Passive eating

Oh come on. You knew it was bound to happen. Experts have Said and Studies have Shown. Passive eating is a thing now. Third hand eating is a matter of days away.

So if you put salt on fatty foods they taste good. Sigh. Did we really need to pay someone to tell us pork scratchings are tasty? Or that Pringles and Doritos taste nice?

If you eat more because it tastes nice, that is a sin. Eating is sinful. Stop doing it. If you must eat, take in the bland and the unpalatable and revel in the knowledge that your one and only life is controlled by others.

You could be so much more than a drone. You have unlimited potential but all you want is a big house and an Audi.

Yet if you follow all the diktats you will die before you are 30. You really want that?

Then keep voting for it.

15 thoughts on “Passive eating

  1. Leg, the big problem for those of extremist political persuasions is PP : Passive Porking. If you live in an apartment building and you can SMELL your neighbor frying bacon in the morning you are clearly being forced to INGEST bacon against your will.

    – MJM

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Pingback: …/Dons PPE* – The Packer Punch – Library of Libraries

  3. Oh dear. Yet again we see another would-be “new tobacco” desperately trying to emulate their heroes in the anti-smoking camp by pinching their ideas – this time trying to re-invent “passive smoking” as “passive eating.” Perhaps they feel that the anti-booze brigade are getting a bit ahead of them with all their talk about town-centre binging, and alcohol being “linked to” cancer (always the first step before “causes,” remember), and their proposals for minimum pricing etc, and thought that they’d better make a grab for that richest of hunting grounds for any aspiring prohibitionist – the “passive” angle – before anti-booze got hold of it. It’s always good to see the Righteous quietly fighting with each other, whilst protesting to the world: “Oh no – we’re all on the same side, here” (yeah, right).

    I’m personally surprised that anti-booze hasn’t already grabbed the “passive” meme, as it’s much easier to do for booze than for food – what with vehicle accidents, crime, social disorder, family breakdowns etc etc simply sitting there waiting to be used to counter the average non-smoking boozer’s argument that “there’s no such thing as Passive Drinking.” But, hey ho, I guess that as anti-smoking – upon whose template all new prohibitionist groups seem to base their entire campaigns – never had any competition (as they were the first such group), they never had to fight for supremacy in the way that the new groups are having to; thus, they never had to develop tactics for that. And if anti-smoking didn’t develop them, being as it seems that these recent arrivals to the queue for the gravy train are nothing more than copycats using a different name, then it’s unlikely that any of them will have either the imagination or the initiative to develop them for themselves.

    Liked by 1 person

First comments are moderated to keep the spambots out. Once your first comment is approved, you're in.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.