Wednesday, May 23, 2018

Why Are There No Public / Academic Arguments For The Standard View of Transgenderism?

This, by Kathleen Stock, is pretty good.
It raises an issue that I've meant to discuss here for quite awhile...maybe I have discussed it. I'm not sure. It's certainly implicit in at least some stuff I've said. It's this:
   Why are there no public defenses of the standard, common-sense view of transgenderism?
   To explain the point as briefly as possible: the vast majority of people don't believe that (to use a well-known example) Caitlyn (nee Bruce) Jenner is a woman. At least a very large percentage of academicians don't believe that Jenner is a woman. A majority of philosophers don't believe that Jenner is a woman. And yet no one will say that in print or in public.
Read more »

Larry Correia Gets A Right Good Social Justicing

Part of the problem is that this sort of insanity is just part of the culture now. Sci-fi is absolutely (as we'd say back home) et up with it.
   You don't have to know much about Larry Correia to tell that he's no *ist. (I'm not going to list all the trendy versions of -ism the left is on about; it just takes up too much room.) I've read three or four of his books, and a couple of his blog posts. That dude just seems flat-out WYSIWYG. And what you see is: he's just a dude who writes books about shooting monsters. There's no pretense to him that I can detect. He's the target of PC shrieking because he doesn't buy into the crazy left's craziness. He's a libertarian of some kind who, very obviously, just doesn't give a damn what you look like, who your parents were, or who you boink. I'm on those same pages with him, obviously.
Read more »

RIP Philip Roth

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

Andrew Dodson, Driven To Suicide By The Ctrl-Left For Participating In the C'ville "Unite The Right" Rally

   Andrew Dodson was an attendee of that march, where he was pepper sprayed directly in the eyes. Online footage shows him screaming out in what looks like excruciating pain. Afterwards, he is seen telling his attackers “I forgive you. I love you”, which is met with laughter and cries of ‘LOSER’ from his political adversaries as he walks away.
   Andrew Dodson, from everything I’ve managed to gather and watch of him, seemed to be a good man. He forgave his political adversaries, he was introspective, he took responsibility for himself and wanted desperately to engage in dialogue and make a positive impact on the world. When Trump said there were ‘very fine people on both sides’, I believe Andrew was one of them.
   He also was not alt-right. But even if he was, his death was not justified.
   Is this the ‘pure form’ of the far-left? Do the ‘moderates’ watch in silent approval as the ‘radicals’ carry out their bidding? Removing the opponents right to a private life, familial ties, employment and, ultimately, their right to life itself? I think I know the answer but I can’t quite bring myself to type it. Instead I will leave you with a quote from Andrew. His death should serve as a warning beacon to us. All of us.

The Dumbest Thing About PC You'll Read This Week: Rebecca Bratton Weiss Edition

Wow that's bad and stupid. Bad. Stupid. Stupid bad.
Eh, I suppose if these people could think clearly they wouldn't be defending political correctness. Still, it never ceases to amaze me how shitty these attempted defenses of the thing are. Shitty is one thing...but relentlessly's a whole 'nother thing.
I mean jeez, you'd think that if this were the best you could come up with it might make you rethink your position...wouldn't you?
I'm not going to refute this crap in detail. Or at least I'm going to try to resist the urge. Summer's here, and I've gotta get cracking on the stuff I actually get paid to write.

Dennis Prager vs. E. J. Dionne on Calling People Animals

Prager is right. Dionne is wrong. There's no question about it.
   Dionne is somebody I've, for many years, thought of as being on basically the right side. Prager is somebody I've, for many years, thought of as being basically on the wrong side. When the left has one of its spasms, you can expect to see otherwise fairly reasonable people start to make arguments that make no sense whatsoever--arguments that they'd never make under different conditions. Dionne, though intellectually rather a lightweight, obviously knows better than to write the things he wrote in that op-ed. Had Obama called MS-13 animals, Dionne would likely have cheered. His (and other progressives') sudden realization that calling people animals is the height of moral criminality is entirely grounded in the fact that it was Trump who made the relevant claim. Well...not entirely. They'd have cheered if he'd have claimed that everyone at the C'ville rally was an animal; they flipped their shit when he, in essence, said that some attendees weren't. The contemporary Klan is, of course, not in the same league as MS-13. But witness the differential treatment those two groups receive from the vanguard of the left.
   Anyway: it's perfectly fine to call bestial people animals. In fact, it's nearly obligatory to do so. Prager's right, Dionne's wrong.

Pronoun Creep: The Left Keeps Finding New Ways To Extend Its Pronoun Diktats

I hope nobody thinks that the left is going to be happy with mere informal, social control over our language-use--pronouns in particular. The logic of the left--or so it now seems to me--is to push toward ever-more-radical positions. And that includes: toward more overt, direct, and effective means of enforcement, including the law. Here's Volokh on the ABA's new rule that seems to mandate incorrect pronoun use by lawyers even during non-professional social activities and Bar Association activities.
Read more »

Monday, May 21, 2018

He Ain't Heavy

Dat mofo is some sharp sheet. Those canards make a big-ass difference.
That's a badass, sexy-ass plane, ya frogs.

Australia Considering Ban On Kid's Books That Include The Words 'Boy' And 'Girl'?

There's almost nothing Trump could do--short of whimsically starting a nuclear war--that could be as consequential as this kind of radical, cultural re-engineering bull. shit.
   I'm completely down with people thumbing their noses at the social enforcement of gender norms. Or any other such thing. I mean...fuck off with that weak shit, homes. People don't have to act like you want just because it's old.
   But this kind of attempt by halfwit, pseudo-or-semi-intellectual bureaucrats to re-engineer fundamental social conventions on the basis of fleeting fads that flit through what passes for the mind of the left...this is dangerous shit, my dudes. Very, very, very dangerous and fucked-up shit. If it comes down to the traditionalism of conservatives or the radical leftist revaluation of all better damn hope that the conservatives win. Because they are about 1/100th as insane as the lefties. And I have almost no sympathy for the right on this score.

According To Trumpistas, Mueller Has Concluded No Russian Collusion, Moved On To Obstruction, Hopes To Finish By 9/1/18

My relevant, half-assed predictions:
    Trump impeached by midterms: laughably wrong.
     No collusion: possibly right.
     Totally obstruction: ????

Goldberg Was Wrong About Peterson Wanting To Outlaw Makeup In The Workplace...But It Maybe Wasn't Her Fault

It seems that Vice (or somebody) cut the interview to give a false impression of Peterson's view, and Goldberg may very well have seen the misleading version.
Here's a part of the uncut version, in which he unequivocally rejects the view Goldberg attributed to him.

Trump (?): "People Will Just Believe You; You Just Tell Them And They Believe You"

This is worth a read.*
   Money (alleged) Trump quote, with reference to lying about his t.v. ratings:
People will just believe you; you just tell them and they believe you.
   This alleged quote sounds exactly like something Trump would say--in both form and content. And it's in keeping with the other things he was saying at the same event: he just does what he wants, and gets away with it. ("I just start kissing them;" "grab 'em by the pussy.") Anyone who actually does such things deserves a right good ass-kicking. Obviously.
   Compare this to the bullshit about "animals" and MS-13, or "all Mexicans are rapists," or the allegations that he claimed that the two sides in Charlottesville were morally equivalent. The stuff reported by Bush is substantial and largely verifiable. It's very likely true. I mean, we know he claimed to sexually assault women. And we nearly know that he actually did it--like Bush, I don't have much doubt that the allegations against him are true.
   We also know that he's a monumental bullshitter and liar. We know this. Given that knowledge, it kinda doesn't matter that he seems to have admitted it. But, still and all, I'd bet money that he did.
[Via Kevin Drum]

*Despite its references to "gender experts" and God...two equally fictional beings, IMO. Well...Rebecca Riley-Cooper is an exception. She's an actual expert--she isn't spewing popomo talking points, nor advancing a brainless, anti-rational, political agenda.

Dionne: "No One Is An Animal"

Counterpoint: everyone is an animal.*

Read more »

Sunday, May 20, 2018

Jay Cost: "Taming The Imperial Presidency"

Testify, brother.

Support For Secession By State

Y'all crazy.
Though...California...that one's not really such a terrible idea when you think about it. I'm not saying you guys should secede...I'm just saying that if you do, don't let the screen door hit your ass on the way out.
But, seriously, WTF is, like, Illinois thinking?

Infinity War

Finally saw it. How do you not like it, with basically the whole Marvel Cinematic Universe in it?
Way too much Guardians of the Galaxy, though.
I still haven't seen Black Panther, but I thought that the Wakanda scenes in IW were freaking great.

Munk Debate: Political Correctness (Peterson/Fry vs. Goldberg/Dyson)

Hard to tell, given my evangelical anti-PCism, but it seemed to me that Peterson/Fry wiped the floor with Goldberg/Dyson. According to before-and-after polls they changed a lot of minds...though I'm not sure how seriously to take those things.
   Dyson was just awful--he was basically the only representative of a fairly robust variety of PC. He's a bullshitter who went right for a racial ad hominem. Honestly, I can't remember him saying a single coherent thing. The preacherly cadence got old fast.
Read more »

Jordan Peterson Explains The "Enforced Monogamy" Thing

I thought this was pretty obviously what he meant.
Peterson: "My critics’ abject ignorance of the relevant literature does not equate to evidence of my totalitarian or misogynist leanings."

Libby Schaaf: "No, Mr. President, I Am Not Obstructing Justice"

Absolutely nothing in this piece in any way supports the claim that Schaaf did not obstruct justice.
My favorite bit:
under the Trump administration, undocumented residents are vilified as “dangerous criminals” or, as of last week — simply “animals.”
First, we've got the introduction of yet another advance in the march of progressive euphemisms: "undocumented residents." (In ten years or so, I expect the PC term to be "the only true Americans.") Then we get the intentionally-distorted 'animals' claim again.
   But most importantly: no argument whatsoever against the obstruction charge. I'm not a lawyer, obviously. For all I know the obstruction charge is easily-answered or even absurd. But nothing in this piece refutes the charge in any way.

Progressive Pseudoscience: "Why It Matters When The President Calls People, Even Violent Gang-Members, 'Animals'"

My God...does anybody actually believe this sort of nonsense? It has the stink of junk science all over it. Would anyone actually bet money that these results are replicable? I'd say wake me when there's a metastudy...but this sort of thing will never make it to that stage.

Saturday, May 19, 2018

George Will: Free Speech On Campus And Speech First vs. Michigan

Will is on fire.

Oh...uh...but remember...there's no free speech problem on campuses...

Friday, May 18, 2018

The Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect


How Long Until Trump Leaves Office?

"Transgendered" Dude Sues Spa Because Muslim Woman Refuses to Wax His Junk

Oh, Canada...
   Hmmm....the outcome here is likely to turn on who it is that's higher in the "progressive stack" it: (a) a dude pretending to believe that he is a woman? Or (b) an actual Muslim woman?
   I'm gonna guess (a). Transgenderism seems to be job 1 on the left right now. They've been almost unbelievably successful; they don't want to blink now. Their success depends largely on projecting the illusion of total confidence. If the sheeple are given any inkling that there might be room to question the eternal and unquestionable verity that some men are women, the whole house of cards could come crashing down. I mean, hell, when you've got even The Daily Wire saying that this person is "a transgender woman," you've basically won a complete victory.
   So, anyway, that's my guess: "transgender" dudes beat Muslim women in this heat of the victimolympics.
   (And, of course, in actual fact: the Muslim woman is in the right here--as is the business she works for. She's just tryna do her job. There's not a damn thing wrong with saying that you'll rip the hair off of women's crotches, but not men's.)

"Peaceful Human Waves" Of Palestinians Aim To Breach Fence Into Israel

I have to say, "peaceful human waves" is not a phrase that is really resonating with me.

Rolling Stone: "They're All MS-13 To Trump"

The Palestinians also get in there somehow...
Here's just one paragraph:
The central debate about whom Trump was truly describing was largely pointless. Whether or not he was referring directly to MS-13 with the word "animals," as he and his defenders insist – or to undocumented immigrants generally, using the gang as a placeholder – is beside the point. He chose to make that distinction the subject of his latest rage tweet Friday morning. Bigotry requires that the enemy be made out to be less than human, and Trump has long made use of blurry lines to criminalize entire groups of people. The president's alienating language about undocumented immigrants further served to make them targets for discrimination and violence, whether or not they are violent. And for those who are, robbing them of their humanity does not help reform them. The cop or the federal agent, following the president's lead, may think she or he is honoring the rest of us when classifying certain people as "animals." Perhaps they think it makes it easier to imprison or kill them. But it does us no favors as a society to pretend as though human beings are not capable of the very worst that we can imagine. Such talk is the stuff of genocide, not government.
To recap: 
It doesn't matter whether Trump said (a) members of MS-13 are animals or (b) all illegal immigrants are animals. Because either way, he's a bigot and intended to make someone out to be inhuman and to criminalize some group of people. Again: whether it was MS-13 or all illegal immigrants: not relevant. One way or another, he's trying to make all illegal immigrants targets for discrimination and violence. Even violent members of MS-13 who torture whole families to death should not be "robbed of their humanity" by the horrible, horrible crime of being metaphorically referred to as animals. I mean, that won't reform them, right? And what other goal could there be? Truth, obviously, doesn't matter. What if the police think Trump is telling them to kill all illegal immigrants, huh? Also, by calling them animals, Trump is pretending that humans can't be bad! But what about the Nazis? Once again, Trump is saying that Nazis are the best people ever. Which is racist, mostly because they were white. Bottom line: genocide.
Lemme try this once again:
You can criticize Trump without being a f*cking moron about it. 

Big Brother is Listening To Your Hatetunes

Eh, why waste time trying to say this in any other way: the left is against free expression.

   And the SPLC? Seriously? The fact that I even remember when the SPLC was a serious organization makes me feel old. And um...everybody out there is ok with GLAAD telling you what you get to listen to?
   Also: note how this is limited to "hate" directed against components of the progressive stack, as usual. It's not hate they're against. It's inconsistency with progressivism. Even casual words incite violence and/or constitute it don't try to make us distinguish those two things you fascist with your white Western straight male logic. And violence is only violence if it's directed at progressive-approved groups because violence isn't violence only violence + privilege = violence.
   Remember: only Nazis support the first two amendments, Nazi.
This is Moral Majority / Tipper Gore 2.0. But this time it's coming from the left, and so has the collective weight of our cultural overseers behind it.
   When such bullshit comes from the right, opposition and ridicule are obligatory; when from the left, they are, of course, forbidden.


Those headlines were everywhere.
They're still everywhere.
I didn't bite, as you might note.
This was "All Mexicans Are Rapists" 2.0, and I'd have bet big money on that even without hearing what he'd actually said. If you wouldn't have...well...
"Our indecent president calls people seeking refuge ‘animals.’ It's hate speech."
"In reference to ‘animals,’ Trump evokes an ugly history of dehumanization"(Note that, in its eagerness to bash Trump, the WaPo can't even write its misleading headlines worth a damn anymore. English, jeez, it's a thing...)
"Trump Refers To Immigrants As Animals. Again." (Huffpo... It's cheating, but there I did it. There are plenty of others to choose from, though.)
   So...I didn't know what he'd said...but I knew that he didn't say that all illegal immigrants are animals. The NYT grudgingly retracts its previous comments with this headline:
"Trump Defends 'Animals' Remark, Saying It Referred To MS-13 Gang Members"
(my emphasis).
   Again, I say: In a little over two years, Trump will be gone. The media (and the rest of our crack-brained cultural superstructure) isn't going anywhere anytime soon. I'm not urging anybody to compare degrees of awfulness here. I'm saying: ignore Trump just for a few seconds. Spare a thought or two for the shameless bias and irrationality of the mainstream media. (Not to mention the train wreck of the secondary-, tertiary-, and quaternary-stream media like HuffLOLPost.)
   I mean, this is a perfectly clear case, with a determinate answer, in which the anti-Trump claims are absurd on their face, not coherent with the actual evidence, and can be easily falsified. And the media can't even control itself in cases like this.
   Also: y'know...'animals' is a perfectly fair and reasonable characterization of MS-13. Some people are denying even that

Thursday, May 17, 2018

Progressives Contra Free Speech: "Is The First Amendment Too Broad?"

One Noah Berlatsky and a couple of critical race theorists argue that we'd be better off without that pesky First Amendment.
Progressives have stopped flirting with Big Brother and have moved straight to heavy petting.

(Incidentally: does anybody know of anything in critical race theory that isn't utter bullshit?)