i haven't read it. But as of 2/2012 (54 tot reviews), only 4 came from men on the first page! Is it the title? Why does this book attract only women??...morei haven't read it. But as of 2/2012 (54 tot reviews), only 4 came from men on the first page! Is it the title? Why does this book attract only women?? ----- 4 years in Mumbai: late 2007 to early 2011
A clever plot of intertwining a fictitious character with a historical figure, our silent movie star Louise Brooks. Story took place in Wichita, KS an...moreA clever plot of intertwining a fictitious character with a historical figure, our silent movie star Louise Brooks. Story took place in Wichita, KS and NYC, NY. 1922 - ?
"JFK was a man whose sexual life remained a central fact of his existence, who did not allow it to be diminished by anything—not his political ambitio...more"JFK was a man whose sexual life remained a central fact of his existence, who did not allow it to be diminished by anything—not his political ambitions, not issues of national security, not his Catholicism, not loyalty to his friends and his male relatives, not physical limitation or pain, not the risk of infecting any of his partners with the venereal disease that regularly plagued him, not fear of impregnating someone, not the potential for personal embarrassment, and certainly, certainly, not his marriage."
Caitlin Flanagan used to write with clarity ("The Hazards of Duke" January 2011). But in this essay, after reviewing JFK's presidency and sexual transgressions with scathing criticism -- she made a surprising about-face just before delivering a contradictory conclusion, based on -- a photograph??
"I recently came across a Kennedy photograph ... his eyes glued to the precious head of his new baby boy — and I was gone. Let him have the girls, I thought; he could handle the girls and still put in an ace performance as Father of the Century. ... All the aging hookers and cast-aside girlfriends with book contracts better take notice: We don’t care about you. JFK is more important to us than you can ever be, so you might as well keep quiet."
Is she (Ms. Flanagan) that shallow? Does a performance, as she put it, trump facts? I may not be a feminist, I may not even care about an 18 month presidency half a century past, but I detest her non sequitur:
note: i'd always suspected that one could draw a line age-wise to guesstimate how ppl feel about JFK -- whether they see him for both his good and his bad, or whether they cling hysterically to some bygone sentiment like Ms. Flanagan. I could be wrong, but do comment!(less)
From 1850 to 1941, the so-called Victorian-refined Portland was known as the "Unheavenly City" or the "Forbidden City". Cities of the Underworld, Seas...moreFrom 1850 to 1941, the so-called Victorian-refined Portland was known as the "Unheavenly City" or the "Forbidden City". Cities of the Underworld, Season 1, last disc shows the Shanghai Tunnels for kidnapping able-bodied men and selling them as slaves to work on ships bound for the Orient. In the tunnels were also cells for white slavery in the 19th century, euphemism for female sex slaves kidnapped as young as 13.(less)
Plus good list of books from Amazon's "Editorial Reviews" for this book!
Summary: Assistant Professor of Politics and Yale PhD went undercover to work 5.5 months in an Omaha slaughterhouse
The first 15 pages provides background and explains his motivation for the book. The reader is treated with his academic writing, along with a healthy dose of his robust politics (at least he is honest and upfront). Fatigue with conspiracy theories aside, learning that Monsanto successfully lobbied for a class D felony into law Vs trespassers of slaughterhouses should pique public interest into this up close and personal account. If not, our voyeuristic instinct should.
///// ///// ///// ///// /////
From "The Meat Lab", 2013 November, Popular Science Magazine: Biotech firm Organovo/Modern Meadow (backed by Sergey Brin, Google's co-founder) aimed to bioengineer human organs, sidetracked into growing edible chicken (now sold thru Whole Foods), then proposed to grow leather. The last part of this article mused on a future where the factory process of cell growth will be live webcasted as a stark alternative to the secrecy of farming and slaughter in the US meat industry today; and where the few "seed animals" at a bio-factory will "live a charmed life" as celebrities in their quasi- regional petting zoo. Quite ingratiating, this last part. The article does not address, however, the importance or means to ascertain that eating petri dish meat is safe for us.
Personally I support growing leather -- for shoes or for furniture. I support growing the types of human tissues that we currently harvest from cadavers (skins for burn victims and cancer patients, ligaments like ACLs, tissue parts like the cornea or the meniscus in the knee. Also see http://www.icij.org/tissue). These will probably all happen in my lifetime without strenuous moral obstacles -- I think as long as they are "passive" body parts as opposed to complex organs. As for the argument that the world cannot meet its meat consumption needs (by 2050 they say), I think we should all cut down on meat and invent delicious seaweed dishes. Change is good. How about we adapt instead of strong arming nature?
There's just one inevitable thing that makes me cringe: how this would quickly turn into a "grow your lady/gentleman parts" freak show, or a "fountain of youth" hysteria. Granted that bio-engineering designer parts will likely improve the Frankenstein-ish cut-n-stitch plastic surgeries of today, I still find it distasteful. Natural selection has its perks. (less)