Professor Plum walked into the mail room dragging a lavender balloon at the end of a paper chain around his ankle and said, “I’m pro creativity.”

He read the mail. (More)

After Ms. Scarlet congratulated him on his performance art project, they left to join the resident faculty in the wine cellar library, where they’ll spend the weekend drinking thinking on our motto of Magis vinum, magis verum (“More wine, more truth”).

In the staff poker game, the Professor of Astrology Janitor felt good about his pair of red Tens. The flop brought the Ten of Clubs, along with the Six of Hearts and Seven of Diamonds. He checked and, with seeming reluctance, called Chef’s small bet. The Deuce of Spades fell on the turn and again the Professor of Astrology Janitor checked, hoping Chef would bet again. She did, and again he paused for a moment and called. When the Ace of Diamonds fell on the river, he once again checked and let Chef bet. But rather than calling, he raised with his three Tens, hoping Chef would call with what he suspected was a lone Ace. Instead, Chef pushed the rest of her chips into the pot.

Had she been betting a pair of Aces and lucked into three of a kind at the river? She had only called his bet before the flop, an unusual play if she had Aces. More likely, he decided, she had a pair of Sevens or Sixes for a smaller three of a kind. He smiled about his carefully-laid trap, as he called and turned over his Tens. His smile faded as he saw Chef’s Nine and Eight of Diamonds and realized she had been trapping him with her Ten-high straight.

The Professor of Astrology Janitor began his plaintive mewling and Chef went to the kitchen to make Chained Eggs, leaving your lowly mail room clerk to review the week’s correspondence….


Dear Ms. Crissie,

The U.S. Supreme court declared DOMA unconstitutional because defenders of heterosexual marriage never argued that gay marriage is unequal and unconstitutional. But it is. Heterosexual marriage is the only constitutional form of marriage because it is the only possible arrangement that automatically confers equal social, economic, and parental rights to all married men and women regardless of one’s ability to naturally bear a child. Same-sex marriage immediately bifurcates these rights, destroying equality between men and women.

The class of marriages having most advantageous rights is marriages between two women. When two women marry, it is a three-way contract among two women and the government. Most women will bear children by men outside the marriage – often by pretending they are using birth control when they are not. Entrapped men become economically-conscripted third parties to these marriages, but get nothing in return.

This is a significant advantage compelling women who would otherwise become (or are) single mothers to choose to marry a woman instead of a man. They can combine incomes, double-up on tax-free child support and welfare benefits, decrease costs, and double the human resources available to raise children and run their household. They are sexually liberated with boyfriends often cohabiting with them to provide additional undeclared income and human resources without worrying about what happens when they break up with their boyfriends.

Today, approximately 25% of single mothers cohabit with an undocumented boyfriend. Same-sex marriage allows women to double-up on everything, establishing sub-rosa polyandrous marriage as a common legal institution with men as peripheral servants without a stake in marriage or society.

The Supreme Court cannot explain away the unconstitutionality of same-sex marriage when the welfare state becomes a predatory, automatic, and unnatural statutory third-party-provider to a class of often structurally-polyandrous marriages, extracting substantial income from taxpayers and entrapped men, that other marriages do not qualify for.

David in Farrightistan

Dear David,

We applaud your capacity for writing fiction. Alas, we think marriage law should be based on fact, and you offer none. For example, you claim that most married lesbians are in fact heterosexual women who marry each other to defraud the government and deprive men of their rights, yet you offer not one scintilla of evidence, apart from a statistic that 25% of single mothers cohabit with an undocumented boyfriend. For that statistic, you link to a Phyllis Schlafly column that does not even make that claim, let alone provide a source. We suspect that you hope readers will see a link and presume it offers proof for your statistic.

We further note that even if that statistic were true, it would prove nothing about married lesbians. Lesbian couples typically have children by adoption, through sperm bank or consensual donors, or by ‘co-parenting’ with gay couples. While others bring children from previous relationships into blended families, so do divorced men or women who enter second marriages.

Finally, we note that while you claim that married lesbians are eligible for welfare benefits that are unavailable to married couples, you offer no evidence. In fact the Supreme Court held that federal law must treat same-sex couples in states that recognize their marriages exactly the same as opposite-sex couples. In short, you have written a fictional story that you hope readers, lawmakers, and judges will respond to as if it were real.


Dear Ms. Crissie,

Do Chained Eggs come from lesbian chickens and enslaved roosters? If not, how do I make them?

Unchaining Breakfast in Blogistan

Dear Unchaining Breakfast,

While Chef has not visited the poultry farms who supply the eggs to the local grocery, she is confident that Chained Eggs are not the product of lesbian chickens and enslaved roosters. To make them, Chef thinly slices a green onion and then fries two eggs, dropping ringlets of green onion around the yolks before turning the eggs to make them over-easy. Bon appétit!



David in Farrightistan; Phyllis Schlafly column; lesbian couples typically have children by…; federal law must treat same-sex couples exactly the same as opposite-sex couples.


Happy Sunday!