Oof.
Yes, my favorite show, first thing Ive sort shipped in ages, prob since first couple or so seasons of Castle.

Id already assumed we'd find out Jane was a willing participant in what was done to her, if not mastermind. While I assume most will focus on the mindfuck to Jane, plus return of old lover no doubt triggering more memories and muddying Jeller, as a guy Im thinking about the damage from Wellers pov.

Its one thing for her to not be Taylor Shaw once he learns, but it is quite another for him to digest that preJane intentionally planned to deceive and manipulate him at his greatest point of vulnerability.
Issue is not just whether she feels some old feelings for Oscar?, but whether Weller can get past a sense of betrayal. Cane he keep Jane separated from her former self in his mind? Even more, is she actually separate? As more memories come back does she revert to that person and the Jane who hes falling for go poof?
Poor bastard.

I actually support first trimester abortion being legal (and in a few special cases somewhat later**) -- there are far too many morally murky situations in real life (even the Catholic Church implicitly does not place equal/identical value on the life of the mother versus the unborn child in genuine life threatening situations), but it in no way follows logically that it can't/shouldn't also be somewhat discouraged, at least at the margin.

I guess my objection to a totally unfettered, and 'immune from any criticism in polite company aka thought crime' policy of abortion at will (whim), defended purely as a matter of the woman's personal choice without regard to any other ethical calculation, is that it depends entirely on the notion that an unborn child is a nullity, nothing, zero, with no intrinsic worth that should be considered in weighing the moral tradeoffs (with the argument about what extent, if any, gov't should take an interest a separate issue).
Basic science tells us that, no, a fetus is not the same as an appendix or a tumor, and that their is a continuous spectrum of development, with no clear dividing lines.

I guess the 'slippery slope' arguments so readily dismissed by the enlightened, were in fact on to something:

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2012/03/why-did-the-journal-publish-an-article-defending-infanticide/


** I know what 'anencephaly' and 'acardiac monster'  mean.

I had to respond to this opinion piece "Women are Facing Sexual McCarthyism" at
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73894.html
quote:

That example is utterly laughable in TWO ways:

1) When I had a vasectomy a few years ago, my wife had to sign a form acknowledging she knew what I was doing, what a vasectomy did (sterility), and that it was very likely irreversible. IOW, getting her permission w/o quite calling it 'permission' -- if they didn't have her form they would not do it.

The thing is, I don't really object to it, because the whole thing about being married in the first place is joint efforts & decisions in having/raising children. Basically it is a sort of 'truth in advertising' requirement. (similar to the way the Catholic Church would have no problem in granting an annulment if the bride or groom knowingly hid their infertility from the other before the wedding.

Of course, the de facto vasectomy permission thing grates because, as a husband, I have zero right to be informed (much less give 'consent') if my wife was seeking an abortion. On one hand the woman has power over the man's potential children, while he has no influence on her aborting his *actual* child.

2) The other absurdity is the dreaded ultrasound violation.  The horror.
WTF?
If I am having a vasectomy I am asking the doctor to CUT my private parts.
How in hell is a hypothetical ultrasound more invasive?

That is just as ridiculous as a woman who is consenting to be penetrated in abortion with a suction wand, or given a D&C, to scream that a mere ultrasound is a violation tantamount to rape.

There are other grounds to object, but that one is freakin' nuts.

Yet this is supposed to be some big intellectual slam dunk '...sauce for the gander' 'gotcha' counterargument.  I am spectacularly unimpressed.

Anyway, absent a marriage, the proper parallel to the vasectomy on the single man side is a tubal ligation on the single woman side.  Abortion utterly fails as a foundation of a shoe-on-the-other-foot argument because abortion and the vasectomy (or the tubal) are in fact not symmetric at all -- whereas the single man or woman using surgery to deliberately sterile only involves him/her, the abortion involves the woman AND her [proto-child]. Completely setting aside any arguments about the beginning of 'personhood', that embryo/fetus is a distinct human organism (with its own unique genetic identity... that's *science* ,folks) that is firmly set on the path to become a person -- barring an abortion, whether induced, or spontaneous thru medical bad luck. 

The attempt to draw a parallel to mere sperm in a vasectomy is logically inept, and is really just a rhetorical bait-and-switch.

Chapter 21 -- Brennan finally uses her martial arts for real




cool -- he's the author of Fight Club



CHapter 24 -- Booth finally meets Brennan after the attack




ok, NYT best selling thriller author... I can live with that :)

then...



CHapter 35 -- B-B heart to heart ends in Booth breaking down





OMG, ROFLMAO!!!! (and a bit horrified)

something historically peddled by the Right, then the 'opiate' as pushed by the Left* is clearly the combination of the surrogate church of Green, cheap weed and free pussy. 

*which is actually funny since the true hard Left never went for *any* of these things, hence my 'opiate' charge.

Independent web journalist Michael Yon has spent mostof the last several years in Afghanistan and Iraq embedded with US and UK troops in bases far from the usual safe stomping grounds of the big net's reporters.

I suppose the linked story about a memorial to fallen soldiers at a base  in Afghanistan  would be considered a photo essay.   The photos and captions are very moving in their simplicity and unexpected beauty.


http://www.michaelyon-online.com/into-thine-hand-i-commit-my-spirit.htm

[only seen about half of the ep]

In light of men usually getting blamed for women starving themselves...

Michaela is getting too skinny, even to the point of her face/head starting to look oddly big by comparison.

Emily looks fantastic tonight with a little *more* weight on her than usual -- that  extra bit of softness is quite attractive.

I'm about half way thru the new Bones ep (watching on the DVR after midnight Friday)...

I was expecting to be all "meh...", but I'm surprised to find my interest getting somewhat renewed.

After several of the eps last season my interest was fading -- too much lurching around drunkenly by the writers (with Brennan's lounge story and the amnesia gimmick at the tail end), but somehow they seem to have found a renewed sense of coherence (knock on wood).  Retroactively they've somehow made it work for me, if you can believe it

At first impression now, I felt they'd too easily dropped the amnesia angle, but what they're doing instead with it is actually good, handled almost... gracefully?... compared to what they'd been doing -- perhaps because in moving B&B forward a bit more they're giving themselves some breathing room with the characters -- and giving them time to use it on screen.

Also -- and this is purely cosmetics -- the show really looks gorgeous, better than ever, like they've got a new Director of Photography or something.  I also like the more relaxed pace in the direction, like they've got a defter touch all around.

Here's to hoping it lasts more than half an ep ;)

Maybe this is only instantly & instinctively funny to guys...

Dr. Jackula

No, he's not a urologist...

The porn titles write themselves:

Count Jackula

Dr. Jackula and Mr. Hard