If you read the entry that made me top of the pops with Internet Page Three Types, you will know that I object to manspreading, the phenomenon of ill-disciplined slobs making themselves right at home in public venues and passageways by sitting with their kneecaps pointed as close to 180 degrees apart from each other as possible.
I do not object to manspreading because I am "offended" by it. This is a non-young person thing, so I will have to explain. At my age,
1) getting offended takes energy
2) sex takes energy
3) taking out the garbage takes energy
4) trying to catch every word someone tells me in a public space (where I cannot dial up the volume of the person talking to me and dial down the volume of the ambient yammering) takes energy
5) having to get up in the middle of the night (because you just know that you will not be able to fall asleep again until...just precisely the point you have to get up) takes energy
6) trying to remember every damned thing I have to do today and put it on the checklist takes energy
7) having to turn around and go back because all of a sudden I remember that vital thing I had to do that I forgot to put on the checklist that morning takes energy (yes, this happens a lot)
8) finding a comfortable sitting/reclining position where I can breathe more easily for any length of time takes energy
9) walking down a lengthy flight of stairs without a banister (where lengthy> 3 steps) without becoming dizzy takes energy.
I do not have a choice regarding 3)-9) above. But I can ration my energy by not pissing it away at frivolities like 1) and 2) above so that maybe--just maybe--I can get through 3)-9) above without incident. Rationing energy is like rationing money. Do it right, and you will have enough for what you need. I need to spend on food, utilities and taxes. I do not need to spend to get all manner of tropical diseases, like the Zika virus, just to roast my six in the Tropics (which, by the way, is not uncoincidentally related to the adjective "tropical" in tropical diseases), which is why I do not whinge about it being Baltic. Of course, I think that Baltic is beautiful, but that is another matter.
The point of the above, me younglings, is that I do not do "offended" because doing "offended" goes completely against the energy-rationing protocol that has served me well for a long time now. So, when I say that I object to manspreading, my objection has nothing at all to do with third wave social justice jihadist-style "being offended by manspreading."
As well, I do not object to manspreading as a phenomenon in the exact same way that I do not object to differing religious and sexual practices as phenomena. As regards manspreading if, like religion and sex, you do it in such a manner that you do not get in my way when you are doing it, I really do not care a damn.
When slobs get in my way by manspreading in narrow passages, hell yes, I object! Now, on the assumption that not everyone has a basic understanding of Fluid Dynamics, let me elaborate. When a slob manspreads in a narrow passage, hoofs and flippers protruding where they would not be if said slob knew how to behave in public, it has the exact same effect on anyone and anything trying to circulate in that already narrow passage that Big Macs, Whoopers, pizza, french fries, crisps/chips and deep fried-anything has on the poor little blood cells trying to circulate in the poor little arteries of thems that likes Big Macs, Whoopers, pizza, french fries and deep fried-anything. Restrict an already restricted passage and the probability of any poor thing circulating therein tripping or otherwise incurring injury goes up. Since those who manspread in narrow passageways tend to have a poor grasp of Fluid Dynamics, chances are their lawyers will successfully argue that they are mentally incompetent to stand trial in a civil suit.
Now, contrary to what those who whinge about people whinging about manspreading say, manspreading is not biologically necessary. The proof is on pages 3-6 through 3-9 of the US Army's Airborne Training Manual, which address "landing attitude." These pages address landing with a variety of parachutes. Irrespective of the model of parachute, however, one phrase constantly reappears. In literature, as Mr. Bumblebee will attest to, repetitions of phrases like that is what is called "a theme." So, the "theme" of pages 3-6 to 3-9 of the US Army Airborne Training Manual is as follows:
KEEPS HIS FEET AND KNEES TOGETHER
Pace defenders of manspreading, it is entirely possible for men to keep their knees in what Torq would call "Materials Condition Zulu" for an extended period of time.
Now, not all men can become airborne qualified. In fact, between 2011 and 2015, 59.5% of all airborne trainees failed, 36.5% of these failures occurring within the first four days of training. As well, in most countries, it is a crime to represent yourself as being airborne-qualified when you are not. That being said, however, why would any male so willingly advertise to all and sundry who clap eyes on him while he manspreads like a sloth that is one of the 59.5% who are not airborne-qualified, i.e. that he is clearly not among the best material available? Then again, individual motives are best known by the individuals themselves.
On a related note, I do not give a damn one way or another about this fat shaming/fat acceptance indaba. It is well known that being overweight is not good for the heart. Also as well known are the guidelines for having a healthy weight (try to keep within the limits of the Washington Naval Treaty, do not be 88-proof, i.e. do not be of such a width and girth that you can absorb the full impact of something coming out of the main armament of a Tiger Tank and not be worse for wear.) Since that is all well known, the choice with what to do with it is up to the individual. You cannot force someone on a diet just like you cannot force a problem drinker on the wagon without said person who needs to be on a diet/problem drinker wanting to do this for his/her/itself.
What is not an individual choice is getting in my or anyone else's way. To be fair, I hold the fairer sex to the exact same standard. Let me explain.
A while back, I was in the library. There was this umfazi who kept getting in my way. Said umfazi was no Claudia Jennings, but close enough for these Near Centuries. Judging by the size and shape of her airframe, she was in her early twenties.
I got the books I wanted and turned sails towards the checkout desk. Said umfazi, like a gazelle, swiftly inserted herself between me and the next person in line. Then said umfazi proceeded to make a big show of yanking out her yuppie-yapper and then doing her dag-namit best imitation of "elocution." When said umfazi finally got to the check out counter, she made a big show of bending over the counter to have a closer look when the clerk tried to explain the concept of "due date" to her. This took an inordinate amount of time. Finally said umfazi buggered off and I got to what I went there for.
The clerk looked up at me with a stupid smile and said "Ya know...that broad was trying to flirt with you."
I felt like smacking said clerk for being for using the term "broad" when he could have used a classier term like "umfazi" (which, if you have not figured it out by now, is Ndebele for "female," something said clerk, who knew exactly what my reading tastes were, knew that I knew.) But it was the end of a long day, which is where the energy thing I talked about in the numbered points and the subsequent paragraph above comes in.
So I just said, "Umfazi was in my damned way."