Tips for Restaurant Owners

Modern Tipping Suggestions for Restaurants

If I was running a restaurant today, how would I handle all the issues surrounding tipping and tipping culture?

Four suggestions:

1.  I would implement a required service charge of twelve percent.  I would make it clear on the menu and on the receipt that this fee is one hundred percent paid to the customer's server only.  Not all servers and not the management.  I would make sure that it is clearly indicated that this amount is twelve percent.  For parties of six or more, I would make this amount seventeen percent.

If labeling this fee a service charge is confusing, fine, I would label it required tip.  Because that is what it is.  Not trying to hide anything or confuse anyone.  And to clear up any confusion, the menu sets the price, not the receipt.  But I would include pricing, fees, and explanations in both places.  I might even have servers disclose, pre-order, if the policy is new.  Transparency is vital.

2.  In order to offset the inevitable pushback for the required tip, I would place a Rate Your Server section on the receipt right under the itemized required service charge.  This would be a preprinted 1 through 10 scale that diners could quickly circle.  If some amount of tip is required, diners will still want to way to express their view of the service.

3.  Right under the Rate Your Server section I would include an Additional Tip blank line, leaving the amount entirely to the diner.

Different demographics tip differently.  And some people do not tip at all.  In my view, if the service is good, that is unacceptable.  This would insure that the server makes at least twelve percent.  If the diner is displeased with the service, they can give the server a low rating.  And yes, if a server consistently receives low ratings, they can be replaced.

Twelve percent is on the low end for tips.  If it is to be required, I think that is where it needs to be.  Not even at the traditional fifteen percent level.  No, I am not sure if people would actually add the Additional Tip.  If we later need to raise the required percentage, or even raise menu prices and pay staff more, so be it.

The reason that I do not suggest starting with higher menu prices and salaried servers is that most servers do better in tips than any salary an establishment could pay them.  And to keep good servers, we need to pay them appropriately.  I do not care what they do in Europe; tipping is a better choice for the servers.

But something has to be done.  Whatever it is, free service should not be an option for customers.  Too many customers take advantage of the current system for free service.  They run the servers ragged, and then they do not pay them.  And they are not the least bit ashamed of it.  This behavior is disgusting and we must stop it.

The twelve percent will never be removed.  This will be explained to diners in advance.  Think of it as part of the cost of the meal.  Is this ideal?  Probably not.  Will it anger some customers?  Probably so.  But there is no way to make everyone happy in modern tipping culture.

In a recent post on business responses to our deteriorating culture, I suggested prepayment for most services.  I stand by that, and it would include the required service charges.  Changes, add ons, and extra tips can be adjusted after the meal.  Is this more hassle for the establishment?  Absolutely.  But eroding standards of behavior have made it necessary.  I believe people of goodwill will understand.  At this point, everyone has seen the bad behavior.

As I mentioned in that earlier piece, one of my goals is to limit discussion with people who can never be satisfied.  For tipping, I want to create a fair and easy to understand system that is not really open to a lot of discussion.  Post it on the door if you have to, but we are not going to sit here and argue about it.  Because we charged you in advance, this discussion is over.  It is time for you to leave.

Dine-and-dash crimes, non-payment for unjustified complaints, and leaving little or no tip; these behaviors are getting out of hand.  I have always believed that restaurants should take a firm line on bad customer behavior.  Even at the risk of losing some customers.  Even at the risk of some bad publicity.  These customers end up costing you too much anyway.  Do not allow them to cost you your entire business.

So let's push the limits here.  Question:  Are the above policy changes not going to encourage patrons to go home and simply dispute their credit card charges?  Yes, I worry this will be the result.

4.  After taking an order, but before the server submits it to the kitchen, the customer will prepay for the order.  In cash.

I'm sorry, but in any business with a high likelihood of credit card dispute, cash is the best, and only, insurance.  Otherwise, you rely on the customer's credit card company.  Not your company; the customer's company.  And how do you dispute supposedly bad service based on the inevitable claims that you are racist?  You are going to lose.  Plus how do you want to spend your time?  Running a restaurant or handling credit card disputes that you will most often lose?

I do not care about restaurant industry standards or customs.  I do not care about the push for a digital currency.  And I am not chasing a Michelin star.  What I do care about is getting paid without a lot of guff.  I would gladly explain the policy to any customer.  This explanation would necessarily come in advance, so there will be no trouble about it.  Pay cash in advance or leave, those are the only options.

If I can afford it, I would have a no-fee ATM installed.

Whatever it takes, but I am going to get paid.  Here is the bottom line question:  Is it better to guarantee payment from a more limited number of customers or to plan for and expect write-offs from the ever-increasing number of people who are going to give us a hard time and not pay anyway?

For all types of restaurants, I would consider re-thinking the seating process.  Before we seat diners, they must pay first.  Maybe at a counter, or maybe in a comfortable pre-seating area.  They can take their time making selections, etc.

Yes, it is radical.  Especially for upper-mid to high-priced establishments.  But again, do you want to risk your business for dodgy, disdainful customers?  Obviously, no restaurant is going to implement all, or maybe any, of these ideas.  I just want restaurant owners and managers to think outside of the box.  I hate that expression, but here, I think it is appropriate.

We must come up with ways to stop the nonsense.

𓐵

Men, Watch This Before You Decide To Get Married

Life is too short to deal with this

You gotta wonder what type of prescription medications this woman is on?  Maybe anxiety medication of some type?  I am asking because, who knows these days?  But just imagine living with this woman.  Here's the sad reality:  For whatever reason, so many American women today are just like the woman in this video.

Can you just imagine having children with her?  Or going on vacation with her.  Here's one:  Can you imagine going camping with her?  And if any young men are watching, just look at her.  I am guessing that twenty years ago, she was stunningly beautiful.  So be careful.

I am not saying she is impaired.  At least she does not appear to be.  She is just the most irritating creature you can imagine.  As someone said in the Youtube comments, she is exhausting.  Life is too short.

Again ladies, you are welcome to call this sexist.  But the chill women that I know could not tolerate this any more than myself.  Working in the real estate business for twenty years, I can tell you this first hand.  So many American women have this demeanor.  I met too many chill husbands with shrewish wives to count.

One other point, which almost seems irrelevant after noticing her demeanor, is that she put herself in this mini-dilemma.  She never takes responsibility for her own actions.  And I am not sure that it is clear in this video, but her hotel is immediately next door to where she was towed.  Her hotel with a vast parking lot.

And mini-dilemma is a correct description.  Being towed is a hassle, but it is not the end of the world, or even the end of a vacation.  She was not in a traffic accident; no one got hurt.  No one had to go to the hospital.  You deal with it and get back to what is important.

That's the real point of this story:  It's just not a big deal.

So what should young men do if they want to get married and have a family?  I am sorry to say, but today, this is not an easy question.  I think you do have to live together for at least a few years.  The longer the better.  Regardless of your religious background, I urge you to do this.  Even if your parents and family disapprove.  Remember, their generation never had to deal with the modern American woman.

You must be able to observe a potential wife under stress.  How does she handle everyday stress and how does she handle high stress?  Stress is a part of every marriage.  And you need someone who you can depend on, and importantly, someone who will help you solve any stressful situation and not make it worse.

Can you just imagine the woman above in a truly high-stress situation?

And during this live-together period, there are a few things to watch out for.  Starting with, what is her attitude about and relationship with pharmaceuticals?  I have known too many women who are rather cavalier about popping pills.  It is always accompanied by, well I do have a prescription.  Or, I have prescriptions for all of these.  As if that makes it okay.

I would add, what is her attitude towards the men she works with?  Are they all a bunch of sexists who deny her proper respect and promotions?  It is a good way to judge her general sense of entitlement and resentfulness and shared responsibility.

And yes, take her camping; what is her attitude towards discomfort?  You can learn a lot about a woman out in the woods.  You know, with all the bugs and the critters and the weather and the dirt.  Make sure to go somewhere outside of cell phone reception.

Whatever you do, do not have children together until you have answered these and similar questions.  These are some of mine, but I bet you can come up with your own questions.

Further, it seems to me that any contemporary discussion of this topic should include the following questions:  Why do men get married and how many men continue to want or need to be married?  Let's start here:  If you want children, marriage is the best path for producing and raising them.  We do not need to dwell on this fact here.

But what if you do not want children?  Or what if, you would have children, but really only to please your partner?  I believe this was very common in the past.  A friend told me that his father told him:  I viewed you children as my gift to your mother.  Sounds great, but it left me questioning whether or not the father really cared if he had children.  He provided them as a part of his obligation, duty, and/or yes love, for his wife.  I would be willing to bet that this was more common in the past than acknowledged.  Maybe it is still common today.

How many men are ambivalent about children?  Let us be honest about this.

There is also the fact that in the past, relations between spouses inevitably produced children regardless of what either partner wanted.  Today, this is no longer true.  And let us be blunt, again in the past, another reason to get married was access to sex.  And this, we all know, is no longer true.  Plenty of sex to be had without the vows of marriage.

So where am I going with this?  I think that today, if they do not want children, men can be very happily unmarried.  I certainly think that young men should give this more thought than maybe they would have in the past.

The attitudes and behavior of women, and the often shameful behavior of the courts, certainly do not recommend it.  Of course, do what is best for yourself, but give it some serious thought.  Ask:  Am I happily unmarried?  Could that continue?  And importantly, how likely would it be for me to become unhappily married?  Yes, definitely consider this possibility.

Here is a unique perspective:  The goal is no longer to be happily married.  The goal is to avoid an unhappy marriage.  Sadly yes, that is the goal.

Am I saying that it is too risky to get married?

Not exactly.  I would argue that the risk is being inextricably tied to the wrong person.

Divorce also comes with risk.  You risk losing access to your children.  And you risk losing property.  We all know men who stay in unhappy marriages because the cost of divorce is too high.

So am I saying that a man should not get married because of the risk of divorce?  Sure this is true for some.  You can mitigate some property loss, but what about property acquired during the marriage?  And the question of access to children is largely unknowable.

But what I am saying is that men should do what they can to mitigate, not loss, but unhappy attachment.  The goal is to avoid an unhappy marriage.  For some that will mean not getting married.  Let's be honest, women today are not a good long term risk.  Live together and answer the above questions first.  A good woman will have the same questions that you have.  Neither of you need to be in a rush.

My wife and I are both on our second marriages.  We lived together for ten years before we got married.  Sure this may be too extreme for most couples, but I can highly recommend it.

But what if you are unhappily unattached?  Well that may be a difficult problem for some men, but it definitely does not require marriage to solve.  And you know what is worse than being unhappily unattached?  Being unhappily attached.

If you do not marry, there is no risk whatsoever.  If you marry but do not have children, divorce can be fairly straightforward.  But if you marry, and have children, and acquire wealth during the marriage, you might find yourself stuck.

Don't get stuck.

𓐵

The Game Women Play

And do women belong everywhere?

There are a number of places where women do not belong.  Or collectively lower the standards; of competence, efficiency, and/or safety.  The best example I can think of is an oil rig.  Women do not belong there.  Is it not just so convenient that they do not really want to work there?

But there are plenty of men's spaces where women do want to be.  They are never as dangerous or as dirty as an oil rig.  But women view them as somehow advantageous for themselves.  We will come back to this, but first, current events demand that we talk about the game.

I really do not care how women dress.  But to pretend that they do not dress provocatively, intentionally, in certain spaces is ridiculous.  It is a game for them; a sly power game.  It works like this:  If a man approaches a woman, and she finds him attractive, well, then she is pleased that her provocative outfit did the trick.  If another man approaches her, and she finds him unattractive, then regardless of what she is wearing, he is creepy and he makes her uncomfortable.  And she will noisily call out his misadventure and mal-intent.

I first noticed the weaponization of the term uncomfortable ten or twelve years back.  The problem with the label uncomfortable is that it can be applied to almost anything or any action however benign.  Left-handed men make me uncomfortable.  It is a very feminine complaint, and because it is personally subjective, one cannot argue against it.  This makes it highly effective against men and anything they may do or not do.  This has only gotten worse.

Anyway, this is why women are so mad at Shane Gillis for joking that they dress like whores in the gym.  He called out the game.  Men, it seems, are supposed to just keep quiet about it.  To call it out is sexist, or worse.  To joke about it is tantamount to sexual assault.  Are we really supposed to take these women seriously?  They have belittled and beclowned themselves.

But it goes well beyond outfits.  This game is the general attitude that women possess towards men today.  Men can be forgiven for tiring of it.  Some blame feminism; I personally have no idea where this came from.  But I do not believe it predates the Second World War.  There was a time when the sexes treated each other better.  There was a respect and etiquette to the relationship dance.  This seems to have eroded since mid-century.  Today, like etiquette more generally, it seems completely lost.

Respect and etiquette have been replaced with hookup culture and the ever-present game.  The whole dance is more transactional, less serious, and yes, ripe for gaming.  Too many women take relationship advice from Alex Cooper.

But the game is terribly unfair for men.  And so many of them no longer want to play.  Women can do as they please and act as they please.  But surely men should be able to escape; at least occasionally.  In order to stop the nonsense, let's bring back some men-only spaces.

Someone should open a men-only gym or even a chain of men-only gyms.  Not all gyms need be men-only, but men should have the option of not participating in the female game.

Of course, women would immediately pressure the gym to open membership to women.  Somehow men-only spaces seem to threaten women and women's rights.  And too many men accept this precept.  I urge resistance.  When you are talking about a men-only gym, the only reason women want to be there is to play the game.

Let's consider a few other scenarios where women have installed themselves.

Women reporters on NFL game sidelines and in men's lockers rooms.  They have nothing to add and no one wants them there; they just want to be there.  And that alone is not a good enough reason for them to be there.  No, it is not.

Women in the boardrooms and C-Suites.  I realize this is debatable, but consider their collective record.  It is underwhelming.  But again, they want to be there, and too many men relent.

Women do not need to be members of all men's athletic clubs.  Why cannot Augusta National remain a men-only club?

Should women really be police officers?  Regardless of the answer, the question should probably be discussed.  Here I mean, cops on the street.  I see no problem if a woman wants to join the FBI.  And here, allow me a question:  Why are so many female cops butch lesbians?  There is something going on there that I do not understand.

Taxi drivers, long haul truckers, airline pilots, fine, women can do all of that.  But do women belong on trading floors?  I tend to doubt it.

Why do the boy scouts need girls?  Do the girl scouts need boys?  The idea is ridiculous.  Men have lost their spines; again, stop the nonsense.

So are we conflating the women's relationship game with women's equality?  First, I would say it is less about women's equality, and more about women's ability to perform at a level comparable with men.  Can women be as effective as men as a beat cop?  The idea is absurd.  Is it merit or is it mere inclusion?  What ties all this together is women's need to be everywhere men are.  It is really not need; it is desire.

To answer the question posed in the subtitle:  No, women do not belong everywhere.  Other cultures understand this.  And it goes without saying that men do not belong everywhere.  This is obvious to all, except maybe women's sports teams and the pandering idiots in charge of school restrooms.

Let's return to the game.  One might ask, what about the predatory Andrew Tate and his ilk in the so-called manosphere?  I have previously discussed these charlatans.  They play their own games.  And I think the game players, of both sexes, are most likely to meet each other.  Or more accurately, collide with each other.  Likely as not, in the gym.  Where they all get exactly what they deserve.

Of course, Alex Cooper and Andrew Tate deserve each other.  But the fallout is the Cornell Seven.  Or what Megyn Kelly rightfully calls the Cornell Eight.  Because Jane Doe was just playing her game, as the men were playing their own.  They too deserve each other.  The societal collision was inevitable.  There will be more.

What's the answer?  It is obvious:  Admit women to fraternities (archive).  That was Wesleyan president, Michael Roth's answer.  Like most academics, he is a very proud invertebrate.  But the fraternities are just as much to blame.  Instead of moving off campus, they acceded to Roth's demand.

What would I have done in his position?  I would have banned women entirely from fraternity houses.  Under my direction, women could attend outdoor parties, but no women would be allowed inside the houses.  It is not safe and they might feel uncomfortable.  Couldn't have that.

So the games will continue.

Let's end with an example of the game played at a high level.  Not for amateurs; do not try this at home.

Think about this poor bastard.  For the entire flight, even after his denial, even after the witness confirmation, the crew and his fellow passengers would have wondered about his harassing tendencies.  His creepiness.  It's no win.  My advice is:  Do not play.

The most important takeaway from this whole piece:  Women have nothing to lose playing the game.  Regardless of their situational affectation and mien, be it feigned anger, sternness, fear, disgust, or something else entirely, for them it is a casual and whimsical distraction.  This is why I call it a game.  On the other hand, depending on the situation, the men can lose an unpredictable amount.

Now it is ungentlemanly to not offer to assist a lady, right?  Fine, but do not allow that old fashioned attitude to get you in trouble.  Today, you must wait for her to ask for assistance.  And even then, be very leery.  This is the world we live in.

One other question about the game:  Who is most likely to play?  Here I am going to use the admittedly crass One through Ten scale of attractiveness.  Maybe this is not perfect, maybe it is not nice, but in order to discuss this, we all need to be generally on the same page.  Remember, the game is about attractiveness.

It is not the One through Five crowd who play the game.  These ladies are delighted to have your attention.  And it is not the Tens.  The Tens know, that you know, that they are out of your league.  So there is no reason for them to be anything other than sincere and gracious.  That has been my experience without exception.  I suppose it could be fake, but these ladies have nothing to prove.

So it is the Six through Nine crowd that you must be leery of.  The women who believe that they can and should be doing better than you.  If bag guy above had been flying first class, this would not have been a problem.  Most women under fifty are in the Six through Nine group.  Watch out for them.

One other note on this question.  This is a young woman's game.  The women over fifty are of a different generation, and well, just better behaved.  Either that, or experience has taught them to value good manners and polite interactions.

Of course there are exceptions, but as general rules, these are pretty good.  My One through Ten categories may be slightly off, but the principle is correct.  As always, your mileage may vary.

Finally, if you view this piece as sexist, that is not my intention.  But if you find it so, I am okay with that as well.  Like racist, antisemitic, homophobic, etc., I could not care less what you call me.  Why not just go find something, anything, you are good at?  And leave the rest of us, both men and women, in peace.

𓐵

Culture Is What We Tolerate

Do not tolerate ghetto and ratchet behavior in your business

How should businesses respond?

So long as we continue to tolerate this behavior, it will continue.  In fact, this is getting noticeably worse.  I advise requiring prepayment for all services including restaurant meals.  Of course, you must ask everyone to prepay, but most people will understand.  Prepayment does not absolutely guarantee against bad behavior, but it does lessen the possibility and gives advantage to the business.  No exceptions; if people do not like it, have the confidence to send them elsewhere.

Regarding other behavior, institute a one-strike trespass rule.  I think a dress code and a no-unaccompanied-minors policy also make a lot of sense.  In most businesses, all devices should be muted.  Patrons should take calls and other noise outside.  Or do not come back.  This must be enforced rigorously.  Loud voices, really any kind of noise, are symptomatic of people who cause problems.  Do not tolerate it.

Background music in a business must be carefully selected by the proprietor.  Do not under any circumstance allow employees to select music or set volume.

One other note on minors.  There are some business and restaurants where children are just out of place.  And the people who tend to bring children into these places are very often problematic.  One might consider an across the board, no children policy.

For the businesses that can afford it, I would put guards on the doors.  Cameras are helpful, but only after the damage is done.  The goal should be to head off the damage in advance.  Maybe you decide the guards need to hold bags and give out baggage claim tickets.  These policies are common in low-trust societies.

Yes guards, just like a nightclub.  Because that is the way so many people behave today.  They will gladly treat your business like a rowdy roadhouse.  At this point, these behaviors and attitudes are an existential threat to your business.  You need to respond aggressively.  In too many places, the US has already become a low-trust society.  If you do not adjust to this new reality, you will go out of business.

And I would severely limit and/or curtail discussion.  These people are not rational.  For the most part, there is just no utility in discussion.  It only escalates and exacerbates the problems.  Just get them out as fast and efficiently as possible.  Here again, guards can be helpful.

Along these same lines, do not be concerned by what they call you.  Because you care about your business, you are obviously a racist or some other sort of bigot.  And they are going to video record the situation; you know this in advance.  But people are tired of their behavior.  It is called fatigue for a reason.  These videos most often make these so-called customers look bad.  Most of the clips above prove this point.  It is vital for you to keep your cool.  Because they often do not, and this will work to your advantage.

At this point, I actually believe the videos will help you gain the type of customers that you want (of all demographics).  Let's go to ABC business because they do not tolerate the nonsense.  Same for any news reports; regardless of how negative the journalist covers your business, today it will help you.  Lefty journalists may be too stupid to know what is going on.  Or too cowardly to report on it.  But everyone else knows the deal.  We have all seen it far too often.

Besides, any reputational harm will be among the people you do not want as customers anyway.  Everyone else will quietly notice, and return.  Just look at the situations with Carnival Cruise Lines and Spirit Airlines.  Who wants to go on a Carnival Cruise today?  This is because they have allowed the ratchet behavior to fester.  And people avoid them; opting instead for the competition.  As for Spirit, they, very noisily, went out of business earlier this year.

The customer dynamics of your business are no different.

I do have one other suggestion.  Well, not a suggestion, an anecdote.  When I was a kid, my parents owned a rental beach house.  It was oceanfront, but it was an older unit.  Think:  In demand because on the water, but older and therefore prone to age-related problems.  And of course, they got a lot of complaints.

Now my parents are pretty shrewd real estate operators.  And I believe it was my mother who came up with a solution to this ongoing problem.  What did she do?  She doubled the rent.

No more problems.

You see, when you double the rent, you get a completely new class of tenants.  People who maybe understand what they are paying for and what is important.  They do not tend to complain about every little thing in an old house.  The type of people who would never send their food back to the kitchen in a restaurant.  Nor use their smartphone without ear pods.

I understand that most businesses cannot double their prices.  But there is a lesson here for all businesses:  The type of customer you attract matters greatly.

Also this:  Eighty percent of your problems will come from twenty percent of your customers.  It might even be ninety/ten.  So serve the eighty or ninety percent of your customers that you want and value.

Get rid of the rest.

𓐵

It Is Not Racism, It Is Fear

Chi Brown on the African American mindset

I really cannot add to Brown's commentary.  I did make a comment on one of his Youtube videos:  Chi Brown deserves a million subscribers.  Today he has 42.5 thousand.  I am one.  Watch a few of his videos and you will join me.

Brown has been posting videos on Youtube since 2015, but he only appeared in my feed in the last month or so.  He was not someone I sought out; I had never heard of him.  Occasionally, the Youtube algorithm does seem to work, however belatedly.

Highly recommended.
𓐵

On Ed Sheeran and Macklemore

Ed Sheeran comes out in support of Macklemore

Here's Sheeran:

Screenshot:  New York Post website, 19 September 2026

Maybe Israel has behaved badly.  I do not know for sure one way or the other.  Certainly Netanyahu is completely untrustworthy.  But of course, here is Macklemore.  He is an open and proud anti-semite.  Is this degenerate any better than Netanyahu?

Screenshot:  The Independent website, 21 May 2014

Sheeran's first instinct was correct.  He should have stayed out of it; which was his long-standing general policy on politics.  My question for Sheeran is:  How could you let some clown like Macklemore draw you into this mess?  For future reference, maybe include a no politics clause in the contracts for your opening acts.  Stick to music Ed; you're quite good at it.

I have said it before and I will say it again.  The people who claim that Israel is committing a genocide receive their information from Hamas.  Regardless of how bad Israel may or may not be, we must recognize that Hamas is worse.  And yes, I have come to accept, however late, that Israel may be very bad indeed.

Today in Gaza, I will go so far as to admit we have two discreditable actors.  Another question worth asking:  Are the bad actors limited to the respective governments, or are the people blameworthy as well?  I mean there is no doubt that Palestinian civilians held Israeli hostages.  Plus the whole idea of civilian hostages is relevant to this question.  But again, I do not know the answer.

I will admit something else.  The way Israel has behaved since 7 October 2023 has not helped its cause.  They have lost a great deal of goodwill in the United States and Europe.  They never had Macklemore's support, but they probably had Sheeran's quiet support.  Now, not so much.

Whose fault is that?

𓐵

The Delusions of the Left

Even in 2026, people believe this...

From Reddit:




I saw this on Instapundit yesterday.

This is my personal view of how such a society would look.  He leaves out all the death camps.  I guarantee that this guy votes.  Think he is a one-off?  The DSA is taking over the Democrat party.  They all believe some version of this.

I think we are watching the end of democracy.  Surely democracy requires a certain level of education and critical thinking skills.  When that no longer exists, what will be the result?  I do not believe it will be communism, these people are far too stupid.  But it will be some sort of totalitarian government.  Perhaps, as in all historical cases, it will be some dictator or junta using communism, and its useful idiots, as a mask for their own unlimited power.

I will tell you something else that democracy requires:  Sobriety.  Yet how many people today are on some psychiatric prescription drug or even multiple drugs?  Should we really be allowing these doped-up zombies to vote?  Our drug dealers, er, I mean our physicians, could say, Sure, I will prescribe you an anti-anxiety drug (can we really call them medications?), but that requires that I report you to the Board of Elections for suspension from the voter rolls, until you come off of it.

Yes I realize this is pure fantasy, but it is an excellent thought experiment.  Who are our voters today?  Uneducated, unthinking, doped-up automatons.  Ask yourself, Am I one of these voters?

I think the easiest shortcut answer is:  Did you take the Covid so-called vaccine?  That is, did you participate in the global mRNA experiment?  If so, then yes, you are in this category.  God help us; around eighty percent of us did take the jab.  If you want to be somewhat more generous, it was only around fifty percent who took the jab willingly and enthusiastically.  That is, not under duress or mandate.  God knows we all ran into these folks at the supermarket.  How do you think they vote?

Now, let's return to our communist friend above.  Do we think he got the jab?  Well, his god, the state, told him it was the thing to do.  So we know he did.  But that is not all.  His god also told him that everyone needs the jab.  So he would have been tickled to death to round up unvaccinated people like my family and me, and put us in concentration camps.  No doubt, he would have viewed these as death camps (remember, it was a pandemic of the unvaccinated).  But what he really wanted was for two big goons in leather trench coats to hold us down while some Mengele-like figure jabbed us without consent.  Because who are we to defy his god?

This uneducated, unthinking, doped-up population that we have created over the last sixty years...

Cui bono?

𓐵

Why Are Gay Men Losing Support?

Stop the show

The backdrop, and the backstop, for today's gay community seems to be gay marriage.  We constantly hear, Oh they want to revoke our right to be married.  So we must support this and that, etc.  But what I see is married gay men who do not seem to really want to be married.  Oh they want the right to marry, they just do not want to act the part.

Here is a question:  What percentage of married gay men are in these so-called open marriages?  It does not matter if you are straight or gay, an open marriage is not a marriage.  If you want to have sex with a random and continuous parade of other people, stop pretending to be married.  It is MINO, Marriage In Name Only.  The reported statistics and rationales are revealing; and my guess is that these escapades are severely underreported among gay men.  The boys are only playing house.

Americans grudgingly accepted gay men's redefinition of marriage.  But now they are making a mockery of it.  Fine boys; this hurts no one more than yourselves.  Surely, this alone, costs your community huge public support.  I also notice that this does not seem to be a thing among the lesbians.  We simply must acknowledge the rampant promiscuity among some unknowable, but significant percentage of gay men.  This is just a fact.

If gay men want to turn around the accelerating decline in their public support, they must separate from their more promiscuous enthusiasts, separate the LGB from the alphabet crazies, and also separate from what Amir calls the gay vibe.  I call it the gay show.  Because I do not think it is real; it is a show.  This is where and why ordinary people reach gay fatigue.  We are tired to death of the show.  You say you are normal, so act normal.  Like Amir says towards the end of his video, most people do not mind gay folks, we just want normal gays, without the show.  He worries that the show might cost him his rights as a normal gay man.  Yeah, I can see that.

Let me add something else about the show and the fatigue.  Perhaps it is only my perception, but this is what I have noticed increasingly in the last few years.  Some gay men, not all, but a noticeable number, are very proud of their newly acquired right to be their true selves.  And if other people do not like it, well, there is nothing they can do about it.

So we get:  Here I am, sharing your spaces, in all my flamboyant fabulousness.  They flaunt it for no other reason than they can; it is an entitlement.  What I think is happening is that they have this subversive desire to throw it in our faces; and so they proudly play up the show.  Oh they couch it within their inflated effeminate demeanor, but make no mistake, it is an in your face sort of attitude.

If you pay close attention, you can see it.  I have received knowing looks, even smirks, from gay men, who have noticed me observing them.  Yes perhaps, they think I am exactly the audience they want to reach with their power play show.  But I think it is more than that.  They seem to know, that I know, that it is in fact, a show.  Maybe I am reading too much into it, but watch closely and decide for yourself.

I think ordinary people, gay marriage supporting people, just hate the newly exaggerated show.  We are tired of it.  And the whole gay community will suffer for it.

𓐵

Tattoo Nose Ring Marketing

Have marketers been captured by their own behavior?

Vivaia is a Chinese ladies' shoe brand.  And the below image is a screenshot from a video ad I captured on Youtube.  The shoes look fine and I have no doubt they are affordable, and maybe even a good deal.

But here, could we just focus on the marketing itself.  Rather than use a beautiful young model, this is obviously meant to appear to be just an ordinary consumer talking about these shoes in her kitchen.  Right?  We see this a lot today.  So that is not very interesting.

What I do find interesting is that the company has decided to use a tatted-up lady with a nose ring.  Which to me signals that the company believes their core consumer audience are tatted-up ladies with nose rings.  Right?  Because God knows if you are trying to appeal to ladies with no tats and no nose ring, the last thing you are going to do is use a tatted-up lady with a nose ring.  Continues below....



So either the Chinese company believes this to be the right strategy because this look truly represents their audience, or the company believes this to be the right strategy because they only believe that this look represents their audience.  That is, they have either read their market correctly or they only think they have.

And look at the age of this presenter.  These shoes are clearly marketed to middle-aged ladies.  So here is my question, how many middle-aged women look like that?  And if you were to do a poll or focus group, how many would approve of the tats & nose ring mien?

Really, I am just wondering.  But what really scares me is that maybe the Chinese company is correct.  And this ad campaign is not as stupid as it looks to me.

For context, here is a wider screenshot:

Now, I would be remiss if I did not point out that if you go to the Vivaia website, there is not a tattoo in sight, much less any nose rings.  It is an absolutely beautiful site, that markets ladies' shoes with beautiful young models.  Just as one would expect.

This means, that the video ad that I have seen on at least five separate occasions across at least three different Youtube channels, is directed at a broad Youtube audience.  This would make sense if I was watching Youtube videos that appeal to tatted-up ladies with nose rings.  And I just don't think that is the case.  Quite the opposite in fact.

So if the target market does not find this appealing, why are the marketers doing this?  Could it be that the marketing people themselves are tatted-up ladies with nose rings?  And they assume this is a more common practice than reality supports?  Does it become sort of a marketer's projection or self-delusion?

But it gets worse.  In researching this piece, I visited the Vivaia website.  I found their shoes to be appealing.  The kind of thing my wife might purchase.  So the tatted-up lady with the nose ring not only misses the target market, but intentionally or not, she is actively working to reduce it.  Why are they doing this?  I need Rory Sutherland to explain it to me.

It is bewildering.

Let me just end by saying that I did find the TikTok influencer they are using for this ad.  But the how does not explain the why.

𓐵

Entitlement Culture

The tow truck driver knows more about entitlement than any lefty academic

The race-based entitlement that academics peddle is questionable at best.  This is what true entitlement looks like.

It is worth pointing out that the illegally-parked vehicle owners are not the customers of the towing company.  No, the towing company's customer is the property owner.  I think that all the back and forth with the vehicle owners is just for good Youtube content.  I mean, why else bother?  But for us, it does offer a great peek at American entitlement culture.

And sadly, you see this in all public facing businesses.  This is just an extreme example.  In any case, I would argue that entitlement has gotten worse in the last few decades.  I wish some academic would study the causes.  But they are so wrapped up in race and grievance that they pay no attention to the actual entitlement all around us.

Just pay attention; entitlement is everywhere.  People are entitled to tips for no real service.  Others are entitled to tip nothing for actual service.  Parents are entitled to take their unsupervised, misbehaving children everywhere.  Passengers are entitled to take the seat of their choice on airplanes.  So-called influencers are entitled to free stuff and service.  And if we back up just a few years to the time of Covid, just think about the entitlement that people had to tell perfect strangers what to do.  Going to the grocery store was walking through an entitlement minefield.

Today we see people using smartphones without headphones or earbuds.  Some blast music in public on their bluetooth speakers.  Patrons refuse to get off their smartphones when dealing with a cashier, waiter, etc.  Or on public transportation.  The social expectation of respect for others is dead.

Truly, the only way to avoid disrespect for others is to avoid public spaces.  We do try.  And here is something interesting:  There is a class dynamic to this entitlement problem.  Counterintuitive though it may be, higher class environments have less entitlement.  In my observation, entitlement culture is a lower class problem.  And it is intentional.  The mid and upper classes know that it is best to take calls outside, or not at all.  Lower class people have a need to inflict their noise and other entitlements on the people around them.  Why is that?

Anyway, it is getting worse.  What is going on?

𓐵

The Unhinged Alphabet Show

When did "pride" become so hateful?

Arielle Scarcella:  At what point does "pride" stop being about pride, and start being performance art for the unhinged?



It is a show, and if you do not approve of the show, there is something wrong with you, not the shameless, deranged performers.  Scarcella says that "pride" is not about pride; rather, it is performance art for the unhinged.  In other words, it is a freak show.  But I think it is much worse than that.  I submit that the show is about asserting power and dominance:  You cannot stop me and you should keep your mouth shut.

Beyond that, a large part of the Alphabet Show is sheer narcissism.  It is:  Look at me!  Look at me!  Look at me!  They should not worry; try as we might, they cannot be missed.
𓐵

Cultural Insanity

Are the alphabet people crazy?



I lived in Chapel Hill, North Carolina for many years.  And there is something about academic communities that attracts unstable people.  I will let someone else explain why that is, but it is a fact.  So living in this sort of place, you encounter lots of crazy people.  It is just part of the life there.

And one thing I noticed about these people, whatever their individual problems, you never know what is going to set them off.  And almost all of them have the potential to become violent.  So it is best just to stay away from them.

This has become my attitude with so-called trans people, and really, with much of the alphabet community.  These people are often crazy and it is just a good idea to stay away from them.  You can easily sense the violence lurking just beneath the surface.

For instance, this guy strikes me as having the potential for violence.  I mean, he is seething; you can tell he might erupt at any moment.  I do not want him in my restaurant (he likes to film himself in restaurants), interacting with my staff, and near my other customers.

I think the problem here is one of perceived respect.  The alphabet people demand the respect that they feel society owes them.  And if they perceive that someone is not sufficiently providing it, well, their response is unknowable.  This is made all the more unpredictable because, it is true, many of us do not and cannot respect them.

But the perceived lack of respect is only the first layer.  When this is not forthcoming, the alphabet people move to control.  You will call me by my preferred pronouns, or else.  You will allow me to swim on the girl's team, or else.  You will not consider me a pervert if I had anonymous sex with two hundred men so far this year, or else.

This or else is typically some form of social control, or group outrage, or cancellation.   It is interesting to note that they demand respect from others and control of others.  Surely they would have an easier road if they left the rest of us out of their lifestyles?  But again, when this effort fails, the response is unknowable.  The threat of violence is always present.

Now, is the problem all of the alphabet people?  I do not think so.  For instance, the lesbians and the bisexuals seem relatively normal.  And some percentage of the gay community seems normal.  Although what that percentage is, I have no idea.  But if you are a gay man, playing dress up and dancing for little kids, you sir, are not normal.

The remainder of the alphabet people do seem some degree of crazy.  While there is no definitive list of the various types of alphabet people, Grok makes a start.  You will note that "furry" is not a sexual orientation or gender identity.  Good to know.

My sincere advice:  Stay away from them.

𓐵

Pride and Prejudice and Promiscuity

Gay men are not like the rest of us

Yes of course, the men attending a gay pride parade are perhaps overachievers in the field of sexual conquest.  But the stereotype of the promiscuous gay man is long established and accurate.  Do not pretend otherwise.

Gay men want to be treated like everyone else; get married like everyone else; these days, have children like everyone else.  But don't kid yourselves, they are not like everyone else.

I'm pretty liberal about gay people and the gay lifestyle; they can do whatever they like, both in and out of the bedroom.  But this level of promiscuity does not lend itself to marriage and children, not to mention public health.

Yes, these debates are over.  But maybe they need a second, more realistic, look.

The public has largely accepted what gay men do.  Even if most of us do not really want to think about it.  But if a heterosexual man has this many sexual partners, most people would consider that licentious and degenerate.  Here, even the term partner is out of place.  These are not partners in any sense of the imagination.  But I do not know a better term to describe the person on the other side of a daily, one-off, anonymous, sexual encounter.  Of any type.

Well there is slut, right?  But call a gay man a slut and his response is likely to be:  Oh honey, you are so right.  You don't know the half of it.  Look at the men in the above video; they are proud of it.

Regarding a heterosexual man with that amount of sexual activity, some will surely envy his sexual prowess.  But they will also call him a womanizer or a player; and no one is going to consider him marriage material.  But is the heterosexual male slut also proud?  Yeah maybe.  But how many of these guys are there versus what is really normalization on the gay side.

I recently watched the Netflix remake of Alan Alda's The Four Seasons.  And today of course, it includes a married gay couple.  Okay fine.  But in the series, the gay couple pick up an anonymous stranger and take him back to their hotel room to have sex.  Like this is normal.

That is not normal.  I mean it may be normal gay behavior and I do not care if that is what you want to get up to.  Have at it.  But it is not normal marriage behavior.  And this is not the first time I have seen this in a television series.  I saw one production a couple of years ago where the requisite gay couple had multiple outside partners.  Hollywood has decided that this is, in fact, normal and the rest of us should get on board with it.

Now, I am perfectly well aware of the fact that some small number of heterosexual married couples also have so-called open relationships.  But here too, let us not pretend this is normal marriage behavior.  I will add what I always think about when someone is unfaithful to their spouse:  If you do not want to be married, just do not be married.  It is not as complicated as people sometimes want it to be.

Like I said, I do not care what anyone does.  But let us not pretend that gay men are like us.  And if this is normal behavior for you, straight or gay, maybe marriage is not your thing.

𓐵

Have You Ever Actually Watched Any Of His Debates?

The left is an intolerant religion and proud of it

I do not know if this is real or not; I hope it is.  But even if it is not, I think it makes a fair point.  Popular culture, media, and the education establishment endlessly foist left-of-center views on people from the right.  And those on the left need not ever entertain any views from the right.  They are actually proud of this.

Since Charlie Kirk's death, the organization he founded has gone off the rails.  I think he was naive about the people he surrounded himself with; including his own wife.  But that should not diminish his own contributions.  The question asked here is paramount.
𓐵

The Ultimate Excuse For Bad Behavior

It's their culture

It always seems to start with noise in public.  No matter what, public noise, the speakers, the smartphones, loud voices, whatever it is, well, it's their culture.

And because it is their culture, you are not supposed to complain.  And if you do have the temerity to complain, you are expected to accept it's their culture as a legitimate excuse; and let that be the end of it.

Well no, just no.

But noise is only the start.  Bad behavior in restaurants, undisciplined children running amok, cultural scams like the skin tax, praying en masse on the streets and sidewalks, the amplified adhan five times a day, the lack of daily bathing, the failure to respect lines (queues), elastic punctuality, the list is endless.

And don't get me started on table manners and eating habits.  Now I do not care what people eat.  Different cultures eat different things.  But I do care a great deal if your culture attempts to control what I eat.  No, that's really bad, and no, I don't care if it is your culture.  Not even a little.

Lately ghetto and ratchet behavior are ruining, or threaten to ruin, all public spaces.  But don't you dare complain; you see, it's their culture.

And notice this:  It's their culture is rarely applied to good habits.  Why?  Because few of us notice a culture's good habits.  Why would we?  Oh, he bathes every day?  I hadn't noticed.

So each of us can decide for ourselves whether cultural practices should be accepted.  But I do not accept, cannot accept, the cultural excuse for bad behavior.  Bad behavior is bad behavior.  And here is a dirty little secret that only gets revealed over time and only if you pay close attention.  People are fully aware that their cultural practice is bad.

Does anyone really believe that Pakistani rape gangs are unaware that rape is unneighborly?  The idea is absurd.

One final example that I like to use is people from Holland and Germany and Scandinavia, who love to tell others how direct, blunt, and frank, they are, as a culture.  But I have long suspected that what is really going on is that they use frankness as an excuse for rudeness.  And moreover, they are perfectly well aware that this is what they are doing.  Bad behavior is bad behavior; and rudeness is rudeness.

They all know.  Of course they know.  It's my culture is just the most efficacious excuse.

Remember, culture is what we tolerate.

If you want to improve your culture, do not tolerate bad behavior.
𓐵

Random Spring 2026 Observations

Some thoughts on current affairs and culture

Pickleball is lazy tennis.

There is a shopping center in town that ripped out much needed parking spaces to install pickleball courts.

The tennis courts down the street are almost always empty.

Los Angeles mayor, Karen Bass is incompetent.  How much rebuilding has been done in fifteen months?

Seattle mayor, Katie Wilson, and New York City mayor, Zohran Mamdani, do not understand that billionaires can live anywhere.

In fact, most Los Angeles, Seattle, and New York City residents could live anywhere.

China is having a property valuation depression.

Everything about China is a scam.

Candace Owens scares the elites.

I hope Candace Owens has more than adequate security.

The US can open the Strait of Hormuz any time it chooses (see AC130 gunship).

The US has thirty AC130 gunships.

The foreign government of Israel wants Thomas Massie defeated.

So Trump wants Thomas Massie defeated.

The recent Met Gala only proved, again, that Anna Wintour has no class.

When I was a kid, the school cafeteria served peanut butter sandwiches, I'd say, round about once a month.  And, no one had autism.  It is worth asking what has changed?

Big Food and/or Big Pharma do not want us asking.

The engine of the international economy runs on...petroleum.

If you are paying through the nose for energy... Europe and California ...it is no one's fault except your own.

Regarding the ongoing Hantavirus outbreak, once again the public health apparatus, led by WHO, proves that it is entirely untrustworthy, and likely working against the interest of actual public health.  And once again, Bret Weinstein is on it.

Leather pants may be okay for a night club, but I cannot take anyone wearing leather pants seriously.

This seems obvious to me:  Volodymyr Zelensky is worse than Vladimir Putin.  Zelensky thrives on this war; why would he finish it?

Suicidal Empathy is killing the West at every level.

𓐵