Satirically Throwing My Hat in the Ring
In 2024, we will be deciding on new members of the Santa Clarita City Council. Since I have years of experience writing on pressing issues, I feel I am qualified to throw my hat in the ring for this important position. Please consider this column then the opening salvo of my campaign.
If the humble voters of our community elect me, I will promptly fight for the following policies upon taking office: A Ban On Cats
Let us be clear: Cats are pointless as a concept. The idea behind having a household pet is that it’s supposed to give you unconditional love. The world is a cold, dark place. We spend our lives being judged and discarded by those around us, for people who are smarter, funnier and have better jawlines.
After a long, hard day, you want to come home to something big and furry that will love you, no matter what. Cats don’t act this way. Instead they are just like the folks who bugged the heck out of us during our working hours.
Depending on your cat’s mood, it may offer up a meow and a lick — or snap at you, claw your face, and leave you bleeding on the floor calling 911. Sort of like a wife.
Dogs on the other hand, are utterly fantastic. It doesn’t matter who you are, they just love fully. You could be Brad Pitt or a basement-dwelling incel with armpits that smell like a tuna sandwich on pumpernickel rye. Their joyful, affectionate response is always the same.
All dogs go to heaven. All cats, at best, go to purgatory. Here’s another example: After a natural disaster like a hurricane or tornado, do you see any cats searching through the rubble looking for survivors?
No, it’s always rescue dogs.
A rescue cat? That’s an oxymoron. There’s no such thing. They don’t care. Vladimir Putin could launch a nuke on Santa Clarita tomorrow, and as long as our cats had fresh meow mix and a litter box to drop a dump in, it would make no difference to them.
Therefore, the felines must be outlawed. Pooches forever.
A Public Awareness Campaign to Help The Ugly Members of the millennial and Gen Z generations are incredibly into social justice. These demographics support every single cause under the sun — even if it’s centered around the right of gender-fluid indigenous lesbians to engage in their traditional mating dance in the middle of a Chili’s.
Yet there is one group that curiously escapes the kids’ collective empathy: the ugly.
If you happen to be born with a crooked nose, teeth the shade of corn nuts, or some other physical malady, there will be no protests in your honor or organizations dedicated to your issues. Instead, the aesthetically ungifted among us are treated with a scorn that can cause even the coldest heart to weep with empathy.
To our virtuous 20-somethings, raised on social media apps that prioritize beauty above all else, the ugly are the biggest outcasts of all. Often on Tiktok or some other website, a young couple will post a video of themselves. If the kids determine that the man is insufficiently attractive to have the female he is with, the judgements come swift and fast:
“Girl you are doing charity work!”
“Do you get a tax write-off for being with him?” “Write about this in your character statement for college.’’ “He makes the elephant man look like he could pose for Playgirl.”
You see, the age-old notion of a beautiful young woman seeing something of value in an ugly guy holds no attraction for our Zoomer and millennial youth.
It is instead viewed as something close to a #Metoo violation. If Disney tried making “Beauty and the Beast” today, they would have to include a trigger warning.
Even then, hordes of 22-year-olds would protest outside the premiere, chanting, “Hey Hey, Ho, Ho, Ugly People Have Got to Go.”
That is why, if I am elected to City Council, I will propose a public campaign to raise awareness about the plight of the hideous among us.
Because Homely Lives Matter. Reform Public Nudity Laws
In order to understand my rationale for this last measure, first consider the guiding premise behind why we call something a crime. More specifically, we reserve this label for acts that harm public safety in some fashion and make others feel threatened.
As of now, it is a crime to be nude in public. However, this only makes sense when we are talking about naked men.
A man’s uncovered form is the stuff of nightmares. It makes us reflexively reach for a gun and guard the sheep. If a girl exposes herself, however, it is a very different circumstance.
No one drives down the street and sees a topless woman jogging and thinks, “Oh my God, call the police!” Instead, we thank the heavens above for such a delightful interruption in our daily routine, a break from the monotony of death, taxes and hemorrhoids.
When something similar occurs at a baseball game, no one is frightened. The crowd erupts in cheers. People take photographs. Spontaneous shouts of “oh yeah!” emerge like an involuntary, biological instinct.
By contrast, if I exposed myself at that same baseball game, there would be loud sobs, grandmothers would faint, and I would get attacked by a German shepherd and put on a registry. Which is exactly what should happen.
Taken as a whole, there is only one conclusion to be drawn from this set of facts: Naked guys should be outlawed and at least half of our law enforcement budgets should be dedicated to ensuring they are never seen in broad daylight. Naked girls, on the other hand, should be allowed.
Public indecency, you say? A woman without clothes is inherently decent, her beautiful shape the surest proof of the handiwork of God.
By contrast, stare too long at a nude male — that strange configuration of ill-shaped parts and enough body hair to clothe a family of apes – and you may just become an atheist.
Heath 2024 is coming, Santa Clarita. Elect me and I will advocate for the legislation our community needs.