Tuesday, November 03, 2009
More Mutilation Theory
(1)
Love those colors!
Kaiser update: We are agreed that the previously mentioned bill was an error. And BTW I mentioned during both phone calls that the reason Melissa refused to 'see me' was that I was recording the proceedings. Ironically, I was informed at the beginning of both conversations with Kaiser that my call might be recorded for quality control purposes. I had no objection of course. So why did Melissa (and her nurse) object to being recorded? Is deception part of the doctor-patient relationship at Kaiser? So it seems. My advice to all patients is to record their visits to their doctors for 'quality control reasons.' Should you tell your doctor sHe is being recorded? Probably not. Are there any brave fathers out there who are willing to record the sexual mutilations of their infant sons? And would the doctors involved agree to that? Can you imagine a family who is willing to record that mutilation and then show the video to the son on his 18th birthday? As a birthday present? Can you imagine a physician who is willing to allow his face and name to be included in such a video? Can you imagine a mother who would allow such a mutilation to take place in the maternity ward next to her bed? While she is awake?
The Today Show recently had a fun interview the owner of a male dog named, 'Nubs.' I loved it for its 'humanitarian aspects' but also for its educational aspects, in this case regarding the previously mentioned 'Mutilation Theory' (see below). Mutilation Theory suggests that Nubs' ears were mutilated for reasons of sexual rage: Apparently, Arab Muslims hate dogs because dogs are not circumcised. This hatred is sub rosa corticalus (if you will pardon my pig latin): the Muslim is enraged by the male dog's intact penis (the dog is superior 'down there'). The enraged Muslim would like to circumcise the dog; however such a scenerio would expose his own rage at his own mutilation for all the world to see. Muslim women would laugh (again sub rosa) as would other men, especially Western men. The Muslim man therefore takes out his uncontrollable rage on the dog's ears (which erect too often for Muslim male comfort).
And I could go on and on, of course, but buzz is increasing and time is short.
Love those colors!
Kaiser update: We are agreed that the previously mentioned bill was an error. And BTW I mentioned during both phone calls that the reason Melissa refused to 'see me' was that I was recording the proceedings. Ironically, I was informed at the beginning of both conversations with Kaiser that my call might be recorded for quality control purposes. I had no objection of course. So why did Melissa (and her nurse) object to being recorded? Is deception part of the doctor-patient relationship at Kaiser? So it seems. My advice to all patients is to record their visits to their doctors for 'quality control reasons.' Should you tell your doctor sHe is being recorded? Probably not. Are there any brave fathers out there who are willing to record the sexual mutilations of their infant sons? And would the doctors involved agree to that? Can you imagine a family who is willing to record that mutilation and then show the video to the son on his 18th birthday? As a birthday present? Can you imagine a physician who is willing to allow his face and name to be included in such a video? Can you imagine a mother who would allow such a mutilation to take place in the maternity ward next to her bed? While she is awake?
The Today Show recently had a fun interview the owner of a male dog named, 'Nubs.' I loved it for its 'humanitarian aspects' but also for its educational aspects, in this case regarding the previously mentioned 'Mutilation Theory' (see below). Mutilation Theory suggests that Nubs' ears were mutilated for reasons of sexual rage: Apparently, Arab Muslims hate dogs because dogs are not circumcised. This hatred is sub rosa corticalus (if you will pardon my pig latin): the Muslim is enraged by the male dog's intact penis (the dog is superior 'down there'). The enraged Muslim would like to circumcise the dog; however such a scenerio would expose his own rage at his own mutilation for all the world to see. Muslim women would laugh (again sub rosa) as would other men, especially Western men. The Muslim man therefore takes out his uncontrollable rage on the dog's ears (which erect too often for Muslim male comfort).
And I could go on and on, of course, but buzz is increasing and time is short.
