Tuesday, 14 February 2012

Kiss this

In these times of austerity, with Greece in flames and the UK in mind-boggling debt, it's reassuring to know that the Department of Health still has money for crucial, front-line services such as commissioning surveys about who people want to kiss.

To boost your chances of dating success this Valentine's Day quit the fags, suggests a poll that shows smoking is one of the biggest turn-offs.

Three-quarters of people aged 18 to 24 said they would not kiss someone who had just smoked.

And half the 1,700 people surveyed for the Department of Health (DoH) said they would think twice about starting a serious relationship with a smoker.

I'm married and I hate young people so I have no dog in this fight, but is this really the best the DoH can do? This is just a reworking of the old "lips that touch liquor will never kiss mine" meme from the 19th century.

I don't care. Smokers can pair off with smokers and nonsmokers can pair off with nonsmokers. Kiss who you want. It's none of the Department of Health's business.

Is there no day of the year on which these inane, pontificating pricks can leave us alone?

Less competition for us real men.


Leg-iron said...

To the women with the sign in the top photo, my reaction would be 'Deal'. I couldn't drink enough to want to kiss them anyway.

As for three-quarters of children not wanting to kiss me after I have a smoke, no problem. It would get me arrested. More worrying is that one-quarter still would even though I don't want them to.

In the end, anyone so shallow as to base their relationship on what is, in fact, a trivial lifestyle choice, is of no interest at all to me.

In that respect, the antis are doing everyone a favour by bringing the superficial wastes of time into plain view.

Anonymous said...

Back when I was a smoker, my strategy was to at least get to 3rd base with the girl, and then reveal I was a smoker.

Classy, I know.

Jackson said...

Meet. trek through India, fuck, get married, buy a house, have kids, just don't kiss.

Or if you're a hater only hook up with another hater. You'll soon find that the only thing you have in common is that you hate each other.

Mag said...

The antismoking theme is that smoke/smoking/smokers as “repulsive” is a self-evident “truth”. However, it [conveniently] overlooks a critical point – smoking had to be “denormalized”. For it to be denormalized, it had to previously be normal.

From Bayer & Stuber
“…..In the last half century the cigarette has been transformed. The fragrant has become foul. . . . An emblem of attraction has become repulsive. A mark of sociability has become deviant. A public behavior is now virtually private. Not only has the meaning of the cigarette been transformed but even more the meaning of the smoker [who] has become a pariah . . . the object of scorn and hostility.”


This change from fragrant to foul has not come from the smoke which has remained a constant. The shift is an entirely psychological one. Unfortunately, the way the shift is manufactured is through negative conditioning. The constant play on fear and hatred through inflammatory propaganda warps perception. Tobacco smoke, particularly exposure to tobacco smoke (SHS), has been fraudulently manufactured into something on a par with a bio-weapon such as sarin gas. There are now quite a few who screech that they “can’t stand” the “stench” of smoke, or the smoke is “overwhelming”, or that kissing a smoker is like “licking an ashtray”. This says nothing about the physical properties of tobacco smoke. These people are demonstrating that they have been successfully conditioned (brainwashed) into aversion. They are now suffering mental dysfunction such as anxiety disorder, hypochondria, somatization, and bigotry. Questionable social engineering requires putting many into mental disorder to advance the ideological/financial agenda.

Jonathan Bagley said...

Brad Pitt never seemed to have a problem. What first attracted you to the successful, handsome, multimillionaire smoker?