hey should. I'm just going to say it. All right he drew the black characters to look like monkeys. All right. Now if that doesn't offend you I don't know what would. I mean that's about as offensive as you can get.

Now was he thinking that when he drew them or is it just an artifact from his drawing style which just fell out that way but he wasn't thinking of it in any way like that? It's a problem.

Now I said before that the easiest way to solve it would just be find a black cartoonist and just say hey do us a favor can you redraw these so that we can tell they're African natives but they don't seem offensive to you? Just give us a hand. I mean if you looked at the whole body of Dr. Seuss works they're only just a few pictures. Why don't we just have the people who are most the victim of that characterization have them take a shot at it? Just redraw it. Annotate it. Make sure everybody can see the original and tell them why you changed it. I don't think it's a big problem. I think it's easy to solve. Just have a little bit of technique. Just get the right person involved. It's just it literally would be one drawing out of a whole book. No big deal. I wouldn't lose the original though.

Here's a provocative sexist hypothesis from user Novicius on Twitter. And I'll try to characterize the claim. Is that the societies that have the most gender equality are also the most ethically and morally superior? So it's a two-part opinion. Do you agree with the first part that societies that have the most gender equality are, and it's not a coincidence that they're more ethically and morally superior? Do you buy that? Might be an opinion, social opinion sort of thing. But I do. That's you I would say observationally that feels about right doesn't it?

I've seen a lot of people say no I don't think that. The people saying no have a bad argument by the way. But I'm a little surprised that there are many no's. Oh interesting. Okay all right.

But let me just finish the point. So this is not my point. I'm just putting it out there. That wherever you have more women with more equality there's more moral superiority. But it's also the reason you're doomed. It's also the reason you're doomed. Because the country with the most morality and equality will be the weakest country in terms of homeland defense. That all of those things that make you ethically and morally superior put you in peril. Right? Because if you want to be protected you want the person on your side who's the worst person in the world. You don't want the ethically and morally appropriate warriors on your side. You want the ones who will burn the village. Right?

I mean you wouldn't say it out loud but if you had a choice between your country being destroyed and you being killed or your military people might be kind of badass, might kill a little bit more than you expected, might take more chances, might do a lot of things that maybe you wouldn't think are a good idea but maybe you need that. See the trouble is that the more dangerous you are the more likely even if you lose nine out of ten times if you're the more dangerous one you only have to win that one time and then you