by baldilocks

One might say that Starbucks is defecating on its own market share, but I hate going for the easy poop joke. Yes, I’m lying.

Seriously, it’s sad to watch as a thriving business dies, even when it Deserves to Die.TM Even when it is committing suicide.

Monica Showalter:

The ever well meaning Starbucks chairman, Howie Schultz, more terrified of bad publicity and claims of racism than anything in the world, has just announced a rather customer-unfriendly policy of opening Starbucks bathrooms (as well as table space) to all comers, including people who won’t spring for a $4 cup of coffee.  Speaking to the Atlantic Council, according to the Washington Post, Schultz said:

“We don’t want to become a public bathroom, but we’re going to make the right decision a hundred percent of the time and give people the key,” Schultz said, “because we don’t want anyone at Starbucks to feel as if we are not giving access to you to the bathroom because you are less than.” (…)

For those of us who do buy Starbucks coffee, we know what this policy change means: an open invitation to the homeless to bring in hepatitis, trash, used syringes, solicitations for spare change, and all the other detritus of their uncured condition to Starbucks bathrooms.  The fact that Starbucks will be the only business with such a policy means that all of the homeless will concentrate in these outlets.  Rival store-owners and social service agencies will actually direct the homeless to Starbucks outlets for the free services.  Large groups will congregate, and tents will go up.

I have been guilty of using Starbucks’ free WiFi to check my email, but one usually doesn’t have to enter the business for that. Now I suspect that it will be difficult and unappealing to even get that close to any Starbucks.

But Monica thinks Schultz has a plan.

“One wonders if what Howie is really saying is that he intends to close outlets – in places where the homeless are concentrated.  Is it that? It’s already well known that a Starbucks outlet’s presence correlates with rising real estate values.  Perhaps Schultz means to concentrate that trend and will now keep his establishments in only rich areas with no social service outlets that draw the homeless.  Maybe he knows something about a coming housing bust and its effect on real estate values.

If he’s going to do that, I bet wasn’t the original plan, but the fix after the disaster. And it’s a good plan, though I doubt that Schultz conjured it.

There’s a Starbucks within walking distance in my blue/white-collar multi-ethnic LA neighborhood . But Dunkin Donuts is closer, has WiFi, coffee, tastier doughnuts than Starbucks (duh), no homeless hanging out and seems to have a smarter CEO — or at least a less white- and rich-guilt plagued one.

And, before I walk to DDs, I use the bathroom facilities in my apartment. I know the janitorial crew for that one.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar for his new not-GoDaddy host!

Or hit Juliette’s!

Two KRUSTY nuclear reactors power a settlement on Mars. From CNET.com.

Nuclear power is not doing well. The cheap fracking of natural gas and oil, while it is putting a crimp on our enemies, is also hurting the nuclear industry. Already racked with the high cost of regulation (we’re talking millions per plant), no compensation for carbon emission and a lack of public understanding about what nuclear power actually is, the nuclear industry is failing. Plants are closing around the US, and the workforce is not attracting the best and brightest. As the workforce ages and less plants are available, we have the risk that US nuclear power is going to go extinct. Except for the United States Navy and China, nuclear power seems on the way out the door.

And yet…
Continue reading “Is KRUSTY the future for nuclear engineers?”

radical feminists protested against pornography for many years until — with stealth funding from the pornography industry, including Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Foundation — there emerged in the 1980s what is now known as “pro-sex feminism,” sometimes called liberal feminism to distinguish from (the original) radical feminism. That the women’s movement was co-opted by the porn industry is a fact that Women’s Studies majors usually don’t learn until their sophomore or junior year, if they learn it at all, because this is one of the shameful secrets that the feminist cult doesn’t like to mention, and radical (anti-pornography) feminists have been marginalized within their own movement.

Robert Stacy McCain Special Snowflake™ @Belle_Knox and Make-Believe Feminist ‘Empowerment’ 2-27-14

Very shortly I will be old enough to qualify for senior citizen discounts all over the nation and I’ve been thinking about my life as I hit its seventh inning stretch when I saw this tweet (via instapundit) by Ben Shapirio

This brought to mind an old post on the Sexual revolution:

In days past a man who wanted a women was expected to be a good provider, to be able to support not only a wife but an entire family through the sweat of his brow. He was expected to call on a woman, likely with a chaperone to keep an eye on him to offer self-control and to slowly but surely win approval of both the woman and the family to some degree before advancing to the next step.

And if he advanced prematurely or attempted to attain a conquest otherwise he was subject to the disapproval of culture or a shotgun to the back to make sure he did the right thing. The right thing being marriage, and if you finally secured a wife after meeting all these requirements divorce was not considered proper or acceptable culturally.

The reason why this combination of restraints and incentives was effective is due to a simple truth that has never changed:

Men want sex and want it badly and as much as men want sex teenage boys & men want it obsessively to the point where they were willing to allow themselves to be pushed toward responsibility, hard work and respectability for the chance to get it.

Thanks however to the sexual revolution, none of this is necessary anymore.

When I was a kid you had to hide a “dirty magazine” (a friend of mine kept a stash in a trash bag in the woods near his house) today you would be hard pressed to find a boy who had not seen hard core porn online by the age of 12 and thanks to the sexual revolution girls are not only taught at a young age that virtues like modesty or chastity are not only prehistoric but a form of oppression but we have a society that actually teaches that one who critiques having sex on camera for the masturbatory pleasure of men to pay for college is worthy of contempt.

In short men all the sexual desires that once motivated men  from nudity, to sex without commitment are now available without the effort of self improvement and the idea of women and girls engaging in this conduct that provides this to men in high school, college and even before is not only considered “empowering” but the failure of a young women to do so makes one odd.

All of this has happened in the space of two generations and by a not odd coincidence in my opinion, coincides with the growth of “woman’s studies” programs in universities all over the nation.

So as I near the date of my senior citizen discount and look back at this change I have a question for all the woman’s studies programs out there and the women in them:

How has the normalization and mainstreaming of promiscuity among young women and the removing of the sexual incentive system restraining men over the last 40 years empowered women and brought them better, more fulfilling lives?

I submit and suggest that it has not.

Update: If I had emailed Ed Driscoll of Instapundit and asked him to put up a post to prove my point today I couldn’t have done better than this:

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Male Student Accuses Female Student of Sexual Assault. She Says He Wanted Revenge.

Doe woke up, realized they had engaged in sexual activity while they were both drunk, and feared that she would file a complaint against him, as she had done to his friend. Panic-stricken, he felt he had no choice but to beat her to the punch.

How’s all that empowerment working out for ya?