Comments by Book Guy

@rickdugan yes, I didn't mean to logicize that I would disagree with that conclusion (the one you state). I'm just abandoning the attempt to follow, or to find more information, about the story. Too much work. If the IBF tests are conclusive, then Khelif is a he. Your options (could have gotten further tests, sued, demanded, etc.) are quite intelligent, didn't mean to indicate I would necessarily reject. I do still assert that the IBF is largely controversial and therefore relying on their tests is maybe not possible, and that their test results have not been made in any way public (though, as you now inform me, the results were shared with Olympic committee) which means we (at TUSCL) have almost nothing to go on. I think the Olympics and Khelif both have made this more difficult than necessary. Show. Us. The. Willy. Geez, wouldn't that solve all of it? "Tests" for what? Why does it take chemical analysis to determine whether there is (a) a cavity, or (b) an appendage? Anyway. Meanwhile the supposedly-woke Olympics have canceled the breakdancer who displayed woke political slogans. (Afghan refugee with apron-cape with political message.) To me, over all, it's all adding up to stories of many many contradictions and incompetent choices, not necessarily in favor of more or of less woke-ism. This is sports administrators for ya'. BTW I'm pretty much anti-woke. I don't want chicks with dicks. I vote "left wing" because of social-services policy, but I object to cancel-culture (I miss my city's Confederate monuments, f.e.) and to (what I view as) excess intrusion of trans-gender experimentation surgery and mistakes among under-age people. So I'm not hunting for a way to support Khelif's supposed "right" to box as a female. I just don't believe we've established male-ness or female-ness. That should be the Olympics' job. They've totally botched it regardless of what the right conclusion should have been.

I think a lot of the choices depend on location. If you don't have good strip clubs but you do have good AMPs, pick the latter. In my town the AMPs got seriously busted and now operate very very gun-shy. Also it's a high-traffic tourist destination town. Both these factors mean you probably have to establish yourself well with specific providers at specific locations, or else you are highly likely to get the no-service tourist hustle instead of the legit. performance from the provider. So, I don't generally attend my local AMPs ... at least not until internet finding aids indicate otherwise. It's not that I have chosen to PREFER strip clubs over all AMPs as a general decision; rather, it's that my particular situation directs me away from our particular AMPs in this particular city.

I grew up eating avocado toast because we had wild avocado trees on the edges of the citrus grove. Only thing you could do with the little knotty "crab avocados" the trees gave, was to puree the innards for toast or guac. Libtard Seattle has good strip clubs, I am gathering from context. Weird combination, usually it's the right-wing locations that have good strip clubs (Miami? Dallas, Texas generally).

I don't think TUSCL is avoiding anything, or de-listing. I think people don't submit many things that are barely existing. Clubs come and go without notice on many internet finding aids. Black clubs are, generally, more evanescent than most. F.E., I recently added a primarily-Black "ghetto style" club in New Orleans to the listings. I haven't been and don't intend to go. It's mostly weekends, and, judging by its Instagram and Facebook presence, it's more a hype-project by a couple of rap-music DJ wanna-be types, than an actual location. They have some big parties with tons of people, invite only, make sure to hire several women who want to get "discovered" and be backup dancers in rap videos. For that one event, those few women twerk like hell but probably aren't going to be the on-call stage entertainment except when the right celebrity guest is watching. Would you call this a "strip club"? I suspect they don't "serve" alcohol, it's just everyone bringing bottles like at an after-party. If the place has an established location and an established set of business hours, it's more like a strip club. Those places have to exist long enough for people to bother to submit them to the listings, so that Founder can include them. Ultimately, the absence or presence in these listings of any venue, strip club or massage joint or whatever, is entirely down to the effectiveness of the club at engendering their own crowd-sourcing. If the clientele are internet savvy then a club will get submitted and therefore included in TUSCL's listings. If not, not.

You mean this? https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/10/29/youngkin-virginia-elections-voter-rolls/

None in my red-state blue-city enclave. I recall from Tampa Bay area, pasties were required if a venue served alcohol but not if it didn't. Or something like that. Different jurisdictions different rules.

Back in the middle-2000s I lived in the capital (founding city) of Hooters and therefore many knock-off wanna-be breastaurants, the Tampa Bay region. Rumor had it (TUSCL discussions and other internet sources) that some girls at some of the off-brands were up for an OTR (outside-the-restaurant) fling, pay for play. The Johns were supposed to enter to dine alone and say as they entered that they were "in town for business" and had "lots of free time", making these statements to whichever older woman appeared to be a house-mother type, who would then forward the more willing waitresses to the appropriate table. You could accept, reject and wait for another girl, or just get your dinner. If a girl sat down with you in the booth on your side, she might actually grope a bit over-the-pants to make her intentions clear. One particular waitress was a favorite at one particular restaurant, and another particular restaurant was just generally known to be good fishing grounds among several of the waitresses. I did not partake and won't identify the people or places specifically. I can't even remember them now anyway, it's been two decades almost. Later I lived in asshole-or-armpit of the world, Jackson Miss., where, for lack of any better entertainment, I was doing a keto weight-loss diet. I found that the batter-less wings with salt-and-pepper only from Hooters were an excellent zero-carb meal. If you had a grocery store bottle of zero-sugar Blue Cheese salad dressing (Wishbone was sugar-free at the time, IIRC, though all major brands now add sugar) you could even indulge with that while remaining pure keto. Currently IMO Hooters girls are unattractive along the same sliding scale as strip-club girls. All of them have become unappealing to me. This saves me money but disappoints my dick. Above information is the sum total of my knowledge of Breast-aurants.

I read more stuff that says Khelif has NOT been proven to have XY chromosomes. First I said that I thought she/he/it did not have XY chromosomes, then others posted links that said she/he/it did have XY chromosomes so I said I was wrong, but now I've found more that says she/he/it does not. The IBF SAID that they found XY chromosomes but never made the test results public and the IBF's tests have been consistently suspect on many occasions. I'm simply going to abandon the chase. I wouldn't get a lap dance from Khelif, personally. I think some of the dudes here are probably sad that it's turned out that their favorite dancer was possibly not qualified to dance. Last graf is sarcasm duh ...

I wasn't responding to anyone in specific. (Except Vance, I guess.) I took my info from three different internet sources that are "standard" news outlets, neither CNN nor Fox. I linked one of them. I didn't state accusations about the people in this discussion, I stated conclusions about the issues at hand, as based on the best facts I could ascertain. Others addressed the people not the facts, and ended up thereby being rather unconvincing to me. New Swiftboating.

Brick and Mortars are seeing weird pressures that don't fit old methods of analysis. The strangest sectors do well, or poorly, partly thanks to internet and Covid, partly other factors (couldn't name them). The economy is explicable in only a few ways, IMO. 1. Profiteering and exploitation at the top. Trickle down has been proven to not work; 2020 was an ideal case in point. Record corporate profits lead to record CEO remuneration, but reduction in rank-and-file workers' real income. 2. Shareholder benefits. Many corporations, thanks to most governance over them, would be required to reduce worker wages if it's possible and doesn't hit profitability, simply because the rules say that their one top priority must be increasing returns to the shareholders. 3. Along with 2, therefore, Casino Economy. My analysis, not conventional wisdom, follows. Back in the 90s (and late 80s) I learned, in my initial understanding of private investing, that the Stock Market is generally higher risk than other investments. You could go seriously conservative with Government Bonds, or you could go hog wild with Futures / Options trading, or you could do Precious Metals or you could do Public Utilities or you could just put everything into a bank Certificate of Deposit, etc.. So I learned, that "diversification" and "good investing" meant you put SOME of your money in the Stock Market, because it was on the riskier end. But now-a-days, EVERYONE has ALL their money in the Stock Market, buying and selling shares of companies, via their mutual fund managers. This is great for new enterprises which need investments in their start-up, very good for blue-chip and established companies that basically see growth (beyond mere profitability) as an aim, and idiotic for grandma and grandpa who need a reliable non-erase-able income. We've forced idiotic-ness onto grandma and grandpa. The bubble will burst. It's just a question of when.

Geez 20 years in the National Guard ... more than you did. Newsweek fact-checks both sides https://www.newsweek.com/jd-vance-attacks-tim-walz-military-record-fact-check-1936443 This is the new Swiftboating. Walz's record is fine. He didn't "abandon" (in fact, he re-upped after 9/11, then left directly to run for office as an immediate consequence of wanting to speak out more about military decisions in the lead-up to his leaving) and he didn't "lie". It's pretty clear to me that Vance is looking to besmirch just because Vance knows that reality is not particularly important to people who would vote for Vance. I'm proud to not be a sucker for this sort of fraud. Just look it up at verifiable news sources. Washington Post initially FELL FOR the fraud, then re-edited and posts up front on the story's web page that it has been edited. They "edited" meaning, CORRECTED in order to state fact rather than Vance's lies. They didn't "stealth" anything. Maybe Walz was eating babies underneath a pizza parlor too.

(a) alerts via email, which can be worked-around by the email-change methodmentioned (b) alerts on Alerts web page at TUSCL, which only show up for topics which you STARTED, not necessarily merely replied to, and which can be batch deleted on that web page I think :P ?

rofl @Dolfan gratis no attribution required :)

Yeah OK I was probably remembering the generic "single mothers" merchandise, not something specific to TUSCL. And if I saw someone wearing one of those on a cap or t-shirt or whatever, I'd probably think it was a poseur wanna-be. Who wears caps or t-shirts in strip clubs anyway. A good fund-raiser might be something like this. First, create a discreet symbolic image which could be recognized, but is not widely distributed across the internet. Basically, a picture or logotype or similar that is only visible to the "verified members" people here at TUSCL. Then you set it up at one of the embroidery or logo shops on the internet, and people can get the thing as a shirt-emblem on the pocket or as a coffee mug or as whatever they want. Profits to TUSCL via Founder. I think there are about eight decent high-profile outfits that do printing on lots of things, as long as you provide them with the print-ready artwork. What image? The logo could be anything -- a mash-up of the letters "TUSCL" into the shape of a girl on a pole, seems to me to be a fun idea, I might try to work on that a bit. Other people might have other ideas. I certainly wouldn't recommend going public with the sale of the image before having all the approvals necessary, so I'm not suggesting (or planning) on actually doing anything final. I just enjoy doing some free-hand graphic typography design sometimes, bit of a hobby from my past. This is a suggestion. It's a bit of work. I bet it never comes to fruition.

Yup, y'all (up there ^^, someone, I'm not going to put in the effort to figure out who) corrected me. He/she/it does evidently have XY chromosomes. This means my foregoing analysis is incorrect. I stand corrected. He/she/it does have XY chromosomes, but only according to tests that the Olympics don't use. He/she/it certainly does have high levels of testosterone. Weirdness, though, he/she/it also is female. I don't understand how that works and for me the problem is that the "tests are inconclusive" despite the fact that, really, it should be damned easy to have a conclusive test. LOOK. AT. THE. DICK. I still don't think this is a case of woke-ism, as much as a case of an individual ugly chick. And a case of sports administrators run amok. They love to have excess rules and crazy prosecutorial appeal processes, mostly to prove they can still compete even though all of them are overweight middle aged men who used to be good boxers. Or swimmers. Or whatever. I still think Lance Armstrong should be allowed to keep his Tour de France wins ... So, now I know, Khelif is a she/he/it who has all sorts of weird genetics. But obviously wouldn't be able to live as a transvestite in sharia Morocco, but also really doesn't tick all the boxes for "totally female" nor for "male who is dressed up as female." So a lot of this would be solved with a simple lift-the-skirt look-at-the-wienie investigation. Olympics don't do that, probably because it's too easy. There's actually an appeal still pending from way back in 2018 on similar issues. In the interim I've learned that the IBF is banned by a lot of different sports governing bodies because they change their standards to suit whoever bribes them the most, and because they have different standards at different weight classes. So seriously, I won't be getting a lap dance from anyone who looks like Khelif.

How was there a lie about military service? I don't get it. I'm not a Fox viewer so I don't see stories that are based on internet fabrications. As I understand it, he said he was in the National Guard and he was in the National Guard and he stayed in it for over 20 years. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what "is" is.

I vaguely remember the slogan "I support single mothers" with a silhouette of a curvy woman pole-dancing, kind of along the lines of the seated curvy woman on the typical truck mud-flaps, except upright. This was available on a t-shirt? Do I remember correctly?

I like letting the alcohol cause me to become more enamored of the new women over the course of time. It's like titrating my horniness drink by drink.

My understanding is that Khelif has not actually been proven to have XY chromosomes. This conclusion has been "assumed" on the basis of OTHER tests which accurately demonstrate high testosterone levels. As I read it, the test for type of chromosome is expensive and genetically invasive, whereas the test for high levels of testosterone is easy and cheap, so the IBF uses the easy cheap test and then EXTRAPOLATES the chromosomal make-up on the basis of that. Essentially, therefore (as I understand it) the IBF has said, "because Khelif has such a large amount of testosterone (and other test result triggers) therefore Khelif must also have male chromosomes." This shoddy approach to science is one of the many reasons that the Olympics have banned IBF coaches and doctors a few years ago. That's my "understanding", from Googling and reading at several news sources. I of course may not have done a complete search. If my above "understanding" is true, then Khelif is simply an extremely strong and "masculine-type" female human (to an extreme, but within the range of normal). All practical decisions therefore would indicate you can't ban Khelif simply because she/he/it "looks male." I guess a definitive test would be to make Khelif undress and look at the body parts between the legs. I'm a little miffed that they don't do that. They used to do mandatory "pap smears" which just seemed silly to me -- they'd use a swab to take a sample "smear" flesh from inside the vagina, and then send the sample off to a lab to determine whether or not the hormonal levels indicate that the person had a vagina. Wait ... wut? Didn't you just stick the swab inside the vagina in the first place? WTF ... I don't believe Khelif is a trans-gender athlete, nor a person of multiple or questionable gender. I do believe the blog-o-sphere is making a lot of silly conclusions. And I certainly believe that trans-gender-ism would be HIGHLY unlikely in the conservative Islamic nation-state of Morocco, where Khelif grew up and which Khelif is representing in the Olympics. So here's what I'm tempted to conclude: Get over it dudes. This isn't woke-ism gone amok, it's just a really ugly chick. But my data is inconclusive because I don't genuinely know the test results. I could be wrong. If Khelif genuinely is a trans-gender person then I would think it's idiotic that she/he/it would be allowed to compete in women's athletics.

PS these are excellent quotes from Puddy Tat. I also spotted one in a different thread, by a Black business leader and philosopher, about how married Black couples have very little crime but "Black" culture was stupid exploitative etc. etc.. All very to the point.

I was gonna say that

I think most of the more powerful strains of weed smell like fresh dog shit. (And not in a good way. If there can even be a good way.) I didn't like it whenever I tried it. I studied in Amsterdam and had some seriously professional stoner classmates so they took me under their wing and introduced me to the right dosage and degree of power for me, and I still didn't like it. I felt the weird tinglies, understood what they were, and then wanted them to end. Which they didn't. For much too long a time relative to what I would have preferred. So, most of my experience involved waiting for the experience to get over with. Subsequent, finally coming down, I remained paranoid for about two or three days even though I wasn't tingly. Ultimately I went for a very very very long run, longer than I'd ever run before, around and around Vondel Park, walking and running, for an entire afternoon and evening, until I was so exhausted that I could barely get to a taxi to be driven home (I left my bike locked up at the park overnight). That still didn't clear all the paranoia. Although it was high quality and was administered carefully and knowledgeably, nevertheless it was all around a very negative experience, so I wouldn't go for it again.

I can't believe how many of you evidently think this is a real human. AI, dudes, AI! Also larger than what I prefer, much too hippy. I'm into the small ballerina type, or the spinner. This woman is waggly all over.

I'm an anti-Trump voter BUT I don't think that Trump's comments (about K. Harris, at national Black journalist meeting) were particularly RACIST. Racism would be to say, "because she's Black she's stupid" or unqualified or whatever. His comments were factually inaccurate -- bluntly false, IMO, or (perhaps in the opinions of his supporters) merely the type of hyperbole that is usual in political campaigns. He was pandering to his base, rather than trying to win new supporters. It was a bad setting in which to try to pander to his base. But this idea that he's somehow BIGOTED about her is a different idea, only vaguely supported by his comments. To me, it's basically this. "OK, I'm Trump and I'm going to go say the things that people like for me to say, when people like me. The people who like me, like me to say these sorts of things. So here are these things." Thus, it makes the statements poor choices (these weren't people who would approve of those statements) and it makes clear what sorts of people he would prefer to be pleasing (his base). But it doesn't suggest that he's stupid enough to think that Harris is incompetent, to the point of incapable of winning an election, strictly because she's Black (or Indian). People in politics know, don't underestimate the opposition. Trump didn't.

PS -- does anyone else remember "Two Shed's Michigan Strip Club Reviews"? Another gone but not forgotten strip-clubbing website.