Planned Parenthood Menu

This is a satirical work. As defined by Wikipedia, satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government or society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be humorous, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society. Satire is not always funny. The thought of offering fetal body parts on a menu is not one bit funny and this menu is not intended to be humorous. It is intended to be thought-provoking.

This is a satirical work. As defined by Wikipedia, satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government or society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be humorous, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society.
Satire is not always funny. The thought of offering fetal body parts on a menu is not one bit funny and this menu is not intended to be humorous. It is intended to be thought-provoking.

Doctor Nucatola of Planned Parenthood was led to believe the two people she was meeting with were prospective buyers of organs and other body parts obtained through abortions.

Here’s Dr. Nucatola’s menu quote which was on the tape which has now become so well known. “And so we had a conversation, and we said, you know, what if we go out and find everyone who is doing this and present everybody with a menu, and at the end of the day they just decided that right now, it’s just too touchy and issue for us to be an official middleman.”

She was making the point that some leaders discussed the possibility of creating a menu of what Planned Parenthood had to offer to companies interested in fetal tissue. The leaders of Planned Parenthood apparently decided against developing such a menu.

The idea of a menu was revolting to me. Although it may have been a poor choice of words on Dr. Nucatola’s part, other words that could have been used don’t seem any better. Catalog? Brochure? Order form? None of those words make the idea any more palatable.

In a press release in response to the video, Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood’s President, said “Recently, an organization that opposes safe and legal abortion used secretly recorded, heavily edited videos to make outrageous claims about programs that help women donate fetal tissue for medical research.”

One implication is that the editing was unfair, and that viewing the entire video would give viewers and readers a better understanding. Instead of viewing the whole video, I read the 60 page transcript. It wasn’t easy and the picture it presented wasn’t pretty. Most of the conversation was very business oriented. They talked about things like volume, workflow, and packaging.

There were discussions of how far along in a pregnancy abortions could be performed from state to state. It appeared that later in the term would be better for the companies that use fetal material. Also, it appeared that getting the body parts as intactly as possible was very desirable.

There was considerable discussion about money. Here are a few quotes from Dr. Nucatola.

“They just want to do it in a way that is not perceived as, ‘This clinic is selling tissue, this clinic is making money off of this.’ I know in the Planned Parenthood world they’re very very sensitive to that. And before an affiliate is gonna do that, they need to, obviously, they’re not —some might do it for free —but they want to come to a number that doesn’t look like they’re making money. They want to come to a number that looks like it is a reasonable number for the effort that is allotted on their part.”

“I would throw a number out, I would say it’s probably anywhere from $30 to $100 [per specimen], depending on the facility and what’s involved. It just has to do with space issues, are you sending someone there who’s going to be doing everything, is there shipping involved, is somebody gonna have to take it out. You know, I think everybody just wants, it’s really just about if anyone were ever to ask them, ‘What do you do for this $60? How can you justify that? Or are you basically just doing something completely egregious, that you should be doing for free.’ So it just needs to be justifiable.”

 “I think for affiliates, at the end of the day, they’re a non-profit, they just don’t want to — they want to break even. And if they can do a little better than break even, and do so in a way that seems reasonable, they’re happy to do that.”

Going satirical with the menu idea, I thought about what it would be like if there was a restaurant where people could order fetal body parts.

The menu is intended to be thought-provoking, not humorous.

Birth of a Rainbow Nation

A real rainbow

A real rainbow.

The Supreme Court’s decision to make same-sex marriage the law of the land was followed by The Night of the Rainbow, an event that will go down as one of the most momentous in decorating history.  Rainbows materialized everywhere in an uplifting national celebration of diversity, tolerance, and all kinds of love.

From Disney World to One World Trade Center, from Atlanta to Seattle, the colors flew with pride.  The residence formerly known as the White House was magically transformed into a Rainbow House.  How they got those lights installed so quickly after the announcement was nothing short of miraculous!

The Rainbow-ization of the United States is officially underway.  The country has been in desperate need of redecoration for a long time.  The makeover could begin with the motto “E Pluribus Unum.”  That dates back to 1776.  It’s Latin for “Out of many, one.”  The time has come to update to “E Pluribus Rainbow.”

“In God we trust” is another anachronistic slogan which has been on our currency since the ’50s, way back when TVs were black and white.  Many Americans have no idea what black and white TVs look like, and they can’t even imagine the horror of being limited to three channels.  Times have changed, and our coinage should be updated to reflect that.  “In the Rainbow we trust” has the pleasant ring of inclusiveness to it.

While we’re transitioning into a Rainbow Nation, we might as well deal with the colors on our paper money.  Minor changes to the longstanding color scheme have been made in the past decade, but our dollar bills are still hideously dull.  It makes no sense.  Why not be a bit more daring and use the full spectrum of colors?  Imagine how enjoyable spending will be with bills in android green, neon fuchsia, and deep carmine pink.

The design of the American flag has barely changed in two centuries.  Betsy Ross did a fine job with limited resources, but it’s time to move forward.  The thirteen stripes could display truly fabulous colors other than red and white.  Also, the blue field where the states are represented is a space with delicious possibilities. Why couldn’t we try neon yellow triangles and chartreuse lambdas on a turquoise background?  It’s time to be bold and use some imagination.

The Pledge of Allegiance is another holdover from bygone times.  However, with a few minor changes, it can be updated and vastly improved.  “I pledge allegiance to the Rainbow, of the Diverse States of America, and to every color which it includes, one nation, under The Rainbow, with pastels and fluorescent colors for all.”

Other American symbols could stand to be jazzed up as well.  Instead of holding a torch, Lady Liberty could just as easily be holding up a rainbow.  We could have a vivid and shiny Rainbow of Liberty instead of an old gray statue.  Finally, the bald eagle, a scavenger, has been the national bird since the beginning.  Boring!  It should be replaced with a colorful bird.  The peacock, an immigrant species to represent all immigrants, would be perfect.

All Americans are People of the Rainbow now.  Resistance is futile.  Be assimilated or be silent.

Note: This article was first published on the American Thinker website on June 10, 2015.

Wit Privilege and America’s War on the Witless

Give me laughterMark Twain once wrote, “Against the assault of laughter, nothing can stand.”

Wit is not always a laughing matter.  For example, the Sons of Liberty used their wits to pull off one of the most memorable practical jokes in history at the Boston Tea Party.  Also, Ben Franklin disseminated and popularized his philosophy through his bestseller, Poor Richard’s Almanac.  His witty one-liners are quoted to this day by people who’ve never even heard of the book.

Wit privilege refers to societal privileges that benefit witty people in ways that are unavailable to the witless.  It continues to be a potent force in the United States.  The witty elite use jokes and anecdotes to win elections, spread ideologies, and market their services and wares.  All too often, the witless are the butts of the jokes. They are at a severe disadvantage in virtually every area of their sad lives.

Witty people are more likeable, more popular, and have greater social status.  They tend to be cheerful, and they receive more respect and better service across the board.  From bankers to beauticians, from the police to pediatricians, from clerks to computer techs, people who provide services of any kind prefer to do business with funny people rather than the grumpy.

The witty are also considered more attractive than the witless.  That’s why comedians never have problems finding spouses, or second, or third, or fourth spouses.  A review of personal ads will inevitably show that the most desired trait for a potential date is a good sense of humor.  Nobody writes personal ads like this: “Seeking somber person to engage in serious conversation. Must hate laughter.”

Funny folks have greater freedom of expression.  In America, when you’re funny people listen.  The ability to tell a joke can make the difference between being heard and being ignored.  Funny videos are shared far more often than serious ones.  In the entertainment business, people who can make others laugh get more opportunities and are treated better than the humor-impaired.

The disparities between the witty and the witless are evident in the business world as well.  A properly delivered punchline can help a person land a job or seal a deal.  Jokes are also frequently used by the powerful to silence the witless.  The laughter emanating from corner offices may sound jovial, but it also reminds the peons in the cubicles of who is in charge.

Disparities due to wit privilege are rampant in healthcare.  People who know how to tell jokes and enjoy a good laugh live happier and healthier lives.  The witty are able to handle stress and anxiety better than the witless.  Laughter is widely regarded as the best medicine, and the witty get it for free.  The primary reason comedy isn’t part of healthcare is that they want to keep it to themselves.  Meanwhile, people who suffer from humor deficiency pay exorbitant amounts for the prescription and non-prescription drugs they need just to get through the day.

Witty people take their unearned benefits for granted.  When confronted about wit privilege, they deny that it exists or say that it’s not their fault they were born funny.  Furthermore, they have no comprehension of how different their lives would be if they ever lost their sense of humor and had to experience horrors like these:

·      The realization, after they’ve delivered a punchline, that they’ve omitted a critical part of the setup.

·      The inability to produce suitable and timely responses to offensive remarks or insults.

·      Dreaded sympathy laughter due to poor comedic timing.

The roots of wit privilege go all the way back to William Shakespeare.  In Othello, the bard wrote, “They laugh that win.”

Little has changed.  Renowned neurohumorist Karyn Buxman proclaims, “Humor is power.”

Wit privilege has had a profound and disturbing influence in the United States throughout the country’s history.   It is deplorable that humorous people have advantages over people who are not funny and who may never become funny.  People born witless are human beings entitled to the same freedoms and opportunities as the witty.

The longstanding and systemic abuses of power enabled through wit privilege are a form of discrimination which must be addressed.  In the interest of fairness and decency, if an equitable solution cannot be found, the laughter must stop.

Note: This article first appeared on June 4, 2015, in American Thinker.

Rachel Dolezal jokes: When will the laughter stop?

Sponsored by Ocean Hair Restoration!

Sponsored by Ocean Hair Restoration!

When I saw the story about Rachel Dolezal being outed by her white parents, my mind went into joke mode. It was just so ironic that this lady passed as a black woman, got a full scholarship to historically black Howard University, and went on to become a leader in the NAACP and an esteemed educator on black studies. All the hypocrisy made it the perfect storm for a joke. Here’s what I came up with.

“A white woman passing as a black woman? This is the ultimate expression of white privilege. Apparently, white is the new black.”

I couldn’t help myself. The joke just came to me and there was nothing I could do to stop it. That was bad. However, I confess that I took it to the next level. I should have kept the joke to myself, but I spread it around. It seemed like too good of a joke not to share. I posted the joke on news websites, Facebook pages, and Twitter. Thousands of people liked the joke. The high I used to get from telling jokes onstage came back. People liked the joke and I was proud that I had come up with it.

A day later, I was suffering with a humor hangover. I shouldn’t have spread the joke, but I was stuck with that. I slipped and now I have to return to the first two steps of Witticists’ Anonymous. I admit that I’m addicted to my own laughter and the laughter of others. Also, I’m coming to believe, again, that it’s wrong to tell jokes that cause discomfort.

Jumping ahead a bit on the steps, I apologize to anyone who may have been hurt by my insensitive joke. Please understand that as a recovering jokester, I’m not perfect and I’m prone to slipping once in a while. However, I’m working the steps. It works if you work it. I’m getting better, one day at a time.

I promise there won’t be any Rachel Dolezal jokes.  No “Rachel Dolezal walked into a bar,” or, “Rachel Dolezal walked into a Denny’s,” or, “Rachel Dolezal walked into a Tea Party conference,” jokes from me.

No sir! I don’t care how good the jokes might be. I’m not going to do it.

Have you heard the one about the white woman who walked into a bar with a former NAACP leader? They were inseparable.

Jerry Seinfeld, Chris Rock, and Remedial Sensitivity

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the cauldron of boiling water.

If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the cauldron of boiling water.

Jerry Seinfeld doesn’t play colleges anymore due to political correctness. Neither does Chris Rock. In an interview last year with Frank Rich of Vulture, Rock said, “I stopped playing colleges, and the reason is because they’re way too conservative… Not in their political views — not like they’re voting Republican — but in their social views and their willingness not to offend anybody.”

In the tradition of Lenny Bruce, Richard Pryor, and George Carlin, comedians love to exercise their wit privilege by telling jokes about anything. They’re essentially wit supremacists who act as if nothing is off limits. Sometimes they push the envelope just to see how far they can go. Louis C.K., Bill Maher, Ricky Gervais, Seth McFarlane, Tracy Morgan, Amy Schumer, Dane Cook, Daniel Tosh, and Michael Richards have all been accused of going over the line in one way or another. Radio personalities Rush Limbaugh, Don Imus, and Howard Stern have also been accused of going too far with their humor.

It could happen to anyone who’s trying to be funny. For example, I myself was recently tempted to come up with a few jokes about what happened to Bruce/Caitlin Jenner’s javelin. It just seemed to me that there’s probably a man in a woman’s body somewhere who would love to have Jenner’s old javelin. It seemed to me that it could have been sold or auctioned off on Ebay. However, I realized that jokes based on those premises, which could be extremely offensive to some people, would be way over the line. Thank goodness I figured that out before it was too late.

Just because a joke is funny doesn’t mean that it has to be told or that it should be told. Funny people love their wit privilege, but it doesn’t give them the right to tell jokes that offend and hurt feelings. Comedians and others who earn their livings through humor must have sensitivity for the feelings of anyone who might be offended. They must figure out how to deliver kinder, gentler jokes that won’t hurt other people’s feelings. They simply must. If they cannot do that, the laughter must stop.

Ten signs that you might be a Wit Supremacist.

The fool will  rule!

Fools must not rule!

You might be a Wit Supremacist if…

you look down on people because of their inability to tell a joke properly.

you talk differently to witty people than you do to people who aren’t funny.

you’ve never really thought about the difference in the way funny people and witless people are treated.

you use your sense of humor to get off the hook for things that would get other people in trouble.

you’ve ever told your friends, “I have one friend who’s not funny at all.”

you’ve ever asked a witless person to speak on behalf of all witless people.

you feel uncomfortable around people who aren’t funny.

you say things like, “I can’t help it if I was born hilarious.”

you talk about other people in terms of how funny they are.

reading this list has made you uncomfortable.

Can you think of any other signs that a person is a Wit Supremacist? Make a comment.

#witprivilege #witsupremacist

« Older Entries