Lately, a number of friends have been curious to know why I have not been posting much on this blog. The truth was exposed this morning: I have been covertly running another blog — the dos equis variety with a permissive pink background, an obligatory blonde headshot and scandalous pillow talk.
Ack, where to begin disspelling that.
Even though our androgynous amigo was the new kid on the block, I felt compelled to post a comment to its view on a breast implant tax. I showed Jeremy Sapienza the post and he laughed; he then suggested that the author was just trying to yank our chains.
Then I delinked Pat after the wetdream. Then I justified my delinkage.
Then it turns out that the chick is a dude… with feelings and I’d like to discuss a couple passages that Scruffy makes:
Libertarians tend to be ugly because it’s an anti-majority philosophy. People who are attractive have an easy time going through life and derive far too many advantages from the status quo to ever question it. It’s only outsiders, who are usually ugly, who join up with fringe movements.
This summer at Mises U, I mentioned to a couple people that I wanted to eventually write an article discussing why hygiene and physical appearance were low on the priority list of most libertarians. Despite the incredible intellectual energies devoted to tackling weighty issues in detail (i.e. I believe Murray Rothbard alone authored at least 4 published papers discussing various methods of abolishing the Fed and reverting to a gold standard), it is unlikely that there will be an aesthetic dynamism equivalent in the form of a highly-competitive nationwide beauty pageant filled with wanna-be plastic libertarian centerfolds. Furthermore, I doubt we will be seeing a rigorous proof of the Photogenic Axiom from Hoppe et al.
Is this bad? To me this is a personal judgment call, so it really does not matter what I think (I’m not an Objectivist). Secondly, individuals like Rothbard specialized in political and economic theory, not exercise physiology. That is what the division of labor brings to the table. At the same time, I personally believe that it is beneficial to live and lead a balanced life (i.e. geeks, spend a little less time on forums and more time in the gym).
As far as ugliness being linked to an “anti-majority” philosophy, is this supposed to mean that the majority of people want to be seen as beautiful busty babes and brawny beaus? Or that they already are?
[Note: I am a kinesiology instructor at A&M and teach several sections of strength training. If anyone would like a specific workout, diet, or critique thereof, feel free to ask.]
Another point Houdini made was regarding the seemingly exponential success of the LG blog:
This effect no doubt carries over into the real world. Whenever I see an attractive woman with a successful career, I’ll remember the experience of this blog and assume that she didn’t really get there on merit, just her looks.
I really do not think this is a valid conclusion. Were Carly Fiorina or Meg Whitman made CEOs because the Board of Directors voted on their looks? What about an unattractive woman with a successful career? Or an attractive woman without a successful career? Did they forget to sleep with the night-time janitors? Are all the executives at Mary Kay lesbians? Ad nauseam.
A priori this point is moot: attractiveness is entirely subjective — beauty is in the eye of… and all that jazz (I would be an awful Objectivist).
I do not think there is anything morally or ethically wrong with wanting and striving to look better. I recall a speech from Don Boudreaux, “Cleansed by Capitalism” in which he discussed just how filthy people and living conditions were prior to the industrial development of the West — inexpensive cosmetic goods & services are readily available today right now, what is your medieval excuse for not using them? While I am not advocating that you (John “I’ve-read-every-book-by-Mises-and-Rand-but-I-smell-like-tuna” Libertarian) become a personal trainer, I would for the sake of First Impression and health, hit the fitness club a couple times a week or eat at Subway (despite what players of Counter Strike contend, eating French fries and drinking alcohol don’t hit “the right spot”). Nor am I advocating that you become a metrosexual, highlights and all…
Regarding mail-order brides, while I have no experience with them, why not start a mail-order groom service? And, how on earth did Wazoo discover that picture in the first place? Go-go-gadget Libertarian-Bride?
Lastly, whomever the author of LG is, props to you for doing what I should have (even if you’re a damn statist).