Wednesday, April 10, 2019

Quick answers to headlines

Can a President be Too Old, asks the Washington Post.

Answer:   Yes, obviously.  Like, duh.  For God's sake Democrats, pick someone under 60.

Queerbaiting - exploitation or a sign of progress?  asks the BBC.

Answer:  Neither:  it's a sign of the stupid modern obsessive interest in labelling sexuality as part of identity politics.  Go write about something worthwhile.

* I’m an attractive, heterosexual woman who wants no-strings-attached sex. Where do I find non-creeps for that? (From Slate's routinely awful sex and relationship advice column.)

Answer:  No where.  You've already worked it out, why are you bothering asking?

Who does homework work for?   (A letter to The Atlantic).

Answer:  what?  Obviously, the person who came up with that headline needed to do more of it.  (Homework, of course.) 

2 comments:

Jason Soon said...

ahem while he is not a President, Mahathir turns 94 this year and he still seems pretty sharp, could probably run rings around much younger heads of state

Steve said...

Yes, Jason: I was wondering if I should admit in my post that Mahathir is an extreme exception that disproves my rule. And one who is surely a better leader at 94 than he was the first time around.

But honestly: I still don't think you want the US President, with his or her finger near the nuclear button, to be one with a strong chance of suddenly dying, early dementia, or having a disabling stroke, during a international confrontation.