Before we get into the meat of my fact-based claim of greater attractiveness and uh...smartness than you, I want it understood that everything coming hereafter is based in science and is therefore undeniable. (Much like human-caused global climate change.)
A meta-study (meaning a study that is meta in nature) conducted by Doctors Paul Silvia and Emily Nusbaum from the prestigious University of North Carolina at Greensboro, first published in the Journal of Research in Personality determined by various scientific methods that I understand completely even if you do not, that men are funnier than women.
In point of fact these Doctors of Science state that they :
"...focused...on studies where men's and women's humor ability was evaluated objectively...subjects were introduced with a stimulus, often a cartoon without a caption. Then the subjects were asked to write a funny caption. Later, independent judges rated the responses for funniness on a scale (e.g., 1-5). The key for such tasks is that the raters do not know anything about the humor producers, including their sex. Such comparisons are more reliable and valid, and raised our confidence that we are measuring true humor ability with little stereotypical influence."
Little stereotypical influence...just the way I would have done it.
"We were able to find 28 studies with 36 independent samples that met our criteria. The combined sample included 5,057 participants (67 percent women). Studies were from various countries (U.S., U.K., Hungary, Germany, Israel and more). Most of the data (60 percent) came from data that was never published before in a peer-reviewed journal, which helps to minimize the effect of publication bias."
Minimal publication bias. Can't get better than that.
"We then calculated sex differences on the combined sample and found that men were, overall, rated as funnier than women. How big was the difference? In statistical technical terms, the effect size was 0.32, or roughly one-third of the standard deviation. In plain English, this means that 63 percent of men score above the mean humor ability of women."
Now you'd think that these Argonauts of illumination would rest on the Laurels at this point. But no! They decided, using keen intellectual rigor, to determine why men are funnier than women.
"...the evidence does suggest that humor plays a major role in mating, with a strong evolutionary basis... women, who undertake the heavier costs of reproduction (pregnancy, breastfeeding) are choosier than men when selecting a mate. Women tend to look for various signal indicators of mate quality, and a great sense of humor is one of them. Humor is strongly correlated with intelligence, which explains why women value men with a great sense of humor, as intelligence was crucial for survival throughout our evolutionary history when we mostly lived in hunter-gatherer groups."
It obviously can't be more plain than this.
Since I am a paid humor writer and most of you are not, I must therefore be funnier than you. Because I'm funnier than you, I must therefore be more intelligent than you as well. And since I am both funnier and more intelligent, I must therefore be more attractive to women than other males who are simply not as funny. QED.
Now I suppose it's possible that some of you are saying to yourselves "Don, you're not that funny. (I'd expect nothing more than that from the simple and unattractive.) But there can be no doubt about my jocularity.
To the left you will see a signed attestment by no less that the Dean of Country Humor, the late Patrick McManus with regards to my qualifications. If a statement of fact by one of the greatest humor writers of our time (and a college professor to boot) isn't sufficient to establish my bona fides then there's no arguing with you.
(A note to my lady readers. I know you're probably fantasizing about me right now. Please remember, I'm taken. But don't despair. By my own, highly scientific estimate, there are at least twelve other men out there who are as funny as I am. So keep dreaming. )
The state of Washington (10 miles away by crow, light years away by preference) is getting ready for elections. One of the candidates for reelection as a councilman for the city of Spokane Valley (Not to be confused with Spokane, the envious little sister of Seattle.) has been blasting the radio waves trolling for votes. Her name is Brandi Peetz and she sounds very much like she's 16 years old. She isn't of course and I suppose I shouldn't hold that against her...but I will anyway, because I don't have a horse in this race.
Brandi sounds very sincere and enthusiastic. She probably is. But she uses a far-too-common phrase for self-identification. She refers to herself as a "fiscal conservative".
I can't possibly convince you of the depth of head-cold saving-it-up spitting-green-mucus loathing I have for that term.
Unless you plan to immediately follow that claim with "...and social conservative too", then you are neither. You can't be. I mean let's flip it around: "I'm a fiscal liberal and a social conservative. This means I'll take as much of your hard-earned income from you as I possibly can, by force if necessary...and then I'll give it right back!"
Liberals (and most DC "conservatives) operate under the no-God-needed assumption that they know far better than you how to use your money, your time and your liberty (You bitter clingers to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like you.), than you do yourself.
Being a fiscal conservative without being a true social conservative means you wish you could spend more but you don't know where you'll get the money. And eventually, you'll regretfully have to collect those funds by force from your constituents to enable more government boondoggles. But you'll feel reeeally guilty about it. So there's that at least.
In case you missed it, these are some of the best and brightest employees of the UGA (United Government of America) Office of Communications. Press Secretaries the lot.
Do watch it. It's fun!
For going on three years, they've predicted (and fervently desired) the political execution of Donald J. Trump. And they've jumped on to failed attack after attack.
Trump's tiny inaugural crowd size (Huuuge!!)
Trump's ridiculous claim that Obama spied on Trump tower (True)
Trump said all Mexicans were criminals or rapists (False)
Trump said racists were good people at Charlottesville. (False)
Trump seriously asked Russia to find Hillary's emails. (False)
Trump said he believed Putin over our own intelligence agencies (Certainly a joke, but I couldn't blame him given Clapper, Brennan, Comey, McCabe, etc etc)
Trump removed the bust of MLK from the Oval Office (False)
Trump doesn't pay any taxes. (Maybe, maybe not. But he's audited constantly and apparently the IRS doesn't see a problem.)
Trump has built no new boarder wall. (False)
And of course the grand-daddy of them all, the entire Russian collusion (false) and obstruction thing. (I still can't figure out how declaring yourself innocent when you ARE innocent can be considered obstruction.)
Oh and the most recent: "We're going to impeach the President just as soon as we can find an impeachable offense" has now morphed into "To hell with it. Impeach!"
There are a whole lot more of these things. In fact it's hard to keep track of them all; there's a new outrage daily. And when the dust settles, all the UGA folk have egg on their face and Trump is still there smiling. But the important thing to remember here is that the entire weight of the UGA has been trying to "Get Trump" for years now and he's still going strong. That, in and of itself is amazing, miraculous even. Aside from a relatively small number of staff believers nd family (and the majority of the subjugated USA citizens) he's not only standing up to all the R and D elites, he's cleaning their clocks...and making them pay for it.
So I was in the shop today, working to make my daily bread. I was listening to Sean Hannity talking with his old friend, the former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingritch. Sean was opining about a poll that said that 70 percent of millennials supported the idea of Socialism. He griped that those twenty and thirty somethings had no idea where the money would come from to pay for all of the big-government proposals being put out by the current pack of democratic-socialist presidential candidates. Newt admonished Hannity, saying that the both of them were at fault because neither of them ever really took on the national education system.
Now don't misunderstand what I'm about to say. Newt is right that many of those young adults are truly as ignorant as fire truck. Government schools really do suck. But the reason that millennials have no problem with spending money that doesn't exist is that they've never lived in a world where the US government has EVER balanced a budget. In point of fact the last time the USA had a balanced budget was during the presidential terms of Andrew Jackson (1829-1837). There had been a few balanced Federal budgets before Jackson, but none after. And President Jackson also had another remarkable milestone during his presidency; he was, and still is, the only President to have served when the United States was entirely debt-free.
(Some libs will jump up about now and scream "Bill Clinton had a balanced budget for the final four years of his presidency...you...you racist" But stupid rhetoric aside, if that was true, how did we go 280 billion dollars deeper in debt during the same four years...idiot.)
So how does the government spend more than it takes in? Well, there's a lot of ways, but ultimately it all boils down to borrowing money from itself, i.e. it prints it. (Today of course there's no need to actually print anything; down at US treasury you just add a couple of zeros onto the USA checkbook balance and leave early for lunch.)
They've even coined a new term for this old con. It's called the Modern Monetary Theory. And it's got the Ocasio-Cortez Squad all a-twitter.
So what's the problem? Look, if it's raining money, we're all off to Aruba for the winter right? Well no. I'm not going to take the time to explain inflation here, it's something that you should have learned in high school, but didn't. But I can give you a few real world examples of what happens when a government promises everything for everyone (Except white males of course, they should just die.)
Today, a US dollar has the purchasing power of of a quarter in 1982. In 1986 I could get a Big Mac for $1.60. According to the Big Mac index, in 2018 it's $5.58.
No Newt. It isn't just because our poor excuse for education caused too many people to think you can get "...money for nothing and your chicks for free". It's because you and the other members of the United Government of America (UGA) wanted to stay in power. And nothing makes than easier than having a Kardashian-level educated public stoked by "champagne wishes and caviar dreams" by dangling free money as a voting carrot.
Believe or not, this is a prepper post. "The Squad" is already running things. Under the UGA, the USA is already a socialist state. Societal failure usually takes a long time coming, but the collapse when it occurs is fast. Get your house in order. Have some stored food. Kill your own debt. Don't wait until that 25 dollar bag of beans that you already purchased costs your neighbor his soul.
Just put up this week's humor piece. It's called Farmercise and I hope you enjoy it.
First published on WND.com in my weekly prepper column under the nom d'plume of Pat McLene
When I go out and look at tips or hacks on many of the prepper websites, I find that among the jewels are more than a few coprolites. By that I mean hacks which, while creative, are often unreasonable or just plain silly. So when the mood takes me, I'll be posting the Guy Fleegman Dubious Prepper Hack Award.
For those who don't recognize the reference, Guy Fleegman (Played by Sam Rockwell.) is the security chief from the movie "Galaxy Quest," a humorous parody of the original "Star Trek" series. The movie contains lots of scenes that mimic episodes from the 1960s TV show, but the one that makes Mr. Fleegman the perfect representative for my award involves his advice to his ship's captain who is being chased by a hideous monster on a barren alien planet: "Can you form some sort of rudimentary lathe?"
So without further ado, here's the first "Guy Fleegman Dubious Prepper Hack Award":
When life hands you lemons, make a quantum flux capacitor.
Prepper site after prepper site lists the "lemon battery" as a great hack to use for charging your small personal electronic devices. The idea is that you stick a couple of pieces of wire into a lemon, connect it up to your cell phone, and away you go. A great visual and a clever hack to be sure, but it leaves a few things out. True, you can get electrical voltage out of the arrangement, but that voltage will be small (less than 1 volt per hookup) and, more importantly, the amperage will be minuscule.
Also, if you stick a couple of pennies or nails in the lemon to serve as your battery posts like so many of the pictures show, all you'll end up with is a couple of tarnished pennies or nails and a really bad-tasting lemon, because you need to use two different metals like copper and zinc (a penny and a galvanized nail for example) to cause current flow through the lemony electrolyte.
Now almost every cell phone on the market needs five volts and at least 100 milliamps to charge. So you'd have to set up at least six lemons or lemon sections in series to get to five volts, and a whole lot more than that to get enough amps to charge your phone.
If you are in a bad enough situation that the only way you can think of charging your phone is to wire fruit together, you've got more immediate problems. And if your emergency supplies consist entirely of a crate of lemons, you haven't been listening.
However, don't throw out that fruit just yet. If the event of a TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It) situation, just break out that lemon, some sugar and your emergency bottle of medicinal alcohol and enjoy a whiskey sour while Rome burns.
One real way to get "juice" out of a lemon.
One of the most important aspects of country living - right up there with food, shelter and clothing - is having reliable homestead heat sources. And like everything else in the self-reliance credo, you need to have more than one option. The old adage is: three is two, two is one, and one is none. This means that you should never depend on a single option for anything, because if that single option fails and you have no other, you are up the excrement river without a oar.
For example: with wood cutting I have an electric chainsaw, two gas saws and a buck saw. For firewood splitting I've got a gas-powered 25-ton hydraulic splitter, numerous mauls and a sledge and wedges. And in addition to our wood cook stove (our primary home heater) I've also got a ventless propane wall heater and a few electric wall heaters.
But what do I use to stay warm on frosty nights?
Sure I have numerous heavy blankets. I've also got an electric blanket for those truly cold evenings. But first and foremost I've got this:
Patrice has a condition common to most women of a certain age called menopause. She's been in menopause for about 200 years (Ask her. She'll tell you it feels that way anyhow.). Without getting into all the yucky details, one of the symptoms is a condition where some menopausians randomly reach temperatures high enough to melt aluminum. This is called a hot flash. Something like 50% of women never experience hot flashes as a symptom, but I think Patrice got all of theirs.
Patrice usually goes to bed before I do, so I never know which fire condition is currently occurring in our bedroom. (Safety tip: If your wife is prone to hot flashes and the bedroom door is closed, it's a wise idea to touch the door with the back of your hand before entering.).
Usually, there's no problem and I can get safely into bed. But at least three or four times a night, I wake up with every stitch of blanket piled on top of me. That's good news though, because it means that I won't freeze from the layer of snow that blew in through the open window that a naked Patrice is now standing in front of (I can't imagine what the neighbors think of the view, but at least we live far enough way that they'd have to use binoculars. ).
You may think I'm exaggerating. But I can't tell you the number of times I've come in from the shop on a snowy night to find the wood stove blazing and every window in the house open. Fortunately, the flashes only happen once in a while and never for very long. In one way that's a pity though. As a part of the rule of three I've got a snow plow on my tractor. I've got any number of snow shovels. But I'm missing that third element because Patrice is only capable of melting a relatively small circle in the snow before her reactor shuts down.