Apparently men with deep voices have more children, says an article from the BBC.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7013136.stm

Oddly enough, the scientists didn't mention anything about homosexuality. Let's see here, men with higher pitched voices are generally more likely to be gay than those with lower pitched voices, as the common Western stereotype goes. Furthermore, in Western societies, prior to the current tolerance to open gay relationships, gay men commonly had a fair number of children, however fewer than straight men of course. So it would stand to reason that gay men in a hunter gatherer society would also be subject to the same forces. Gay men aren't going to have as much sex with women because it's icky; less sex = fewer children. There you have it I just woke up and I've outsmarted the scientists.

        I am appalled at what constitutes a charity these days. A few days ago, I recieved a phone call from the Children's Charitable Foundation, and I will admit I was taken in by the pleas of the caller, who spoke of sick children getting their last wishes fulfilled; in fact, I thought it was the Make-A-Wish Foundation calling. But no, I was mistaken this was the Children's Charitable Foundation. Nevertheless, I said I would pledge $25 to their cause, which, at the time, seemed very worthy.
        Well, today I got the mail and found their donation form. As soon as I looked at it, I knew something was up. Everything about their pamphlet just screamed "10 minute Frontpage job." Now, I'm not one to judge based on looks a lone, so I decided to do a little investigating. I had heard stories of many a charity that only spent around a quarter of their revenue on programs, but I never would have expected what I found out next.
        A simple web search of "Children's Charitable Foundation" was enough to yield a link to Give.org, which is the BBB for charities. The page lambasts the CCF being unaccountable. In fact, it failed to meet half of the standards for accountability. Now that's bad and all, but what really got me riled up was the percentage of donated money that they actually use for the children.
        CCF spends... 6% of it's funds on helping the children. No I didn't miss a zero, 6% on the dot. Now to put it all in perspective, they raked in $1.1 million in donations and gave out $60 thousand. Umm, that seems a little out of whack. Just a little.
        For god's sake, I know people that tithe at least 10% of their total income, and this charity can't even match that. Sickening.
        So what are they doing with all their money? Fundraising. Apparently cold calls, like the one they sent me, cost money; in fact, they spent 88% of their funds on fundrasing. Pathetic.

If CCF ever calls me up again begging for money, I'll give them a piece of my mind.

        Please make all pricing schemes clear, I was about to walk right out the door of an un-named business, because of their iffy pricing scheme. First of all when they advertised themselves, they claimed to have a "clear and easy to understand" prices, without all the confusion that other businessess in their market have. Well that was a damned lie. First of all, their broshure , however pretty and clean looking, was actually very poorly lain out. I'm sorry but if you include a note in one table it's safe to assume it doesn't apply to the next table; hence the reason the packages are in different tables. If said clause did apply to all packages in all tables, say so in the damned introduction. Furthermore, add if's, and's, or but's; I'd rather be told 'no' before I start making plans; instead of leading me to believe that I've thought up a customized package that fits all my needs, which in reality would not be allowed.

        In conclusion. Be clear, if I have to ask, you weren't clear enough. Also, just because a broshure is pretty and looks well structured, doesn't mean that it actually makes sense, fix that.