A day to day acount of the whacky and wonderful world of Muggaz - i tend to be having too much fun these days, and often cannot remember moments due to debauchery - its time the internet repayed my loyalty by recording my antics.
External beauty brought by inner cruelty.
Published on October 6, 2004 By Muggaz In Misc
Personally, I am a big fan of the Scandinavians, as far as the fine human physique goes, blonde hair, blue eyes, and general physical health, you couldn’t want more in a mate. I am at conflict with myself here also, as I also find choc-complexioned members of the sub-continent very attractive – there is a hidden evil though, these genetics are merely cosmetics on a grand scale.

Not many people know, in 1997 the Swedish Government disclosed that they had been practicing sterilization of its undesirable citizens from 1935 to 1976, this was implemented by the authorities, however, Indian culture also had their own sterilization program in form of the caste system, the wealthy would only consort with the wealthy, hence producing healthy spawn with plenty of resources available to them… turns out they were damn fine to look at because of this.

Should I feel like a bad person, because I can admire this paradoxically advanced yet horribly backwards form of cosmetic surgery? Probably… but I don’t! Sweden sterilized 60,000 of its citizens in the aforementioned period. Victims included people with bad eyesight, low IQs, and those judged to be living a "vagabond lifestyle" – mostly gypsies. Sweden is often professed to have the best health care system in the world, and also the craziest furniture – can this be attributed to a ‘humanist’ sterilization policy?

India is noted to have the biggest class gap of any nation in the world – the rich are numerous, and so are the poor, the middle class is almost non-existent – average babes are also non-existent in India, they are either outrageously hot, or outrageously not – in one humble man’s opinion.

Obviously, I don’t agree with sterilization, yet, I can see the logic behind these moronic systems. When you have a socialist progressive country like Sweden, where all health care is paid for by the state, it is within the states interests to reduce those cost by all means required – and obviously, one way of doing it was rendering those ‘un-desirables’ incapable of mating. I can honestly say that I can see the benefits of this, because we see generation, after generation of imbecile in today’s society, and I could confidently assume that the count of imbeciles in Sweden would be far less than that of, let’s suggest for arguments sake – the United States of America, or to a lesser extent, Australia.

Of course, the USA, or Australia, would rather their imbeciles fend for themselves, and at least have the ‘chance’ of pro-creation, but God forbid the government help them in their endeavours to become better people, to provide better living conditions for the population as a whole - hence creating a desirable populace. Only those that can afford the cosmetic enhancements of values that the USA promotes – big breasts, large wallets and big macs, they are the ones that are held in high esteem, these very values are what I would consider ‘un-desirable’

As governments are held accountable for more of our needs and wants, while facing increasing demands for high costing programs, It’s probably not too far fetched that ‘humanist’ bureaucrats would be entertaining the thought of sterilization in the not to distant future – Is this a message to those ‘un-desirables’ to shape up or ship out? I can assure you my friends, even attractive woman with cosmetic surgery can be construed as ‘un-desirable’ as far as I am concerned.

It’s time to enforce our values on society, before society chooses them for us – if materialism is all you care about, I bid you, and your grandchildren good riddance, the capitalist machine will swallow you up before you can say Ikea.

BAM!!!""

Comments
on Oct 06, 2004
Whoah, what happened to yesterday's forum? Thanks for the link. I'm not sure why you think I'm an alco, but hey, whatever draws the people in.
on Oct 06, 2004
haha - peeps went spastic huh? No one was getting anywhere - least of all me, so I locked it... I got what I wanted out of that article anyway.

I hope you at least read this one mate!

BAM!!!
on Oct 06, 2004
Good article! It is not too far fetched to think that we are capable of forced sterilization. Not at all far fetched.
on Oct 06, 2004
Good article, glad to see you bogging about somthing other than Joe U drama!
on Oct 06, 2004
Actually, the first country legalising compulsory sterilisation was in fact the United States. Before World War II, eugenics were relatively normal in most countries (including Australia, Canada, United States, Iceland and many others); notably for the mentally retarded.

In the United States, it was first introduced by Pennsylvania in 1905 and followed by many other states after (and upheld by the Supreme court in Buck v. Bell trial). However, these practices didn't stop at the mentally retarded : in Oklahoma in 1935, you could be sterilized if you were convicted twice of a crime "amounting to felonies involving moral turpitude."
on Oct 06, 2004

No one was getting anywhere - least of all me, so I locked it...

*note: bloggers can't lock threads, only admins can.  Bloggers can hide threads, but the only way they get a lock symbol on them is if an admin did it.*

On topic, the problem with "forced sterilization" is it takes away one of the basic rights of humans- to have offspring.  It becomes debatable, however, when it comes to people who have genetic disorders or diseases that can be passed to offspring.  It would be nice if we had some way of preventing birth until a license could be obtained.  That way there wouldn't be any "mistake" births, and those people who were weakening the gene pool couldn't have children

on Oct 06, 2004
It becomes debatable, however, when it comes to people who have genetic disorders or diseases that can be passed to offspring.


By that definition I wouldn't exist. My deafness is caused my defective genes. My mom was born deaf, her entire family is deaf, and only hearing people is my brother's 3 kids, and he have a deaf son too. (total of 4 children).
on Oct 06, 2004
Ok- this has nothing to do with this article, but since you disabled commenting on the other one, I have to do it here. lol. Muggaz, we all love you and I would never want you to go. It wouldn't be the same if I didn't have you, Texas, and Gideon to be my point whore idols. So anyways, you better never leave!!! Or else!!! mwahahaha!! ok, enough of that.

~carebear~
on Oct 07, 2004
Muggaz, will you be first in line for sterilization?
on Oct 07, 2004
Good article! It is not too far fetched to think that we are capable of forced sterilization. Not at all far fetched.


Thanks Wisefawn... I hope you are wrong! Sterilization is just plain wrong...

Good article, glad to see you bogging about somthing other than Joe U drama!


Thanks for popping by Janders! Drama isn't my main course you know... it actually drives me insane... I suppose peeps would guess otherwise!

Actually, the first country legalising compulsory sterilisation was in fact the United States. Before World War II, eugenics were relatively normal in most countries (including Australia, Canada, United States, Iceland and many others); notably for the mentally retarded.In the United States, it was first introduced by Pennsylvania in 1905 and followed by many other states after (and upheld by the Supreme court in Buck v. Bell trial). However, these practices didn't stop at the mentally retarded : in Oklahoma in 1935, you could be sterilized if you were convicted twice of a crime "amounting to felonies involving moral turpitude."


That's actually really disturbing - I did read a quote somewhere where some intellectualy disabled woman had a court order of sterilization enforced upon her because "3 generations of Imbeciles was enough" or some such... It has to count among one of the biggest human rights tragedies of civilizations history... Thanks for stopping by J.E!

On topic, the problem with "forced sterilization" is it takes away one of the basic rights of humans- to have offspring. It becomes debatable, however, when it comes to people who have genetic disorders or diseases that can be passed to offspring. It would be nice if we had some way of preventing birth until a license could be obtained. That way there wouldn't be any "mistake" births, and those people who were weakening the gene pool couldn't have children


Interesting point Angie... birth licensing isn't actually a bad idea at all... I know many people who aren't fit to have children, yet who am I to decide? what kind of criteria do we choose? is it the amount of love the parents can provide? or the financial security? the two certainly aren't mutaul exclusive... thanks for commenting Karma

By that definition I wouldn't exist. My deafness is caused my defective genes. My mom was born deaf, her entire family is deaf, and only hearing people is my brother's 3 kids, and he have a deaf son too. (total of 4 children).


I am blind! so I probably wouldn't exist either! oh well, if i didn't exist, I wouldn't know, and no one would care, and the world would be a better place? I am glad I am here XX, and I am glad you are as well!

Ok- this has nothing to do with this article, but since you disabled commenting on the other one, I have to do it here. lol. Muggaz, we all love you and I would never want you to go. It wouldn't be the same if I didn't have you, Texas, and Gideon to be my point whore idols. So anyways, you better never leave!!! Or else!!! mwahahaha!! ok, enough of that. ~carebear~


You know I couldn't leave you Carebear... someone has to look after you! I happily assume the position!

Muggaz, will you be first in line for sterilization?


Yes, I guess if good looking, charming empathetic young lads are outlawed, I must be first against the wall! I must not be allowed to breed!!!

Thanks one and all for visiting me

BAM!!!
on Oct 07, 2004
Much more like the Muggaz I came to know when I first came here to blog. This is the Muggaz I like!

Great article, too.

Whilst I'm not at all pro-strerilisation, I do believe there should be some measures in place... in certain circumstances. Not because you are deaf or blind. How stupid is that?

Actually, sterilisation was used in a place very local to you, which now no longer exists, I believe. ...Remember the Kew cottages? ...and the attached mental institution? The place where people were taken to, and society promptly forgot about them.

When it was operating as the institution, the patients living there were found to be having sex, (natch.. happens everywhere) and not just with the one partner. As you may or may not know, that institution was for cases who were beyond all other help. There were a lot of unwanted pregnancies, and births of severely deformed or grossly mentally challenged kids. It (sterilisation) was introduced because there was no way they were going to be able to stop them having sex, so at least they were stopping the unwanted pregnancies. And lessening the burden on the taxpayer.

(I took a look around there when they had closed it down. I used to do security patrols for the company that looked after the vacant buildings, and some of the things I saw would keep you awake at night! The towers at either end being the most horrific..... bloodstains, used condoms, used tampons, filthy blankets and bedding on the floors of the belfry..... must have been some awful stuff happening there. They even had a hidden jail cell there, I've seen it. )