclusively by their houses head “darky” Mammy.  When Scarlett suggested a “darky” she also included her opinion that no other people were any more dependable to raise children well than black maids like her Mammy.  The carpetbaggers were shocked and asked how she could trust a (Insert extremely derogatory term for African-Americans) to be in close contact with a child.  Scarlett then thought to herself it funny that the people who fought for black freedom had such thoughts and she asked them that exactly.  Their reply was that they definitely thought blacks shouldn’t be enslaved, as per the “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” credo, but that they still thought blacks were repugnant and undeserving of being treated well.  They also let loose a chain of slurs towards her buggy driver, which was another black servant she held in high regard, and while they rode off Scarlett was very upset they would treat one of her family in such a way.

My line of thought was that maybe the kind of racial sensitivity that is prevalent in many northern states today was still in an infant stage during the Equal Rights movement and didn’t become more mainstream until after the fact. I’m theorizing that many northern inhabitants still only had a, comparatively, unrefined sentimentality towards racial equality even while approaching the mid-twentieth century and that the ERA was the catalyst that jumpstarted a magnitude of progress that has been less recognized in the minds of younger generations alive today.

And yes, I am aware my comments are a massive generalization of regions of people much more diverse and problems more intricate than my post leaves many to think I believe. I do not normally condone the usage of generalized labels to describe populations but I picked up and ran with the wording used in the comment I was responding to and it didn’t come out sounding as PC as it should be.

Felt like a conceited and condescending ass after having written quoted text

So, with the contentious gun debate happening I decided to try and form my own opinion on the founding fathers and guns. I formed it with little research or insight and after doing a minimal amount of the former I was rewarded with the latter and ended up invalidating my own opinion. I had premised my opinion on a theory that rather than being “tyrannical” the American colonists had a “falling out” with the British government in much the same way the southern states did during the civil war with the northern states. I had thought this British tyranny argument might have been a historical revision adopted by modern day political factions in an attempt to make it a mainstream myth that in many minds had become an axiom. I was wrong.

I want to make clear I knew about the intolerable acts before coming to this conclusion and it was because my knowledge only reflected an ambiguous perspective on the matter I thought myself to be correct. The tariffs forced on molasses, documents, and tea did not seem all that harsh to me given the much more dire economic circumstances present in the mainland England. And the quartering act as well as the ban on moving west of the appalachians were the only coercive mandates I could remember that threatened the colonists ability to self govern. This was the extent of the information I had on the actions being issued from the British government around the time and I thought them somewhat reasonable when the context was provided which shows the American colonists were the ones most benefitted by the seven year war and having to fund the debacle helped push the British economy into a deep recession. As to why the colonists weren’t given a seat in the British parliament I looked that up as well and apparently the representatives in the houses could only be picked by, and can only come from, an exclusive aristocratic group in England. From what I gathered there were many highly populated constituencies within the English mainland itself that had no representation in pariament so this seemed to be a nondiscrimate discriminate act not just contained to the colonies.

However, from reading on wikipedia about british tyranny it seems that there was an ongoing attempt being orchestrated jointly by King Harry III and members of the British parliament that were proof of the British’ government desire to strip governing powers from the colonies ruling class. It mentions there are a veritable number of bills that infringe on the right to self rule being implemented even prior to the intolerable acts. And, because it has been a while since I’ve read the Declaration of Independence. I had forgotten the references to british tyranny mentioned in the declaration of independence itself.

Here is the entirety of my rant prior to doing any actual research:

I find it kind of funny that anti-gun control arguments often center on a belief that the second amendment was set in place to thwart “government tyranny”. This argument would premise itself on the notion our country won its freedom from a “tyrannical” british empire which, while a good lesson plan to instill patriotic sentiments in elementary schoolers, isn’t how it went down and glosses over some details.

First, there needs to be a preface to kind of detail the political history surrounding the American colonies. Initially the british empire would send ships over to the new world with british administrators to oversee the same laws applied to the American colonists as were implemented in the british empire. This method ended up not going very well, as the new world decimated most attempts by Europeans to establish colonies. The result was most of the time when the new arrivals for an already “established” colony came by ship to settle in, and check on how the sites were doing, they were greeted by grizzly scenes. Just about every person from the prior ship load of colonists had either died or were very sickly. North America has a very diferent environment from Europe and so the colonists immune systems and farming experiences didn’t help them very much in this new territory. They had to find new agricutural staples that could survive in the dramatically different environments and also had to develop, or in some cases learn from native americans, new crop raising techniques. Additionally, they had to adapt to the new diseases that had been developing separately from the European environment. Eventually, there were much fewer volunteers to pioneer a voyage to the new world because of its prior low success rate.

I can’t remember which King it was, and I don’t really care to go look him up, but because of the success other countries had seen in South and Central America that yielded valuable metals, and good environments for items such as sugar cane, the king felt he was not receiving the expected profit from his investments and was desperate for any success at all. It lead to a decision made under the pressure, accompanied by the necessity, to make the country more competitive in a world that was in the middle of developing globalized trading practices. The King decided to make an incentive for new pioneers and declared that any person, or group, to travel to the new world could claim any land they found for their own and additionally told them they were free to exercise their own religious and political practices in any way they saw fit. This announcement carried the stipulation that the new American colonies were still to be considered british citizens and for a long time the colonies were british in name only.

And that history lesson sets up the story for the events just ahead of the Revolutionary war. The colonists adapted and established several colonies that were flourishing and seeing good profits from the triangle trade model around the Atlantic ocean. However, their numbers were exploding and many colonists were eager to travel further westward and claim more land for themselves. West of the Appalachians were native american and french settlements and a westward expansion from the American colonists would encroach onto their territory. The French colonists developed differently, from the British colonists, and there was a bit more symbiotic nature between the french colonists and native americans. They had developed a fur trade with the native americans and I think it utilized a route from east canada, to the mississippi river, made stops along french and indian settlements on the river, and eventually reached baton rouge where remaining items were traded with the Gulf area. :caution: Although I know this trade route existed later in history I’m not sure if it had already been established prior to the Revolutionary War and the only pertinent information in the previous statement is that the French and native americans traded with each other.:/caution:

As the American colonists tried expanding westward they were met with military resistance from an alliance formed by french colonists and native american tribes in the region. The American colonists found this dispute to be too much for them to handle alone and british deployments of soldiers and military supplies were sent as support. This war lasted for seven years and is known as both the “seven year war” and the “french and indian war”. After the war the British empire did what was one of the first implementations of this behavior in the colonies history, they exercised their sovereign powers over the colonies and banned the colonists from moving their settlements west of the Appalachians. The British reasoned that they didn’t want another outbreak of an incident as costly as the seven year war and that it might happen again if the colonists were to make another expansion attempt. Additionally, at the end of this war the British empire found itself in a terrible recession that was devastating to the British mainland population. At this point in time the British had restructured itself into a constitutional monarchy and, for the most part, british royalty were limited to mostly a position as figure head’s in british society. The governing powers had been assigned to the British parliament which was


:Note: After refreshing my memory of the ruling actions implemented by King George III and Parliament prior to the revolutionary war I agree that the British empire were tyrannical in their treatment of the colonists. :Note to self: Re-read the declaration of independence.

Some Comments I’ve Not Yet Shared- pt. 1

So, sometimes when I get engrossed with writing comments for news article sites I end up not realizing when I’ve gone over the character limits.  And then I inevitably don’t post most of those comments at all because I do not want to reduce the content of the posts.

Here’s one such comment that was addressing the lack of scandal evidence found in Benghazi reports:

What I got from this is that the official reports still reflect a large amount of controversy surrounding the Benghazi debacle but many of the criticisms have been aimed in the wrong direction.  The one criticism people still have the right to charge towards the white house is that the inappropriate crediting of it as a response to an anti-islamic film was an excessively speculative and premature decision.  Though a lot of people probably would have assumed the exact same thing given that there was a large turnout of protesters in islamic countries and the rabble flocking to the embassy were inside an islamic country.  Real problems with the handling of the issue seem to be rooted in the incompetence of our bureaucratic structure and the insufficient budget apportionment to address this kind of exigency.  The budget problem seems to be congresses fault but the department of state is part of the executive branch so you’d think the Obama administration would have some hand in that area.

Perhaps I’ve revealed too much?

I have created a facebook page for this alias with a photo and, while I wont admit my relation to the person in it, it may have made it substantially easier for my profile to be compromised by someone who recognizes it.  While a part of me wants to no longer hide my fetish related exploits from my family, I’d really prefer they never know about it.  More content to come soon for this blog.