Friday, April 9, 2021

Althouse

Althouse

"I feel like it’s fucked up they have so much power they can get shoes cancelled. Freedom of expression gone out the window."

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 08:30 AM PDT

Said Lil Nas X, quoted in "Lil Nas X Satan Shoes will be recalled as part of settlement with Nike/Nike sued MSCHF Product Studio for trademark infringement over the black-and-red, devil-themed sneakers" (The Guardian). 

Can't you make shoes out of shoes — decorate them, bedazzle them — and then sell them? We won't get an official legal answer, because Lil Nas settled the case. Nike retains the threat of litigation over anyone who tries to use their shoes as a foundation for a fashion/art project. 

Lil Nas loses nothing other than the opportunity to fund litigation to establish the principle he speaks as though he cares about. But the shoes that were made — all 666 pairs of them — were sold in the first minute, and anyone who bought the shoes can now get a refund of the purchase price — $1018 — but no one will do that, because they're notorious, and they are clearly more valuable now that they've become so famous.  I see on eBay that a pair recently sold for $5,000, so only an ignoramus would participate in the recall.

Did anyone ever really believe that devil-themed sneakers were outrageous? Kids wear devil costumes at Halloween. The devil is not a big enough villain to make anything edgy in 2021... or in 1951. 

But Big Sneaker put its foot down, and ooh!, it's almost illicit to possess these things.

***

There is no comments section anymore, but you can email me here. Unless you say otherwise, I will presume you'd enjoy an update to this post with a quote from your email.

"When Lou swims naked in the river, he begins to 'run his long, ridged tongue up and down her wet back.'"

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 09:26 AM PDT

"The bear is 'like a dog, like a groundhog, like a man: big.' One night, by the fire, he begins to lick her with a tongue 'capable of lengthening itself like an eel,' and 'like no human being she had ever known it persevered in her pleasure. When she came, she whimpered and the bear licked away her tears.'  Lou becomes lyrical and hazy with love for the bear; a sort of delirium descends on her. She wants him to devour her, but he is good, and gentle, 'once laid a soft paw on her naked shoulder, almost lovingly.' Can Lou get what she wants – from a man, or a bear? Eventually, the bear, by sheer dint of being of a bear, injures her.... When Bear was first published [in 1976], to great acclaim and some controversy, the feminist and women's liberation movements had been burgeoning for some years in North America and Europe.... Just how linked to sex should feminism be? And what kind of sex, for that matter? The 'sex wars' of the 80s were on the horizon, and heterosexual feminists were grappling with men as objects of desire who can nonetheless always pose a threat. [The author] is playful, slyly winking on these questions; riffing, for example, on age-old misogynistic associations of women's genitals with fish, as when Lou buys fish for the bear, which repels her."

From "Animal attraction: Bear, the controversial story of one woman's sexual awakening/First published in the 70s, Marian Engel's novel about a lonely librarian's relationship with a bear interrogates boundaries between men and women, humans and animals" (The Guardian). 

That's on the occasion of a new edition of the book, but I'm only seeing an old (expensive) edition on Amazon for us United Statesians.  

From the quotes in the article, I'd say that the book is comic erotica. 

I like the question "Just how linked to sex should feminism be? And what kind of sex, for that matter?" The answer to the second question can't be with a bear. But it can be literary fantasy.

This gets my "pornography" tag because I want the tags to be neither too broad nor too narrow. I collect things that are useful to think of together, and that includes all sorts of thoughts about why the things the tag gathers together are different from each other.

*** 

There is no comments section anymore, but you can email me here. Unless you say otherwise, I will presume you'd enjoy an update to this post with a quote from your email.

"These hefty sums are a far cry from how lethal injections were initially envisaged. The use of medical drugs to kill prisoners was pioneered in 1977..."

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 07:47 AM PDT

"... in Oklahoma where officials were convinced it would be both humane and cheap – they predicted it would cost only $10 per execution." 

 From "Revealed: Republican-led states secretly spending huge sums on execution drugs/Documents obtained by the Guardian show three states paying astronomical amounts to skirt – almost certainly illegally – a ban on pharmaceuticals for lethal injections" (The Guardian). 

(To comment, ou can email me here. I will presume you'd enjoy an update to this post with a quote from your email, so let me know if you don't.)

"A software mistake caused a Tui flight to take off heavier than expected as female passengers using the title 'Miss' were classified as children, an investigation has found...."

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 07:36 AM PDT

"An update to the airline's reservation system while its planes were grounded due to the coronavirus pandemic led to 38 passengers on the flight being allocated a child's 'standard weight' of 35kg as opposed to the adult figure of 69kg. This caused the load sheet – produced for the captain to calculate what inputs are needed for take-off – to state that the Boeing 737 was more than 1,200kg lighter than it actually was.... It was programmed in an unnamed foreign country where the title 'Miss' is used for a child and 'Ms' for an adult female." 

The Guardian reports.

69kg is 152 pounds. Think that's a good guess about what a female adult weighs? 35kg is 77 pounds. That's not that low.

"Even though he has not yet announced that he is running, and I certainly hope he does, I am giving my Complete and Total Endorsement to Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin."

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 07:35 AM PDT

"He is brave, he is bold, he loves our Country, our Military, and our Vets. He will protect our Second Amendment, and everything else we stand for. It is the kind of courage we need in the U.S. Senate. He has no idea how popular he is. Run, Ron, Run!" 

Said Donald Trump, the former President of the United States, quoted in Politico. 

Wisconsin is one of Democrats best pickup opportunities on the Senate map after President Joe Biden carried it in November. But Johnson won an upset victory in 2016 for a second term despite being considered a longshot in his rematch against former Sen. Russ Feingold. In a twist, some Democrats are hoping he runs again after Johnson has aligned himself with Trump and made headlines for controversial statements about the election and the insurrection at the Capitol. 

Who might the Democrats run in Wisconsin? That's the question I was trying to answer when I dug up this Trump article. Ah, here:

Several Democrats are already in the race, including Outagamie County Executive Tom Nelson and Milwaukee Bucks Executive Alex Lasry. State Treasurer Sarah Godlewski and Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes are also seen as potential candidates.
(If you'd like to comment, email me here. Unless you say otherwise, I presume you'd enjoy an update to this post with a quote from your email and with the use of your first name only.)

"As the only Asian American woman on the academic faculty, I can’t imagine any other faculty member would be treated with this kind of disrespect and utter lack of due process."

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 06:57 AM PDT

Writes Yale Law School professor Amy Chua. Megyn Kelly reacts: At Lawyers, Guns, and Money, lawprof Paul Campos goes on the attack in a blog post that begins "Rules are for the little people, chapter infinity":
Meanwhile Chua and [her husband lawprof Jed] Rubenfeld continue to get paid collectively close to a million bucks a year to basically not do their jobs any more, but apparently being asked to at least avoid getting drunk around the kiddies is just too much to ask of our best and brightest.

I can't possibly know exactly what the facts are. I've read Chua's letter, and I don't think the law school has put out its version of the facts. As a law school professor, I was never someone who invited students to my home, so I tend to admire the lawprofs who do extend this kind of sociability to their students. I would find it very difficult to do, and I assume that, generally, students would love this kind of festivity. 

But I could imagine professors inviting students into their home for the wrong reasons. There could be the Harvey Weinstein of law professors. I visualize a continuum of motives for professorly parties, from unselfishly magnanimous to utterly monstrous. But where's the line on the continuum where the professor should know this isn't right and the law school should intervene and say no more parties for you? Why did Yale intervene? I think it intervened and entered into some sort of no-parties agreement with Chua and Rudenfeld, and now, it seems, the question is whether the agreement has been violated. That's the basic factual question here. I'm not looking at the agreement, but Chua does seem to say that she has continued to have students over to her house. 

In her letter (embedded in the tweet, above), Chua justifies what she did based on anti-Asian violence and racism. She's the Asian-American female law professor, and students in her diversity category need support, so... there's an implied exception to the agreement? Or... interpret the agreement properly, and there's no violation? I'd have to see the agreement and know what, exactly, she did. 

Does the agreement refer to "parties" and define parties? Is the law school dean following the students' interpretation of the agreement? Do the students even have the text of the agreement?

IN THE EMAIL: Tank writes:

Like you, I have no idea what actually happened or whether Chua is in the right. However, her use of the Asian Card immediately puts me off because it likely has no relation to the controversy, but is being used to shut people up.

I'd like to know more about all the "cards" that are getting played. What race(s) are the students who are complaining about her? Do the complaints have a racial element? Has the faculty relied on Chua to tend to the needs of Asian-American students? Does the school hold itself out as a paragon of diversity goodness because it has Chua, among others, on its faculty? There's a whole complicated context here, and Chua is fighting — frantically, or so it seems. 

ALSO IN THE EMAIL: Heartless Aztec writes:

As a retired teacher who pulled numerous semesters at the local community college 40+ years ago let me say what a grand idea it was then to have or go to the occasional parties where students and other faculty members were invited. We were all young and it was a very different time - a very different world. By 2015 when I retired that world had changed and there was no way that any students would ever be in my home for any reason or that I would ever attend a party where they were invited in any capacity other than officially school sanctioned. 20 year old students were for the most part immature children in 2015 and fledgling adults in 1980.

AND: Amadeus 48 emails: 

If we take Amy Chua's letter at face value, she doesn't know what she did " wrong," because no one has told her. Why would a law school take a bow towards due process by informing of the accusations? Her description of the zoom call is incomplete. Why did she enter into any agreement? Isn't all this fallout from her friendship with Brett Kavanaugh? Didn't some students make accusations against her husband, Jed Rubenfeld, based on wrongspeak? Wasn't she accused of coaching female interview candidates to glam it up a bit for Judge Kavanaugh? Read the article in The Guardian about that one. Not a single source named. I suspect that there are factions at Yale Law School-- students, administrators, and faculty--who are out to get Ms. Chua and her husband. But I am sure there is more to the story.

"Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh and husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth II for more than 70 years, has died at age 99."

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 05:29 AM PDT

Entertainment Weekly reports.

"I evaluate my potential dates based on eight traits. Five of those traits I try to learn about before the date."

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 05:31 AM PDT

"The remaining three I think about after the date. Before the first date, I try to determine the following: Does he make me laugh via text? Does he live in LA? Does he like his job? Is he down to go backpacking? Will he get on the phone? After the first date, I ask myself: Does he like himself? Is he curious? Is he kind? It's a little crazy, imperfect and, yes, judgmental. My systematic approach may well be weeding out someone who could make me my happiest self. But the leaving-it-up-to-fate alternative of relying on chemistry, physical attraction and serendipity haven't led me to that person either. I would prefer to have something to work on. Tasks to do and cards to sort, as opposed to waiting around in Whole Foods for some dude and me to magically lock eyes as we reach for the same carton of oat milk...." 

From "My Ridiculous Dating System Totally Works!/There's just one catch" by Alex Kruger (NYT). 

I was going to leave out the subtitle. It detracts from the excerpt I chose. It's read-the-whole-thing bait... but I'll just tell you, the catch is that the person who checks all your boxes might not want you. Actually, I don't like the first part of the headline either. It's too gushy, and it wrongly makes you think the system isn't good. But it's fine. Kruger is trying to save himself from pursuing mere physical attraction, though he doesn't clearly say that. 

***

There is no comments section anymore, but you can email me here. Unless you say otherwise, I will presume you'd enjoy an update to this post with a quote from your email.

"The boars snooze in people’s paddling pools. They snuffle across the lawns. They kick residents’ soccer balls and play with their dogs.

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 06:56 AM PDT

"They saunter down the sidewalks and sleep in the streets. Some eat from the hands of humans, and they all eat from the trash.... 'It became like an everyday thing,' said Eugene Notkov, 35, a chef who lets his dog play with the boars that putter around the local parks. 'They're a part of our city'.... Bumping into one is 'like seeing a squirrel.'...'I wish we could all in Israel learn to live like they live in Haifa,' said Edna Gorney, a poet, ecologist and lecturer at the University of Haifa. 'It's an example of coexistence — not only between Arabs and Jews, but also between humans and wildlife.'... 'They are controlling the streets now,' said Assaf Schechter, 43, a port worker confronted recently by a boar on his porch. 'It's a very crazy situation.'... 'At night, I would go out, after a drink, and recycle the beer,' Professor Malkinson said. 'It's two for the price of one — you fertilize the trees and you try to deter the wild boars... Essentially the conflict is between those who oppose having wild boars in the city and those who don't... It's not an ecological problem... It's a social problem.'"

From "Where Boars Hog the Streets Groups of boars have become an unavoidable presence in Haifa/Some human residents are charmed, but others are annoyed or frightened and now carry sticks on walks" (NYT) 

To comment, email me here.

FROM THE EMAIL: Temujin writes: 

I've been told that Haifa is a beautiful, laid back city. Never heard a thing about the boars. Along the Mediterranean and probably in the rest of Israel, and indeed the world, boars are shot, for food or to protect people and crops. Homer told us of Odysseus getting gored by a battle with a boar, leaving him with a lifelong scar. This has been a battle between humans and boars for eons. In Tuscany, boars can destroy vineyards overnight. So...hunting parties go out to kill off boars. And it's served as main entrees on menus all over the world.

But it'll be a problem, if it is not already for Haifa. Feral pigs breed constantly and in huge numbers. Boars are levels more dangerous. Haifa is clearly laid back. And we know from our own experiences here in the US what happens to cities when your policies get too laid back. Things that were on the fringes start to overtake the daily pattern of life. And soon they are no longer a talking point, or cute, or 'quirky'. Just annoying and dangerous and tend to change the face of your city.

Haifa might have to think about how they handle food waste and start featuring Boar steaks, stews, and other features on local menus.

But it's pork! They can't eat it. The Jews can't eat it and the Muslims can't eat it either.

AND: Mike emails:

Well, if you believe Wikipedia (and who doesn't!) the city is 14% Christian. For them, the offer of free pork chops might appeal.

I'm not an expert of the scriptures, but I'm going to guess that the Christians would also have to do all the food prep work.

Daffodils.

Posted: 08 Apr 2021 08:12 PM PDT

IMG_3439

"A neopronoun can be a word a created to serve as pronoun without expressing gender, like 'ze' and 'zir.'"

Posted: 09 Apr 2021 06:32 AM PDT

"A neopronoun can also be a so-called 'noun-self pronoun,' in which a pre-existing word is drafted into use as a pronoun. Noun-self pronouns can refer to animals — so your pronouns can be 'bun/bunself' and 'kitten/kittenself.' Others refer to fantasy characters — 'vamp/vampself,' 'prin/cess/princesself,' 'fae/faer/faeself' — or even just common slang, like 'Innit/Innits/Innitself.'... For those unfamiliar with the culture surrounding neopronouns right now, it's likely impossible to distinguish between what's playful, what's deeply meaningful and what's people being mean.... 'I'm not going to call u kitty/kittyself or doll/dollself just bc u think its cool,' one TikToker wrote in a video caption. 'Pronouns are a form of identity not an aesthetic.' But what's the difference between an aesthetic and an identity anyway?... [A] social media bio will often include a link to an identity résumé on Carrd, often with a pronoun usage guide. (One sample: 'Bug likes bugs.' 'Those things belong to Bug.' 'Bug wants to work by Bugself.')... The neopronoun community comprises mostly internet-native young people, and is agile when it comes to facing down criticism and mockery. Social media posts affirming the validity of neopronoun identities are a constant refrain: 'If you use neopronouns, you are extremely valid and I love you,' one person wrote on Twitter."

From "A Guide to Neopronouns/Are you a person, place or thing? We have good news" by Ezra Marcus (NYT). 

If you want to make a comment, you simply email me here. Unless you say otherwise, I will presume you'd enjoy an update to this post with a quote from your email. I note that the NYT article doesn't allow comments on this column, and it's not hard to figure out why. 

I can imagine what the comments would look like on this post if I were still allowing unmoderated comments. I think many would be the same things people have said repeatedly when the subject is transgender persons. My posts are always about something I haven't written about before, so I want comments that I haven't already seen on earlier posts. There's a specific subject here — creative pronouns. 

It's one thing to express yourself with statements about the idiosyncratic pronouns you prefer, but it's unkind to overburden other people with the need to remember and use such things. At some point, you go beyond expressing yourself and are controlling the expression of others. Are you having fun and also denying others the freedom to find it funny? 

The discussion in the NYT column is almost entirely focused on the feelings of the person who is declaring neopronouns. What about the people who are expected to do the work of incorporating neopronouns into their speech (and who, apparently, may suffer shunning if they mistake it for a joke or won't or can't adapt their speech to cater to special pronoun needs)? 

Grammar is already hard enough. Lots of people have trouble avoiding mistakes just trying to speak standard English.

FROM THE EMAIL: A guy named Guy writes: 

My name is my pronoun, always has been. Wouldn't have it any other way. :)

When I was a boy, it would cause me some confusion when someone would yell, "Hey Guy!", but mean somebody else.

Later I encountered the opposite: My girlfriend, who had very pretty long blonde hair, tried to get my attention from a hotel balcony. "Hey, Guy!" Every male on the floor below turned to her, looking like they were hoping she was calling to them. It gave us a good laugh, later.

"You might be getting tired of hearing about the Great Comments Decision of 2021 but here are my two cents after thinking about it for the past few days."

Posted: 08 Apr 2021 05:05 PM PDT

Writes a reader named Chris.

I've been following your blog for a long time having come over from Instapundit probably in the early 2000's. I'm not a commenting kind of person but I do read a lot of them. I love it when people who are knowledgeable about the article or post weigh in and add value to the discussion. That is what a great comments section can do.

Lately I've been seeing both in your comment section and others something I came to recognize back in the 1990's.

I used to watch the old PBS MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour show. They would do a 10 or 15 minute news summary and then dig deeper into three or four issues with experts or panel discussions. After many years of watching I got bored with the show and after thinking about it realized it was because they had the same cast of experts on the panels year after year. I now could predict almost perfectly what I was going to hear on any issue once I knew who was on the panel. I stopped watching after that happened.

Your comments section was in the same place. The same list of characters who repeated the same arguments. I found myself scrolling by many comments once I recognized the names because I knew what they were going to say. This dynamic, far more than any right/left political considerations, is what was greatly reducing the value of the comments for me.

The main value I was still seeing in the discussions was when people from across the country reported their experiences. I will miss that. It was a great way to understand a bit more about what was happening in other parts of America.

But it would be easy to make the case that the negatives in the comments vastly outweighed this particular positive. It is kind of sad that I see people who want to blame the closure of your comments on their political enemies on the "right" or the "left." Not everything has to be political and not everything you dislike is caused by the other side.

I grew up in a time when people could disagree politically and still be friends and neighbors. We had better figure out how to do that again and remember we are all Americans or we are headed for some very dangerous places. I intend to keep reading your blog as long as you are interested in writing it. Not because I agree with everything you write, but because you offer something I don't see in the media or other blogs. And rather than try to define what that is I'll just call it cruel neutrality.

Thanks, Chris. 

If you have comments on this (or another post), you can email me here. I love the way the email approach is working, and I hope you like the many updates on today's posts: here, here, here, here, and here.

Chris says he loves the comments "when people who are knowledgeable about the article or post weigh in and add value to the discussion." That might be exactly the kind of thing that readers will submit by email. I have high hopes that this email approach will make everything better. I'm feeling very positive about the response in the email. I stop and read email when it's good for me, and the quality of what I'm receiving is very high.

at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

What makes an Instant Coffee "Premium"?

It's in the beans and packing process͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ...