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."
- "When Lou swims naked in the river, he begins to 'run his long, ridged tongue up and down her wet back.'"
- "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..."
- "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...."
- "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."
- "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."
- "Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh and husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth II for more than 70 years, has died at age 99."
- "I evaluate my potential dates based on eight traits. Five of those traits I try to learn about before the date."
- "The boars snooze in people’s paddling pools. They snuffle across the lawns. They kick residents’ soccer balls and play with their dogs.
- Daffodils.
- "A neopronoun can be a word a created to serve as pronoun without expressing gender, like 'ze' and 'zir.'"
- "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: 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. |
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." 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. |
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." (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.) |
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." 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. |
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.) |
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:
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:
AND: Amadeus 48 emails:
|
Posted: 09 Apr 2021 05:29 AM PDT Entertainment Weekly reports.
|
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. |
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.'" To comment, email me here. FROM THE EMAIL: Temujin writes:
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. |
Posted: 08 Apr 2021 08:12 PM PDT |
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:
|
Posted: 08 Apr 2021 05:05 PM PDT Writes a reader named Chris.
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. |
You are subscribed to email updates from Althouse. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.