Tag Archives: Face diapers

Do You Wear Depends? by Eric Peters

Eric Peters draws an analogy between face diapers and the regular kind. From Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

If you’re not physically sick and find yourself being pestered by someone who is mentally sick about your “failure” to wear a “mask” to “stop the spread” of a physical illness you haven’t got – but which they worry you might have – ask them a question in reply:

Are you wearing your Depends?

These being the adult diapers designed to protect the incontinent from spreading . . . something else.

They will probably draw themselves up indignantly and say no – of course not. Why would they? They have no need for Diapers as they are in control of their bladder – and bowels. It would be absurd for them to wear a Diaper and more than that, degrading – because of the implication they might piss their pants or shit themselves, otherwise.

Exactly so – as regards the facial equivalent of the same thing.

To insist that someone who isn’t sick must wear a Face Diaper because it is possible he might be sick is to treat him as if he is sick. Which is the same as saying he is disease-ridden, someone who presents a threat to anyone nearby, if he doesn’t wear a “protective” device.

Is this not also degrading?

Some will say it is noble – because it is a sign of caring. You are showing – literally – that you take other people’s health seriously and are being respectful, etc. But this is only a valid argument if, in fact, there is a threat to other people’s health arising from your not wearing the “protective” device.

Continue reading→

Diaper Report 3/28/21, by Eric Peters

Making people where face masks presupposes that they’re sick. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

Forcing healthy people to wear a “mask” as a condition of being allowed to live was never meant to “stop the spread.” It was meant to establish the precedent – in this case, for forcing healthy people to submit to a vaccination.

To many vaccinations. And more than just that.

A writer for the Daily Beast makes the point – without putting it quite that way.

Instead, he uses the world-turned-upside-down logic of the “mask” pushers – i.e., that you must accept the vaccine as the price of being allowed to work, shop and socialize with others because you haven’t got the right to expose others to sickness.

He writes, in reverse-logic form:

Just as I may have a right not to wear a mask or get a shot, you have a right to be able to walk down the street without me giving you a lethal disease. Choosing not to get vaccinated isn’t “freedom” any more than driving drunk is. It’s endangering other people. It is profoundly unethical.

Except it isn’t either thing – if you’re not sick. Because a person who isn’t sick can’t ”give you a lethal disease.”

Presupposing sickness is the same as presupposing guilt, which is vile enough. And much more dangerous to societal health than a virus – especially one that doesn’t kill 99.8-something percent of the people who are infected by it.

Because presupposing sickness would kill 100 percent of everyone’s right to be presumed innocent.

Of anything.

If the person who wrote the article has the right to presume I am sick then surely I have just as much right to presuppose he’s mentally ill, say – and insist on “testing” him to establish that he is not. And to deny him entry into a restaurant or shop if he does not submit – if he does not produce an official document attesting that he has been examined by a psychiatrist and found sane  – because otherwise he might be a dangerous lunatic and that risk, which is possible,  is simply unbearable.   

Continue reading→

The Diaper-Free Zone, by Eric Peters

There are places in this benighted land where you don’t have to wear a mask. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

 

The Orange Man danced to the ’70’s disco song, YMCA – but there actually is a “place you can go” . . .  where you can “have a good meal” and  “there’s no need to be unhappy”  . . .

Or “masked.”

It is  Beckyjack’s Food Shack in Hernando County, Florida. This joint not only doesn’t require “masks” to enter or be served, it doesn’t dignify them. There is a big sign in front that reads: Face Diapers Not Required! Everyone Welcome.

Imagine that.

It is a big step in the right direction to leave it up to individuals to decide whether to wear a “mask” rather than force everyone to wear one, as in the “case” of a local bakery known to me that has a sign informing customers that they will not be asked about “masks” and are free to wear one if they want to and free to not wear one if they want to.

 

Imagine that.

One size does not and should not fit all, except when it comes to prison cells, perhaps – and that is what America is becoming, right down to the ugly prison terminology (“lockdowns” used to be for convicts, not the unconvicted) and the meant-to-humiliate stand here/walk there/behind the plexiglass barrier kabuki.

People who want to wear a “mask” have the same right to do so that neurotics have always enjoyed. Wear a halved watermelon over your head, if it makes you feel better. Nothing has changed in that respect. Tolerance – even of aberrance so long as harmless – is what made America a different kind of place, once.

What has changed is that the neurotic have been emboldened to regard their psychiatric affliction as normal and now insist that everyone else share it – or at least look as though they do. This has changed America into a different kind of place. An ugly, fearful, eyes-averted kind of place. A place where normal human interaction has been painted as pathological by the pathological.

Continue reading→

Why Diaper the Healthy? by Eric Peters

We may never figure out why so many people are attached to face diapers with meshes far larger than the virus they purportedly stop, and the social pressure brought to bear on healthy people who don’t wear them. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

One of the strangest things about the disease plaguing America – sickness psychosis, not the WufFlu – is not the wearing of literal Diapers on one’s face as well as their equivalents (e.g., an old bandana or a “mask” that the box it came in warns is useless) as a mechanism to protect the wearer from becoming sick.

It is the Diapering of the not-sick.

Even if Face Diapers worked, that would be an irrelevance if the wearer isn’t sick. It is the equivalent of insisting that people who haven’t got broken legs wear leg casts.

Of course, the Sickness Psychotic will erupt in outrage and say that broken legs aren’t communicable!

True, but neither is a virus you haven’t got.

Then they fall back on, “But you might be sick!” – i.e, the apparently healthy, with no signs of sickness – such as symptoms – must be presumed sick, perpetually.

This isn’t strange.

It is evil.

No different an evil, in its essence, than presuming Jews are evil, for instance. That blacks are criminal. That women are sluts. That we are all “trrists” – and drunks and drug addicts, too.

It is a recipe for societal sickness. Paranoia – and its corollary, fear – enshrined as the basis of a state of perpetual psychosis.

It is also the doctrine that will be used as the basis for pushing the pending Needling on people since the only way to “be sure you’re not getting people sick” is by inoculating them against the sickness.

That way, they can’t get it – or give it.

Except, of course, they can – plus more.

Continue reading→

Dating and Diapering, by Eric Peters

There is an upside to face diapering. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

One of my Undiapered friends is a young guy who – like many young guys – is interested in young ladies. But how do you find one when you can’t see one – their face obscured by a Diaper?

But that’s just the point, I counseled my young friend. You do not want to date the Diapered – assuming you could tell whether they were smiling or frowning at you. These women have done you a favor by saving you a lot of trouble. If they’ve got a Diaper on, especially if not under duress (as at work) you already know something about them a great deal more important than whether they’re smiling or frowning at you.

You know, first of all, that they are herd creatures – afraid to show they aren’t by not swaddling their face with a disgusting piece of cloth because the government – or Wal-Mart – told them to.

You can infer, second of all, that they have bought the Brooklyn Bridge – or would, if it were offered to them for a really good price. Evidence for which is their having bought – at incalculable cost – the ludicrous idea that draping a dirty bandana around their face is “stopping the spread.”

Any woman who – or man – who thinks that is a woman (or man, if you’re female) you don’t want to date.

They are either no very smart or are very lazy. They listen to TeeVee. They are not very good at math. They do not look into things for themselves – and act according to their judgment, based on the facts they’ve evaluated. They stampede with the herd; whatever bovine virtues it has – they signal.

So as to blend in to the herd. Mooooo! 

If that’s what you want, have at it. Lots of contenders – if you could tell them apart.

Snow leopards aren’t as easy to find – but they are well worth looking for until you do find one.

Continue reading→

Censored: A Review Of Science Relevant To COVID-19 Social Policy And Why Face Masks Don’t Work, by Denis G. Rancourt

There is very little in the scientific literature that backs up what has become the obsessive mantra to wear face masks. From Denis G. Rancourt at technocracy.news:

Wikimedia Commons, https://www.nursetogether.com

Denis Rancourt, PhD, has published over 100 peer-reviewed studies in his career, but ResearchGate choose to censor and remove this paper because it didn’t fit the narrative of the Great Panic of 2020 over COVID-19. Such censorship proves the existence of an alternative agenda.Again, this underscores the Technocrat methodology of shaming, ridiculing and censoring anybody that comes forth with real science that refutes their pseudo-science. ⁃ TN Editor

Masks and respirators do not work.

There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.

Furthermore, the relevant known physics and biology, which I review, are such that masks and respirators should not work. It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.

The present paper about masks illustrates the degree to which governments, the mainstream media, and institutional propagandists can decide to operate in a science vacuum, or select only incomplete science that serves their interests. Such recklessness is also certainly the case with the current global lockdown of over 1 billion people, an unprecedented experiment in medical and political history.

Continue reading→