Burnettiquette

More than 1/3 of people lie about their weight

According to a study by AOL, 42% of people surveyed said they absolutely would not tell the truth about their weight if asked.

Thirty-seven percent said they'd lie to a spouse about their weight.

And 39% said they'd be willing to shave up to 10% off their weight in order to deceive someone.

What I was most curious about but didn't see in the survey was who lied more about their weight, men or women.

At risk of getting boycotted, I'm gonna guess it's women...but just barely.

I think it's a myth that women are so much more self-conscious than men about their weight.

Sure, women I've known are really sensitive about such questions. I even had an ex-girlfriend back in the day nearly break down in tears and walk out of a department store when a sales clerk gently but adamantly told my ex that there was just no way she was going to squeeze herself into a size 2, unless she placed a 1 before the two.

Not nice, I know.

But of all the guys I know (not all of them beautifully sculpted like me), while I can only think of two who ever got that stressed out about their weight (and those two were morbidly obese), most guys I know stressed over their weight during their single days. They just stressed behind closed doors and banked on the fact that other guys just wouldn't query them on weight.

Here's the difference I noticed between men and women. Both worry about their weight in terms of their outward appearance. But men don't sweat the actual number as much as women, because they know that women who aren't in some sort of fitness or health-related line of work really have no idea what guys want to weigh, or should weigh.

An overweight guy with enough self-confidence can get away with walking around, sucking in his gut, and pretending that big automatically translates to muscular.

It may be 'cause society in general has been so much more biased toward them, but I just can't imagine an overweight woman attempting to pull off the same stunt as the overweight guy.

Who knows - maybe I'm reading too much into the study.

Follow me, please: http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Chicago Beating Death

By now you probably know that a teenage boy was beaten to death in Chicago earlier today by two groups of other teens who were fighting each other - allegedly a gang dispute, but jointly turned on the victim when he unwittingly wandered into the middle of their rumble.

Now, Derrion Albert, a good student and church-going kid with absolutely no reputation for violent or criminal behavior of any kind, is dead.

Over the next several days, good people in Chicago will March, ask police for more patrols, and ask the city for more $$$ to help fund programs to save the kids from themselves. People will also say the violence must stop, but they will say it in a way that mimicks the dissipation of smoke in the open air: that plea will go nowhere, because it will be aimed at no one in particular.

Yeah, communities have to turn on criminals. But this kind of mind-numbing violent crime, involving perpetrators as young as 17, won't stop until communities also turn on parents who allow their children to raise themselves and who don't compel their kids to behave.

That's right. Parents. The four knuckleheads in custody in Chicago for killing Albert didn't lose respect for human life this morning. It's been building for some time, and probably because no adult relative or guardian got in their faces and told them to straighten up or else.'

Pathetic.

PS. If you're considering leaving a racist or borderline racist comment on this post, don't bother, unless you have newly discovered scientific evidence that there is a cause and effect relationship between skin color and behavior. If you don't have that proof - that color causes certain behavior, then swallow your prejudice and face this fact: this crime was (allegedly) committed by four young men, not every other young man in this country who happens to share a tan with them. Hell, I look like 'em. But I look like the victim too. Chew on that.

PPS. I wonder if I'll hear from the readers who wrote me on Friday to say they care less about human victims of crime than animal victims, because human victims ask for it. Hmmm, Albert's family would no doubt be thrilled to hear that enlightened view of the cycle of life.

Follow me, please: http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Roman Polanski

In case you live in a cave, thirty-two years ago at the age of 44, movie director Roman Polanski, "hosted" a 13-year-old female date at then friend Jack Nicholson's house. Polanski gave the girl champagne and drugs, and when she was good 'n drousy, he raped her. He later admitted the sexual encounter as part of a botched, wonky, plea agreement with prosecutors in Los Angeles. The agreement called for Polanski to spend 90 days in a secure psychiatric facility, AKA psych jail, being evaluated. Following his evaluation, if the shrinks did not consider him a threat, he'd likely be done with jail, would go on probation, and would have to get counseling, etc.. At the end of his psych incarceration, the judge in the case hinted that he might disregard the plea deal and sentence Polanski to something harsher, in order to appease the public.

So Polanski fled to France, where he was still a citizen. And that's where he's been since, living his life, starting a new family (wife, two daughters), making movies and winning an Oscar, and being hailed as a cultural and artistic icon, till yesterday when police in Switzerland arrested Polanski and held him on that 31-year-old rape case from the U.S.

Pundits and politicians in France and Switzerland are calling for Polanski's release, saying the case is too old to resume, the collective consciousness of the U.S. is too puritanical, and that U.S. authorities should let bygones be bygones.

Friends and fans in Europe and the U.S. say Polanski has suffered enough in life, being exiled all these years from the U.S., being tormented by Nazis during WWII, and dealing with the murder of his first wife Sharon Tate, by Charles Manson and his gang of loons.

So what do I think? Bring him back and lock his Oscar-winning butt up!

Here's my logic:

• Sure, the judge in the Polanski case back in the day, may have been a fame seeker, but criminal law doesn't require a judge to abide by a plea deal between prosecutors and a defendant, if the judge doesn't think the terms of the deal are just. So whatever his motivation, I can't be too mad at the judge for balking at 90 days in psych jail as a sufficient sentence for the rape of a 13-year-old.
• If Polanski wasn't famous, this would not be a public debate right now.
• If a woman whose husband beat her declined to press charges, in most jurisdictions law enforcement would proceed to charge him anyway. So when Polanski's 13-year-old victim - obviously now an adult - says she doesn't want the case against him to proceed, I feel for her desire to move on, but the case should go on. Besides, her judgment may be clouded, since he paid her in a financial settlement from a civil suit she filed against him over the rape.
• If Polanski wasn't famous, no one would even dream of entertaining his claim that his victim was a real-life Lolita and enthusiastic about their encounter.
• Even if you fell for Polanski's Lolita defense, how do you justify the booze and drugs? Consensual sex partners don't need to be drugged first.
• If Polanski wasn't famous, and had instead been your weird, creepy-looking neighbor back in the day, you'd be calling for a new judge to drop the hammer on him. Same goes if he was one of the guys from the trailer park or the projects on the other side of the tracks.
• If that guy from the trailer park or the projects cited his horrific childhood and adult tragedies as factors in his crime, we'd all tell him - say it with me now - That's all sad, but it's no excuse to rape a child!

Let's review. Regardless of whether the judge was fame-seeking or not, here are a few of the things that troubled him about Polanski's deal: Polanski gave his victim multiple glasses of champagne; fed her quaaludes; performed oral, vaginal, and anal sex on her, even after she said asked him to stop, and even after she said she felt like she was suffering an asthma attack; and had the presence of mind to lie to a visitor who unwittingly interrupted the rape, and told that person he was getting dressed.

Yeah, I thought The Piano was a great movie too. But Polanski needs to face a judge in this country, where he committed and admitted his crime.

PS. Here's a doozy for ya: My Friday column was about two South Florida men accused of horribly mutilating two horses, so they could butcher the animals and sell their meat. I mourned the loss of the animals but said I was disturbed by what appears to be an increasing callousness toward human victims of violent crime. I suggested that we shouldn't care less about animal victims of violent crime, but we should definitely care more about human victims of violent crime. Half the reader responses I received argued that humans aren't real victims like animals, because humans bring crime on themselves. Hmmm, does that enlightened view apply to 13-year-old rape victims too?

Follow me, if you don't mind: http://typepad.com/jamesburnett.

Today's Column: Mourning people as we mourn animals

What's crackin' friends and frienemies? Busy day, so I'll get right to it. My column in today's Miami Herald is about the outrage expressed in South Florida over the recent slaughter of a number of horses. This week and last, two young men were arrested for two of the killings, and they're facing serious criminal charges, as they should be. Supposedly they were killing the horses - other people's horses - not for sport, but to sell the meat to people who enjoy eating horse.

So along with just about everyone else in the Miami area, I was pretty angry when I read details of how these poor horse were killed. And I want the book thrown at the killers. But what annoyed me at a level much greater than my anger over the horse killings was the starkly opposite responses of readers to the horse killing news and concurrent but unrelated people killing news.

Comments on the horse killings were that the young killers should suffer horrible deaths and burn in hell, etc. On a story about a 15-year-old boy who was shot and killed at a Burger King a couple weeks ago, one reader commented that the boy's death was "no big loss; he should have been home studying."

Hmmm, so a 15-year-old kid, a victim, sort of asked for it 'cause he wasn't home studying. But if that had been a 15-year-old horse, the same reader would have written in that the killer should suffer the same fate as the victim.

I'm not saying that we should not take special care of animals. I get it. They're innocent creatures and depend on us. But just because humans have a cognitive level that allows us to better know right from wrong than four-legged animals, doesn't mean we deserve to be victims of cold-blooded murder any more than horses or dogs or cats deserve it. So only if you're innocent and not able to care for yourself do you deserve to be mourned or avenged for your murder? Doesn't make sense to me.

So my feedback on the column so far has been interesting - a mixed bag. Some folks agree with me. Others think I'm an idiot, because I can't compare innocent animals to humans...who may have asked for it.

I don't need to tell you what I think of that philosophy. But I will give you this analogy that I shared with a woman who emailed and told me that she makes no distinction between human and four-legged animal life, 'cause we're all animals:

I told her I didn't believe her, because while we may agree that when it comes to being victims, neither humans nor four-legged animals should suffer cold-blooded violence (unless they're cows or chickens preparing to be shipped off to the grocery. What? I'm just sayin'.). But if the topic is not victimization then human instinct will not allow us to value four-legged animal lives as equal to human lives.

So you're walking down the street and you come upon a house on fire. A woman laying on the front lawn begs your help and tells you her baby and her cat are both upstairs in different rooms - cat to the left, baby to the right.

Knowing you may have time to rescue only one of them, you run upstairs. Which way do you go? I'd argue that even the greatest animal lover is going to go to the right and rescue the baby first.

But why? They're both innocent creatures, right?

No answer necessary to that one. I think common sense will fill in the blank.

Anyway, check out the column here. And if you want to continue friendly (or unfriendly) debate about that column, go here to post a question or comment for my interactive chat that will take place from 1 - 2 p.m. today.

Either way, it's all good.

PS. Follow me at http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Friday Column: Beer Tastes & Tap Water Budgets

What's crackin', friends and frienemies? Happy Friday.

My column this week is about a young woman, Yanira Doyle, who is surviving South Florida's real estate crisis right now, because she used her head before the crisis struck. We need more Yanira Doyles buying houses:

Basic logic could have prevented real-estate mess

By JAMES BURNETT

jburnett@MiamiHerald.com

Yanira Doyle could easily be a prophetic figure in the South Florida real-estate market, and all because she didn't let her eyes get bigger than her stomach.

Before the housing market began to slide sharply downward two years ago, Doyle, then a 26-year-old prospective home buyer who is not psychic, saw the future and weighed her options accordingly:

Buy a gleaming condo in a shiny tower on the beach and fit snugly into the sometimes skewed impressions distant friends and relatives have of South Florida, based on Travel Channel shows -- or buy a place where monthly expenses weren't so high that Doyle couldn't maintain it, pay her other bills, and continue to build a savings account.

`A NO-BRAINER'

Doyle, featured recently on the WLRN FM 91.3 radio show Under the Sun for her uncommon sense, opted for the latter. ``It was a no-brainer to me,'' she says. ``You buy what you can afford.''

Don't scoff at the simplicity of Doyle's logic. Unless you've had your head in the sand for the past couple of years, you know that there are plenty of South Floridians and prospecting interlopers who did just the opposite of Doyle and now find themselves in trouble.

For all the academic and government studies on what went wrong, it can be summed up like this: There is an anti-Doyle attitude pervasive in South Florida, an attitude that says, I can only achieve the American Dream by keeping up with the Joneses . . . even if the Joneses earn more money than me.....

Go here to read the rest of the column.

Patrick Swayze, 1952 - 2009

Patrick Swayze died today, after a 20 month fight with pancreatic cancer.

I was a huge fan of his, though I could've done without all the dancing, and I kinda thought Baby should've been put in the corner. And I thougt "Road House" was cool too, even though the premise was a stretch - a Ph.D, who knows Kung Fu or something like that, and voluntarily uses his considerable mental skills to help get rowdy bars and lazy bar bouncers under control...And he gets the girl.

But the first film I ever saw as a kid w/out my parents chaperoning was 1983's "The Outsiders," from the S.E. Hinton novel. A buddy's older brother snuck us into the movie theater at the Armed Forces Staff College in Norfolk, Va.

People always remember the Johnny Cade character, played by Ralph Macchio, because he was a sympathetic figure, who died young, uttering a slightly corny but unforgettable line: "Stay gold, Pony Boy. Stay gold."

I always remembered Swayze's character, Darryl "Darry" Curtis, gritty, blue collar father figure to his orphaned, ragtag younger brothers, and leader of the "greasers," the aimless, brooding guys who lived on the wrong side of the tracks.

When the Curtis brothers' collective life was in disarray Darry took control, organized 'em like soldiers for a rumble with the upper crust kids, and generally kept everyone in line.

Rest in Peace, Patrick Swayze.

Follow me: http://twitter.com/jamesburnett

Caster Semenya

If you don't know that name, Semenya is a South African track star and college student who was raised as a female and has always competed as such.

Between this year and last, she has beaten opponents by such wide margins on the international track scene that competitors began grumbling could not have been born a woman, because she is too muscular, runs like a man, and is just too dominant.

If true, that rumor "probably" would disqualify Semenya from international competition, and negate her prior victories.

After Semenya underwent forced gender testing a few weeks ago, imposed by the International Association of Athletics Federations, some of the results allegedly leaked a few days ago: Allegedly, Semenya has male and female organs, and no uterus. And because of the presence of internal male genitals, Semenya apparently has a testosterone level three times higher than the women she races against. Theoretically, the testosterone makes her stronger, thus faster. So she does have an advantage.

I guess doctors call her scenario "intersex" these days, rather than hermaphrodite, because the latter suggests an individual has two fully functional sets genitalia.

My snap judgment when I first heard about Semenya a month or so ago was that if it was found out the runner was a man, or at least not all woman, then she should be immediately disqualified 'cause international track and field competition has been tarnished enough over the years by cheaters.

But then I got Semenya's whole story: She didn't cheat. She may not be able to bear children, but for the absence of external male parts, she was raised as a girl, treated as a girl, told she was a girl, assumed by her parents to be all girl, because doctors at her birth likely made a visual judgment of her gender.

So, that makes Semenya.......?

She's a good runner. Should she be banned from female competiton, because she's not "all woman," as most of us laypeople define gender? Should she be compelled to compete with men, because she's not "all woman?" That wouldn't work though, 'cause she's not "all man" either. Should the women she races against be forced to run uphill, so to speak, 'cause of Semenya's testosterone advantage? Not like it's their fault her gender has been confused by the adults around her all her life.

One sports ethicist opined that given how she's been raised and her unique circumstances, and the fact that this ship has already sailed, the IAAF has no choice but to allow Semenya to continue competing as a woman.

I feel terrible for Semenya. And I genuinely have no strong opinion on how her competitive situation should be resolved.

What do you think?

PS. Follow me: http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Quick Hits

What's crackin' friends and frienemies? It is a busy Thursday, so I'm gonna keep this short, which loosely translated means long.

First, don't forget to read my column tomorrow. Some of you will get it right away. Others won't like it 'cause it touches on a cultural boogeyman - a racial/ethnic issue. Boo! Ha ha ha ha ha ha! Don't get tense. It's just my opinion. And trust me, it'll be food for thought. We all know that sometimes the healthiest food doesn't go down smoothly. Anyway, I'll link the column tomorrow. And for once, would some of you please join me in my online chat at 1 p.m. tomorrow at this address - http://www.miamiherald.com/qna/forum/james_burnett/index.html? You're gonna make me develop a complex. Last week, I was left hanging like the wallflower on prom night.

Second, U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson (R - South Carolina) is an idiot - not because he's a Repubican or because he disapproves of Pres. Obama's healthcare reform plans. Wilson's an idiot because he disrespected the office of the presidency last night by shouting over a sitting president, during a live address, and calling the President of the United States a liar. What Wilson did was worse than when American celebrities (you, Gwyneth Paltrow!) talk to foreign media and complain about living in the US. The worst a few moronic Democratic congressmen did during live addresses by former Pres. George W. Bush was hiss. That was disrespectful too, but doesn't rise to the level of interrupting a sitting president to call him a liar. And don't try any partisan crap w/me. I'd say the same if we were talking about Pres. John McCain right now.

Third, take a good look at the mug shot below. It is of Alan Dale Lee, a Pasco County, FL, man, jailed recently for stabbing another man. Not another penny ever needs to be spent on anti-drug use campaigns. Lee's head shot is the best deterrent I've ever seen.

 

 

 

Fourth, Mike Duvall violated the rules of the game and the tenets of The Cowboy Code: He talked publicly about a sexual conquest. A real player wouldn't have done that. If you don't know the story, Duvall was a California state assemblyman...until yesterday, when he resigned after audio/video recordings surfaced of him bragging to a lobbyist in the state assembly chamber about how he - Duvall - had a mistress, had way too much sex with her, and liked to spank her because she's "such a bad girl." Some of you don't think affairs are that big a deal. I strongly disagree with you, but that's another post. For the record, Duvall now says he didn't have an affair. He just made up a story about a mistress to make himself seem cool, or as he described it, he engaged in "inappropriate storytelling." Hmmm, flashback to 8th grade. Sorry, I'm having trouble typing this 'cause I'm constantly drawn to Mr. Lee's mug shot above.

Fifth, it's Thursday. And my only televised guilty pleasure airs tonight: Real Housewives of Atlanta. Yes, I'm sure that if I continue to watch I'll catch something awful like junk rot, which will go nicely with the disease I'm certain I caught watching the first episode of Miami Social. But you can't live forever!

Finally, am I the only person concerned that classic Marvel Comics characters like Spiderman, Iron Man, the Fantastic Four, and Wolverine, are gonna be integrated into Mickey Mouse cartoons now that Disney has purchased Marvel? Probably.

Till next time, follow me at http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Presidential reality check

Before I ask and state what I have to ask and state, let me remind a few of you who are prone to bulging neck veins and high blood pressure and bleats of "Ah haaaaa!" that I don't care who you voted to move into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. last November.

As "parties" go, I'd just as soon voluntarily give up my (self-appointed, but accurate) label of being "Miami's Coolest Guy" to knock back a fruit-flavored umbrella drink with and dance with the dorks who hang out at places like Have a Nice Day Cafe and Bar (Your City Here), than throw my full support behind either the Democrats or Republicans.

And any of you bulging-neck-veiners who try to say otherwise are either willfully ignorant, or unfamiliar with my body of work.

That being said, here's a pop quiz. Who said tthe following to a group of Washington, D.C.school children, in a nationally-televised broadcast to public schools across the great US of A:

"I ask every student watching today: Look around you. Count four students. Start with yourself. No one dreams of becoming a dropout, but far too many do. Which one of you won't make it through school?

The fact is, every one of you can. Let's make a pact then right here. Let's work to see that 5 years from now, you and your friends will be more than sad statistics. Give yourself a decent shot at your dreams. Stay in school. Get that diploma.....

"I'm asking you to put two and two together: Make the connection between the homework you do tonight, the test you take tomorrow, and where you'll be 5, 15, even 50 years from now. You see, the real world doesn't begin somewhere else, some time way down there in the distant future. The real world starts right here. What you do here will have consequences for your whole lives.

When it comes to your own education, what I'm saying is take control. Don't say school is boring and blame it on your teachers. Make your teachers work hard. Tell them you want a first-class education. Tell them that you're here to learn.

Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart. I can't understand for the life of me what's so great about being stupid. If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now when they're stuck in a dead-end job? Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.....

Take control -- challenge yourself. Only you know how hard you work. Maybe you can fake, maybe, just maybe you can fake your way into a job, but you won't keep it for long if you don't have the know-how to get the job done. Maybe you can cram the week before that marking period ends, and turn that C into a B. But you can't con your way past the SAT and into college. If you don't work hard, who gets hurt? If you cheat, who pays the price? If you cut corners, if you hunt for the easy A, who comes up short? Easy answer to that one: You do."

Answer? United States Pres. George H.W. Bush, on Oct. 1, 1991, at Alice Deal Junior High School.

Not a whole lot different from what Pres. Obama had to say in his speech this morning at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va.

There are two shames here: That back in '91 Democratic Party leaders - elected and otherwise - called Bush's speech political opportunism and a paid political ad, and even launched a formal investigation into the funding for Bush's speech; and that in the weeks leading up to Obama's speech GOP leaders - elected and otherwise - suggested his was part of a devious plot to indoctrinate school children into socialist and communist lifestyles.

I even had a co-worker violate Godwin's Law and pull out that tired Hitler comparison, suggesting that like the late Führer, Obama's speech would be a brainwashing tool.

His evidence? Not just that Obama insisted on exhorting school children, but that as part of his post-speech lesson plan he wanted kids to write him letters on how they could help him be (presumably, a better) president. Yeah, the lesson plan idea was bad, no question. Still, I hate to break it to my colleague and others who were on that train of thought, but former Pres. Bush (41) made a similar request to his young, mush-minded audience. I study voting patterns and polling religiously. I haven't seen one study that suggests the GOP scored more young voters in the years immediately following Bush's speech. That won't happen for Obama either, as a result of today's speech.

My colleague also insisted that the job of exhorting school kids with inspirational speeches should be for parents only, because "we the people" didn't elect the president to do such things.

We didn't elect U.S. presidents to hold turkey-pardoning ceremonies on the White House lawn. But they do that too, every year at Thanksgiving.

Sure, both men were trying to score political points with their speeches. Why the shock?

But generally speaking the criticisms of both men over a speech telling kids to study, work hard, etc., etc., were just dumb.

If you didn't like Bush, hopefully your dislike was due to his policies and not because his gang wore different colors than yours. And if you don't like Obama, I can only hope you're using the same standard of policy and not team colors. Somehow though the fringe element of his critics is increasingly suggesting that while they don't like his policies, if there isn't a "fresh" policy to legitimately challenge they'll gladly take a swipe at a more superficial characterisitic.

So, neck-vein-poppers, take a deep breath, count backward from 10, breath slowly into a paper bag if you have to. And when you've calmed down, step gingerly off your soap box and acknowledge in a grown-up way that sometimes a pep talk is just that, no matter the six-degrees-of-separation sinister connections you think you can make between that talk and a broader agenda.

Relax. By week's end if your distaste for Pres. Obama is "pure," there'll be a legitimate issue, a policy issue for you to challenge and debate. And if your distaste is rooted in something more superficial...like team colors, well, hang on till tomorrow evening. And no doubt a TV or radio chat show host will give you plenty of toothless fodder.

Now, I'm going to get back to my Gurkha Beauty and await the inevitable and inaccurate onslaught of anonymous email comments from people who will have missed the point of this post, and will accuse me of one or more of the following: pushing Obama's hidden "black nationalist" agenda, pushing Obama's hidden "socialist" agenda, hiding Obama's original birth certificate in the safe under my floorboards, hating white people, pretentiously eating chicken nuggets with a fork instead of my bare hands, and wanting to open the U.S. borders to aliens - not from Mexico, but from Outer Space.

PS. Follow me: http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Monday is Labor Day: Spouses be warned if you live near water

A truck driver in China jumped off a ferry boat and into a dark, rapid Yangtze River, because his wife nagged him too much.

That's it. There's no punchline. Zhou figured his odds of getting a little peace were greater at the bottom of the Yangtze than with his wife who remained on the ferry after his leap of faith.

Hmmm. I'm gonna wuss out and not write the chauvenist thought that's on my mind right now. Instead, I'll just remind you that tomorrow's Labor Day, the day working folks and folks who wish to work take a break, and the day that people who don't like to work carry on business as usual. You'd think they would call it Non-labor Day, but that's another story altogether.

So don't nag your spouse tomorrow. Don't ask him or her - especially him, from my admittedly biased point of view - to do anything that involves more than sleeping, eating, drinking, ass-scratching, more sleeping, eating, drinking, and watching TV...and maybe lighting the grill.

If you do nag your spouse on Labor Day, don't complain if he or she goes and jumps in a river. I've already reminded Mrs. B that we live about a 10 minute walk from the Intracoastal Waterway, and a 15 minute walk from the Atlantic.