July 29, 2014

"Even knowing Charles was juggling multiple partners, I never doubted how important I was to him..."

"... because he never left an information gap for me to fill in. He told me all the time how special I was; he’d message me to let me know how much he was looking forward to seeing me again. Lack of appreciation makes your partner needy and insecure, not sharing your time and attention with work, friends or family."

From an inanely glib Salon list of lessons about marriage that one woman purports to have extracted from the experience of "dating" one man who was — with permission — having sex with women other than his wife.

"Obama Mulls Massive Move on Immigration."


"We have established the brigade to raise awareness of our religion among women, and to punish women who do not abide by the law."

It's the al-Khansaa Brigade, the ISIS all-female moral police...,

ADDED: I gave this post my "gender politics" tag, even though it's very different from what usually gets the tag. But if anything is gender politics, this is. What's all that other stuff?

"How a bipartisan group that hoped to make Washington more functional became yet another cog in the D.C. moneymaking machine — and infuriated Democrats."

Finally, an answer to the question that's been bugging me for years: Whatever happened to "No Labels"?

Now, I wonder if anyone can tell me: What's brewing in The Coffee Party?

"We followed family tradition this year by taking 5 of our 22 grandkids, ages 10 through 13, on a trip through the American West."

"My Mom and Dad began the tradition, showing their grandchildren the majesty of our country and teaching them about the sacrifices and character of the pioneers. We visited Goblin Valley, Spooky Gulch, Peekaboo Slot Canyon, Capitol Reef National Park, Bryce National Park, Zion National Park, Lake Powell, Rainbow Arch, Grand Canyon, and the four falls in the Havasupai Reservation. All totaled, we hiked over 50 miles: quite a feat for the young — and for Ann and me."

Me = Mitt Romney.

"I wish Netanyahu and his government had a better sense of the toxic repercussions of mobilizing GOP proxies as cut-outs in this way."

Says Josh Marshall (in a dizzying swirl of metaphor).
It should go without saying that the Israel-US alliance becomes more brittle as it becomes more clearly identified with a single US political party. And perhaps more than that, as it becomes more clearly identified with the ties between Netanyahu and US Republicans.
The headline is "Dangerous Game," and we're told "Nothing gets the Obama administration's ire up like the perception (very often grounded in reality) that Netanyahu and his government ministers are trying to scuttle his initiatives by inveigling themselves into domestic partisan conflict in the US."

Marshall won't say it directly, but this feels like desperation about the 2014 elections.

What a distinction: "least-liked pair of candidates for any governor’s race in the past 10 years."

It's Florida's Charlie Crist and Rick Scott.

"Dating website OKCupid has revealed that it experimented on its users, including putting the 'wrong' people together to see if they would connect."

The whole thing is an experiment, but here's the revelation:
In one experiment, the site took pairs of "bad" matches between two people... and told them they were "exceptionally good" for each other.... "Not surprisingly, the users sent more first messages when we said they were compatible," Christian Rudder, one of the founders of OKCupid, said in a blog post on the company's research and insights blog.
Further experiments suggested that "when we tell people they are a good match, they act as if they are. Even when they should be wrong for each other." The company later revealed the correct scores to the participants.

In another experiment, OKCupid ran profiles with pictures and no profile text for half of its test subjects, and vice versa for the rest. The results showed that people responded solely to the pictures. For potential daters, Mr Rudder said that "your actual words are worth… almost nothing."

Happy birthday to Professor Irwin Corey. He's 100 years old today.

Here's video of him performing in 2011, when he was 97:

And the video below comes from way back in 2007, when the President of the United States was George Bush, and Professor Irwin Corey looked much more than 5 years younger. He criticizes the President in both videos, and perhaps the years weigh very heavily as you approach 100 — I'm saying "you," but do you really think you'll have the opportunity to feel the increasing weight of the years leading up to 100? — but perhaps for a true left-winger like Professor Irwin Corey, the experience of disappointment in Obama hurts far more than getting what you knew you were going to hate from George Bush.

From Wikipedia:

July 28, 2014

Professor Irwin Corey is about to turn 100.

I love Professor Irwin Corey, and I hope this birthday — on Tuesday — gets the attention it deserves. The Daily News had a story yesterday with some great recent pictures of this man who looked old when he was on TV in the 1960s.
Asked how it feels to be nearing 100, Corey deadpanned: “I’m going to write a book — ‘The first 100 years are the hardest.’”
Some video here

"Anyone born a man retains male privilege in society; even if he chooses to live as a woman — and accept a correspondingly subordinate social position..."

"... the fact that he has a choice means that he can never understand what being a woman is really like. By extension, when trans women demand to be accepted as women they are simply exercising another form of male entitlement."

From "What Is a Woman?/The dispute between radical feminism and transgenderism," by Michelle Goldberg.

Petting the dog.


It's Ranger.

"Why do white people fixate on the 'Westernizing' elements of ethnic plastic surgery?"

"While working on this article, I found that people of all races had principled reservations about and passionate critiques of these practices. But the group that most consistently believed participants were deluding themselves about not trying to look white were, well, white people. Was that a symptom of in-group narcissism — white people assuming everyone wants to look like them? Or is it an issue of salience — white people only paying attention to aesthetics they already understand? Or is white horror at ethnic plastic surgery a cover for something uglier: a xenophobic fear of nonwhites 'passing' as white, dressed up as free-to-be-you-and-me political correctness?"

Scott Walker's ad about Mary Burke's family's company — Trek — gets the numbers right.

PolitiFact verifies.

Here's the ad:

Other things to think about: Should Walker concentrate ads on Mary Burke's family's company? Which voters are susceptible to arguments based on Trek's use of Chinese labor to makes its bikes? Which voters are susceptible to the argument that Mary Burke would make a good governor because her family has a business that makes great bikes? If I'm riding around on my Trek bike, am I a rolling ad for Mary Burke?

ADDED: Instapundit says:
[A]ttacking Dems on hypocrisy that will hurt them with their base is an excellent turnout-reducing strategy. People bothered by these ads won’t vote for Walker, necessarily, but they’ll be less likely to show up at all. Same reason people should go after Democratic officeholders who pay women less than men.
And as I said in the comments a few hours ago:
I think Walker is trying to deprive Mary Burke of an argument she wants to use: That Walker didn't keep his "promise" to cause X number of jobs to come into being in Wisconsin.

It's his preemptive "Yeah, you're worse."
As you can see from this Green Bay Gazette report, Burke does use that argument. Democrats are fixated on 250,000 as the number of jobs Walker promised. PolitiFact is keeping track of the statistics here.

Based on the average American man's waist measurement, the top-selling size pants should be 38, 39 or even 40.

But it's 34, and I think you know why.

No, it's not that the bigger men get the less likely they are to buy pants.

It's that men don't wear pants at the waist level. The belly floats free, above the so-called waistband.

"The East Bay School is not a traditional boys school, aimed at reinforcing typical ideas of what it means to 'be a man.'"

"The school's director, Jason Baeten, says that the goal is instead to create an educational space where boys can make mistakes, be vulnerable and learn to be self-reliant."
Baeten says, "We all came together and decided what we wanted our graduates to look like, what qualities we wanted them to have. So, things like: respects women, flexible, resilient — all of these."

One of the ways that the school is trying to upend tradition is by re-inventing shop class for the 21st century. In fact, they don't even call it "shop." At the East Bay School for Boys, it goes by a different name: "work."

David Clifford, the school's director of innovation, explains why: "We moved away from the language of shop because it has a history behind it, where for decades now, shop has been considered second or third tier in education, where first tier is academics."
This school is in Berkeley, California, and the report is from NPR.

How to trick me into reading another article about Frida Kahlo.

Tease it with the line "Is she the queen of the selfie?"

I refuse to link to that. I'm annoyed at myself for clicking.

And that on a morning when I actually read — more or less — an article written by a philosopher about a book written by a philosopher about — more or less — selfies.

If I were more self-absorbed, I'd hate myself.

Who wins in an argument over the meaning of a word?

The word is "feminism."

ADDED: The problem on display is:

1. There are widely shared equality goals but these have been met, leaving nothing more to do under the banner "feminism."

2. Some people want other things, and the term is useful to them, so they use it actively, demanding things that are off-putting to a lot of people.

3. Those who were fine with the widely shared goals become conflicted about the term, but not enough to successfully take the definition back.

4. A small group of those who are put off want to make a thing out of disowning the term.

5. Most people don't bother one way or another. They move on, following their individual lives, which is good feminism. Or that's what I'd say if I had to have an argument about it, but I don't.

Do we have to talk about talking about impeachment?

Who started it?

Who benefits?

"A woman's bloodcurdling screams as an iceberg collapsed near her boat has seriously split web opinion."

The "Run, Rick, go - GO!" viral video.