Category Archives: Politics

The Toddler openly sides with Putin against the Ukraine

“President Trump called on Ukraine to replace Volodymyr Zelensky as its leader and piled pressure on Kyiv to stop airstrikes against Russian oil refineries, a day after the U.S. leader announced a deal to boost Moscow’s diesel exports. 

“I think it’s time for Ukraine to get a new president,” Trump told reporters on Saturday, blaming Zelensky for Russia’s continuing war on the country—and Kyiv’s airstrikes for high diesel prices in the U.S. and worldwide. “He better damn well stop,” Trump said.”

No surprise. The Toddler’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, recently tried brokering peace — diplomacy for which he has no qualifications other than being the Toddler’s family — and said Ukraine ruined the deal by not agreeing to give up land to Russia. Imagine that, the Ukraine doesn’t want to give Russia what Russia can’t obtain by force. Needless to say, any promises Russia makes in return won’t be worth the paper they’re written on. However ending the war would allegedly benefit some of Kushner’s cronies, much like his envoy work in the Middle East. Given Kushner recommended not aggressively testing for covid during the pandemic because it would hit blue states worse, it wouldn’t be surprising if he considered dollars for him, defeat for Ukraine a fair deal.

And I’m sure from the White House’s perspective (and probably Republicans), having Putin recreate the old Soviet sphere of control as he wants to do would work out great. The Toddler’s National Security Strategy lists Western Europe as our greatest security threat — too many nonwhite immigrants, too much democracy, not enough power in far-right hands. White supremacists and fascists would be so much easier to deal with. Putin in charge would be, too.

I imagine Putin sees European democracy in the same light. Recent right-wing success in East Germany and a strong showing for the French far right may not be a natural outgrowth of those countries’ politics (though they might be, I admit) — after all, Elon Musk works to promote the far right in Europe. The Toddler administration unashamedly pushed for Viktor Orban to stay in power in Hungary and punished Brazil after convicting former president Bolsonaro for attempting a coup.

Game recognizes game. The Toddler undoubtedly understands someone like Putin or Bolsonaro better than he ever will Barack Obama or Hilary Clinton. Plus there are advantages in dealing with people who have no legal restraints on their actions: if Putin wants to throw a billion the Toddler’s way, who’s going to stop him? And these right-wing movements are all misogynist and white supremacist, which makes them compatible with the American right wing. It’s a win, except for Ukrainians and decent Americans. And American soldiers: Putin supports Iran which has injured hundreds of our military yet the Toddler’s still in Putin’s corner.

Lawyers, Guns and Money says the Toddler still has enough levers to pull that pressuring Ukraine might work out well for Russia, bad for Ukraine. I hope it’s not so. Certainly he’s getting frustrated, snarling to a reporter that of course there’s a ceasefire — he told them “you agree” so that’s that. Yeah, right.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Yes, American medicine has problems. MAHA is not the cure

I recently read Caroline Criado Pérez’ Invisible Women (review next weekend) and it’s a good reminder that destructive as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is to American healthcare, the system has plenty of problems. Particularly concerning women. Doctors who don’t listen to women talking about their pain. The lack of research on women (the assumption is the generic male body can stand for all human beings) and the lack of interest in research. Cutting off the clitoris because it’s useless (supposedly).

The trouble is, Kennedy ain’t interested in fixing any of that, any more than he is in improving access to healthcare. He’s in a tradition of crackpots and frauds going back to the colonial era — and at least back then, they had solid reasons for distrusting medicine (bleeding as a universal cure, anyone?). For all its flaws, medicine is light-years beyond that now and America is much, much healthier than it’s ever been. There are potential cures out there that could make us even healthier (for example. And another example. And another). The way to improve the system isn’t by going back to some non-existent golden age of health. It’s like the John Birch Society ranting that fluoridation is a communist plot: whatever problems fluoridated water may pose (I have heard people argue there are some), that is not one of them (as historian Richard Hofstadter put it many years ago). Similarly, RFK fighting vaccines and Dr. Oz yanking people off Obamacare are not going to fix any problems with American healthcare. They’re making things worse. And some MAHA voters are angry.

Writing on her substack and in Mother Jones, Jill Filipovic argues MAHA voters are far from a mindless anti-vax block, that their priorities aren’t anti-vax but “fewer ultraprocessed foods, food dyes, forever chemicals, microplastics, and pesticides, and more physical movement.” The Toddler administration’s support for deregulating pesticides, plans to repeal limits on forever chemicals in drinking water — these put MAHA women (the movement is predominantly women) votes up for grabs. Dems can seize them!

But can they? It was Biden’s administration that set the limits on forever chemicals Republicans want to repeal; that obviously didn’t help them. Filipovic sees MAHA as women with legit concerns about healthy food who got sucked down right-wing rabbit-holes. Perhaps she’s right and Dems can win them over by taking up Michelle Obama’s recommendation that kids should eat more fruits and vegetables. Or perhaps they’re too far down the rabbit-holes: NPR looks at one activist, Zen Honeycutt, who claims Girl Scout cookies have dangerous amounts of chemicals in them. The counter-argument is that the levels are too low to be a problem, and well within legal limits; Honeycutt replies the limits are too liberal.

While medical science can certainly be wrong, I’m inclined to trust the expert NPR interviewed over someone with no scientific credentials whose own organization sells Vaccine Detox Herbal Extract and who says the solution is to trust people we know who “have either used certain products or eaten certain foods and it’s worked for them. This is why we encourage in-person connections, and we should tune in to ourselves. Our bodies tell us what is not good for us. When you really tune in, when you eat something and it doesn’t work for you, you should trust that.”

Um, no. This is an argument I’ve seen elsewhere in various forms: “Fred Smith lived on junk food then axe-murdered 17 people, clear proof junk food makes you murderous” or “I knew a man lived to 105 eating nothing but pureed carrots!” A single example does not prove anything And people’s reactions to food can be heavily subjective. People’s bodies don’t warn them away from Girl Scout cookies — we love them. Some men obsess over eating a diet that’s as “manly” as possible (meat, glorious meat, it’s the food of warriors!). Lots of MAHA believers are convinced by people they know that raw milk is wonderful but the risks are vicious.

Honeycutt’s Vaccine Detox bilge raises another problem: MAHA voters who aren’t anti-vax per se may be perfectly willing to ally with them and support them — let’s face it, anyone who supports Kennedy supports an anti-vax agenda (Michael Hobbes makes the same point). I think there’s zero chance the health changes pro-vax MAHA wants will make up for the damage from that. He was always anti-vax, even when he lied to get his position (and he’s still lying). He and the Republican Party are also practicing eugenics. Their questioning of established science will not lead to miracle breakthroughs. If MAHA voters are okay with that stuff, I’m not sure they’re gettable, certainly not with policies that run in the opposite direction.

That said, I do think health reform would be good. Kamala Harris’ proposal to let Medicare cover home health care. Medicare for All or Medicare buy-in for all. Reversing Medicaid cuts that are shuttering maternity wards. Better research into women’s health. Criticizing industry-backed pharma or food research. Zohram Mamdani’s plans to open grocery stores in food deserts. These ideas are worth doing but like many good policies they may not convince voters to cross the aisle. Arguments they’re winnable voters are beginning to remind me of “if we just respect anti-abortion voters’ feelings, we can win them back for the Demnocrats!”

In other related news:

Sen. Mike Lee, Utah Republican nutjob, wonders if Anthony Fauci might be tied to the Russian disease outbreak.

The Toddler’s new press secretary, Katie Zacharia, lies that 80 percent of pregnant women have a miscarriage after getting the covid vaccine. She’ll fit right in with the current White House staff.

“The Department of Health and Human Services informed congressional appropriators earlier this year that it was moving about $12 million from its Office of Minority Health to help cover the ballooning cost of security for Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.”

Republicans are cutting the money that provides healthcare for 9/11 survivors. And still claiming Covid is not terribly infectious. And it’s still worse than they admit.

Changes to the National Science Foundation under the Toddler don’t bode well for research.

Cheryl Rofer on crackpot science and media coverage of the same: “The holders are cultish enough that they don’t need no stinkin’ science. And reporters coddle them. I think this is partly because many reporters have only a tenuous hold on science themselves.”

RFK cuts grants for autism research. After all, he already “knows” it’s vaccines.

Casey DeSantis (wife of Ron) is pushing ivermectin for cancer research.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

A documentary about evil and a late night show about Satan: movies viewed

THE HUNTING GROUND (2015) is the documentary, focusing on how colleges massively under-report rape and sexual assault so that parents will look on them as a safe space; admit that they have on -ampus rape and all the other schools that keep covering it up will have a winning advantage (you can imagine why I wound up watching this recently). If a student does complain, schools do their best to cover it up and avoid penalizing the man, even though they may be quite willing to expel students for cheating, drunkenness, etc. (Alexandra Brodsky’s Sexual Justice is good on this topic). None of which is a surprise to me but the focus is on individual victims, their stories, the optimism with which they entered freshman year … and their first person stories are unsettling and painful (which is good, I’d prefer never to become jaded). Like books I’ve read on racial injustice that came out during the Obama years, this ends on a note of optimism that change is coming — which makes a bitter pill after 11 years of the Toddler’s misogyny, Brett Kavanaugh, manosphere, etc. “A woman says no and you have sex — are you a rapist just because of that?”

LATE NIGHT WITH THE DEVIL (2023) is a found-footage film set during a 1977 Halloween episode of Jack Delroy’s (David Dastmalchian) late-night talk show Night Owls. Once considered a potential rival for Johnny Carson on The Tonight Show (for those too young to remember, Carson was the king of late night for decades), Delroy has been on a career spiral that makes cancellation inevitable. Now, however, he’s brought on an allegedly possessed little girl (Ingrid Torelli), the parapsychologist treating her (Laura Gordon) and a James Randi-style debunker (Ian Bliss). Will this explosive mix propel the ratings back up.

What we see is a supposed mix of the show that aired and backstage footage nobody’s ever seen. This suffers the usual weaknesses of found footage films: people having private conversations right in front of the camera, an ending that’s effective but also confusing. The ultimate fate of the debunker is annoying too. However the movie still works: Night Owls has the look and feel of the knockoff it’s supposed to be Dastmalchian is good in his role, the rest of the cast are solid and the story kept me interested. Worth catching if you want some horror for October. Thanks to Starfire Lounge for making me aware of this one. “We met before, among the big trees.”

All rights to image remain with current holders.

Leave a comment

Filed under Movies, Undead sexist cliches

Walking to the right until you end up in hell

A couple of years back, Fred Clark made the observation that the religious right does not police its right-wing boundary for heretical thought because there is no boundary: “No group or individual’s status within evangelicalism is suspect because they may be too white or too patriarchal or too nationalist or too conservative. But any member of the group who is perceived as insufficiently white or insufficiently patriarchal or insufficiently nationalist or insufficiently conservative is deemed “controversial,” and their status and legitimacy within the group is never a settled question.” Or as he put it a decade earlier, “‘Conservative’ occupies the same space in the evangelical imagination as “sexual purity” does. To say someone was “too conservative” — theologically, politically, socially — would be like their saying a bride was too much of a virgin.”

Thus while conservatives may not like the Jim Crow-loving slimeballs preaching that white male supremacy, an all-white America and the return of slavery would all be good things, the faith of those slimeballs is not in question. Liberals, no matter how much they may look to the Bible for guidance and inspiration, are always suspect.

Reading Clark’s Slacktivist blog recently, it struck me the same is true of secular conservatism. They may not like neo-Nazis (and I emphasize “may not”) but if Nazi support helps them crush liberals, there are no enemies to the right. And this is not good: “if there’s no boundary on the right, inevitably you spiral down to a state of Nazi allyship, as Roberts and slimy Catholic right-winger Adrian Vermeule are. We end up with Moms for Liberty and others quoting Hitler, Tucker Carlson interviewing Nazi right-wing star Nick Fuentes and Heritage’s Roberts defending Carlson — though as noted at the link, the heat from his own side was hot enough to make Roberts back down.” There are exceptions, but not enough. And it’s hard to oppose Nazis when there’s so much overlap in your goals: crushing women, crushing POC, crushing LGBTQ people.

Here’s an example. In the wake of Sen. Eric Schmitt embarrassing himself interrogating prosecutor Jack Smith, it came out that he’s being touted as a possible VP for when Vance runs for the Oval Office — despite Schmitt being comfortable hiring a Nazi. I can’t imagine Republicans being so chill if Schmitt had a Muslim on his staff, as accepting Muslims as Americans is now one of those On The Left things Republicans have to despise.

This is not innately a right-wing problem. Decades ago, a large chunk of the American left was convinced the Soviet Union, the great socialist bastion of freedom, was leading the world into a Golden Age of socialism. Even as late as the 1970s, I knew campus communists who insisted the USSR invading Afghanistan wasn’t an invasion, it was a liberation from the cruelty of Islamic dictatorship! It wasn’t. At the moment, however, this kind of thinking seems to be overwhelmingly a right-wing thing — I wish “no enemies to the left” was a thing, but it isn’t.

Instead we have a mass of Democrats freaking out that Zohram Mamdani is too radically left and his being on the ticket will sink Democrats’ chances in purple and red states … where he isn’t on the ticket. Dems everywhere feel the need to gatekeep and assert that yes, they aren’t on Team Mamdani. Somehow nobody ever felt the need to likewise denounce conservative West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin even though he frequently blocked Democratic policies on energy and climate and wanted Republicans to win in 2024 (that in itself should put him completely outside Overton’s window).

And now Republicans have a new case, declaring Nixon’s crimes were all a frame up by the deep state. Because as we know, Republicans being criminals and being impeached isn’t an issue for the party today (Kevin Kruse points out, by the way, that the “historian” pushing this is not a historian at all).

Nazis are still monsters. Modern Nazis are already part of the GOP and they find it compatible. And that just normalizes Nazism as simply another strand of conservatism. The GOP’s inability to draw a line in the sand will not end well for anyone. Neither will those Democrats who think they can fix this by ensuring their decisions don’t alienate Republicans. That includes — if we do pull a big win next month — not acting as if Republicans deserve some sort of participation trophy when they lose. As Rebecca Solnit put it in 202, “the victors of the recent election are being told in countless ways to go grovel before the losers. This unilateral surrender is how misogyny and racism are baked into a lot of liberal and centrist as well as right-wing positions, this idea that some people need to be flattered and buffered even when they are harming the people who are supposed to do the flattering and buffering, even when they are the minority, even when they’re breaking the law or lost the election.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Who knew there were so many women named Jane Doe?

That was someone’s quip on FB, pointing out how many rape victims using that pseudonym show up when rape hits the spotlight. Case in point, the Cornell gang-rape case.

Someone complained on Bluesky recently that it was ridiculous that so many people were shocked — did we learn nothing from MeToo, and multiple past cases? While I get her incredulity, I’m fine with this case generating public outrage, even though it’s only one of countless such cases.

Perhaps it’s that like the Pelicot case in France, the rapist texting to his buddies with an offer of free-you-know-what undercuts the idea that rape is some guy losing control or making a stupid mistake or thinking with his small head. When you’re offering a woman zoned out on booze and ketamine to your friends, you’re making a conscious choice — and it’s a very bad choice. Cheryl Rofer on LGM suggests parents dropping their kids off at school the past month or so may have played a factor. Or that the fury of #metoo, contrary to multiple proclaimations, hasn’t died away.

Jill Filipovic writes about “feeling de-personed, reduced to a sexualized thing, to a collection of body parts. Feeling profoundly betrayed because you thought a man was worthy of your trust and you learned the hard way he saw you as less than a human and more of an orifice with a brain inconveniently attached. Feeling the sheer terror of realizing your physical safely is contingent on the whims of a larger, stronger man (or a group of them).”

“This is precisely why more women don’t come forward, and why more rapists aren’t prosecuted. Because mostly-male cops and prosecutors find it more believable that a 20-year-old would want to have sex with a room full of fraternity brothers than accept that she was raped. What ever happened to common fucking sense?” — Jessica Valenti.

What happened may be that the DA decided New York’s rules on rape while voluntarily intoxicated made the case a long shot — but as pointed out at the link, that’s no excuse: “This district attorney saw an allegation of a gang rape and didn’t even bother to interview the victim. He looked at a summary of the allegations and came to the conclusion that there was no provable crime, and didn’t bother to conduct an investigation.”

“Thomas Giuffra told CNN’s “State of the Union” that people attempting to unmask his client’s identity had also targeted at least three women mistakenly identified as her. The former Cornell student is identified as Jane Doe in court documents.“She’s received multiple threats, and women who aren’t even Jane Doe receive threats,” Giuffra said. He added that he had received a threat Sunday morning.”

“The Cornell 7, did not take turns raping an incapacitated girl for seven hours because they were unaware that their act was non-consensual. The lack of consent WAS. THE. APPEAL. This is not an educational issue, this is a VALUES issue. If you value dominance, rule-breaking, feeling powerful and asserting your manhood more than you value not-hurting a woman, rape is the outcome of those values. A non-consenting girl is a feature, not a bug of frat life. Dominating her makes them feel powerful, allows them to assert status with their boys and proves their masculinity.” — Celeste Davis in a post on why most proposed solutions won’t solve the problem.

“It is notable, however, that in Sanday’s and others’ research, participants and spectators both talk about assaults of women using the language of fun – “party games,” “trophies,” and “entertainment.” They consistently express cruelty as enjoyable leisure, not coerced, reluctant conformity. This goes beyond masking despair with a visible laugh or pretending to be having fun. The issue on campus isn’t “a woman got drunk and something bad happened to her”; it’s, chances are far more likely, “a man set out to find a person who is drinking and knows it will be harder for that person to say no, resist, or be believed later.” Anti-feminists and misogynists prefer to focus on a victim’s culpability rather than on perpetrators’ decision-making process and incentives, however.” — Soraya Chemaly.

In the case of Megyn Kelly, they focus on the victim being unattractive: “That the girl who was never the most sought after suddenly had four guys who wanted to have sex with her. And she counted this, yeah, in her inebriated state, as a win and liked the feeling of being sexy and desired and wanted.” You will not be shocked “she’s too ugly to rape” is an undead sexist cliche — but while Kelly does not shock me, she disgusts me. Never let rape-apologist bullshit like that get normalized.

“It’s a horribly familiar shape. We recognize it. We’ve seen it before, too many times to count. We saw it in Steubenville, in Glen Ridge, in Saratoga, in Torrington. We saw it at Trinity High School — Louisville’s version of Georgetown Prep. It is the shape Gibby Haynes described as “the ever-present football player rapist.” It seems like every town big enough to have its own McDonald’s has one. Except there’s never just one. Because this species always hunts in packs. The activity is, for these guys, a form of male bonding. The bond this forms and expresses is, for them, the most important thing. “Bros before hoes.” The girls they join together — always together — to prey on and to humiliate are incidental, interchangeable, forgettable and soon forgotten.” — Fred Clark’s thoughts on the Kavanaugh hearing sound perfect for the present controversy.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

How not to write about politics (and some related matters)

CNN: “The Senate on Monday passed a major bill to overhaul college athletics with a large bipartisan vote, 77-22.”

That is an impressively bad opening because I have no idea why this is important news. “Major bill” means nothing. “Overhaul college athletics” could mean anything. We get two more paragraphs before we learn the bill will “set national standards for how college athletes can profit on their name, image and likeness.”

We then get a whole boatload of He Says/She Says. Ted Cruz says it offers “simple, commonsense rules.” The NCAA supports it. The AFL-CIO and the NAACP oppose it. It quotes the Toddler saying “It will not only save college sports, it will save the colleges themselves” which adds nothing (is anyone surprised).

I get down 11 paragraphs before I learn anything of substance about the bill, including that it allows the NCAA to regulate player compensation. Given the controversy over this topic, I’d have liked more specifics. Near the end it quotes Cruz saying the bill will protect players’ ability to profit from their name and likeness, which is important. The NCAA has routinely shut down side hustles on the ground the player is (for example) selling art based on their fame as a player, which violates the sacred amateur standards of the multi-million dollar college sports industry. Another sponsor says it will stop colleges from splurging on sports to stay competitive so they can divert money into research or AI (siiiigh) — how does the bill do that? I will note that none of this is new: Rocky and Bullwinkle took shots at college spending on sports back in the 1960s and the 1935 movie Fighting Youth pointed out the contradictions of a big, profitable business that insists the player should do it for free (though this criticism is placed in the mouths of commie subversives).

I took a look at the bill and it’s not so long I wouldn’t have been able to read it if I’d been assigned to cover the story. Obviously a reporter can’t interpret what it means or what the actual effect will be. Even so, some specific quotes from the bill would have grounded it in something other than He Says She Says. For instance, the bill says colleges cannot penalize a player or restrict their eligibility because they made money off their likeness or their name somehow. Cruz saying what his bill does might be spin; seeing the actual words is something else.

There’s also a lot of specific details about financing, which is presumably how colleges will save money. Though I’m curious, given that coaches routinely pull down megabucks (not something that used to be the case), whether it will really divert money away from sports or just from athletes. Which might be more detail that CNN had time to get into.

Still, at least CNN is making a sincere attempt to cover the topic. By contrast, here’s a WaPo headline:

Portraying the Toddler as someone who’s really trying to help us poor, struggling consumers? With ideas like bringing in mystery meat from overseas (supplied by someone Melania Trump knows)? And when it’s his tariffs and his stupid Iran war that are shaping the economic landscape? And as the comment at the bottom says, the headline dances around the Toddler’s complete ineffectiveness — he hasn’t failed, things “have failed so far to pan out.” It’s quite possible the article is better, but given Bezos’ hamfisted handling of the Washington Post, I wouldn’t bet on it.

Bari Weiss, meanwhile, continues to face-palm as head of CBS News. A common argument on the left is that this is new owner David Ellison’s diabolical plan to destroy the media, but as Scott Lemieux says at the link, “there is no evidence for this and plenty of evidence against it. Everything about Weiss’s career suggests that she wants to be an influential propagandist, not somebody who produces a show with declining ratings that nobody likes and is forced to resign in disgrace. She has run a successful group blog pandering to an audience who thinks that Pete Hegseth is the second coming of Clausewitz, and genuinely doesn’t seem to understand that this relatively small sector of Silicon Valley executives and anti-anti-Trump fanatics is not remotely enough to sustain a broadcast news audience. The Ellisons almost certainly have the same delusion, and indeed I would bet a high-end Tiffany bracelet that they sincerely think that Weiss is a mildly contrarian liberal. And the biggest problem of all is that none of them have any respect for the actual craft that goes into TV news, including partisan operations. Making propaganda people want to watch is an art in its own way. Rupert Murdoch understands this and hires people who can execute it.”

I think this has something in common with this comment about decadence.

Which is echoed here.

That includes not appreciating how much skill it takes to do something well. Sure, science can be wrong, medicine can be wrong, regulators make mistakes. This does not mean the opinions of the man in the street are just as good. Or that listening to your Facebook group about the benefits of raw milk for toddlers is a good idea. And contrary to the ever-wrong RFK Jr., AI is not better informed than a good doctor, nor is it essential they consult it.

Case in point, this argument for why school is inherently feminine (posted by Celeste Davis at Matriarchal Blessing)

This is in the first place (and second and third) factually wrong. If men couldn’t obey the military would be a women’s organization. Corporate America would be run by women. Schools for centuries were men only; teachers set the rules and required boys to obey them. And refusing to listen to someone who knows more than you is not “masculine,” it’s stupid. Refusing to learn is in no way admirable.

Despite my reservations about Susan Jacoby’s The Age of American Unreason, she has a point that losing respect for intellectual and practical skill is not a good thing.

Leave a comment

Filed under Nonfiction, Politics, Undead sexist cliches, Writing

Linking to misogny

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: “I don’t want my son serving alongside troops who are out of shape or in combat [units] with females who can’t meet the same combat arms physical standards as men.” The War Horse at the same link: “Women serving in combat specialties have always been required to meet the same job-specific standards as men, based on the physical demands of their chosen field, such as infantry or artillery. But the broader physical fitness tests taken by all service members once or twice a year serve a different purpose: measuring overall fitness. Those tests have historically been scored using age- and sex-based standards.” Astonishingly (he said sarcastically) “Whiskey Pete” is fine with keeping the adjusted standards for older men.

In case you’re wondering, 90 percent of women in the Marines can meet the new standards. Of course, Hegseth is starting from a loathing for women in what he sees as male roles, so we’ll see what happens next. Remember, his spiritual mentor, misogynist Doug Wilson, is very big on male supremacy.

“The U.S. already has abortion travel bans—we just don’t normally call them that.”

“A judge criticized the Department of Health and Human Services for citing nonexistent scientific evidence or potentially AI-generated citations to support sweeping changes to federal teen pregnancy prevention programs. The Trump administration had said money Congress appropriated for such programs should avoid encouraging teen sexual activity and be used only for programs that promote abstinence and “body literacy.” The administration’s changes were challenged after HHS cut tens of millions in grants.” No surprise. It’s a proven fact that comprehensive sex ed and affordable birth control can reduce the unwanted pregnancy rate, ditto the abortion rate — but Republicans would sooner have more abortions than approve of women enjoying sex.

“A death related to ectopic pregnancy should really be a never event,” said Dr. Alice Abernathy, an OB-GYN in Philadelphia. At the link, ProPublica reports that since abortion bans became legal, ectopic deaths have soared.

Danny Katch looks at “the deep misogyny of an anti-trans movement that poses as defenders of women when it’s convenient but ultimately is driven by a desire to police all violations of traditional gender norms.”

The Girl Scouts support members in their faiths, including Muslims. Needless to say, bigots hate that.

Republican Florida governor candidate Byron Reynolds assures women repairing Florida’s roads is so they can get to the hair salon and stay pretty.

“Although many families strive to share these responsibilities, research has consistently found that mothers tend to shoulder a larger share of the work tied to their kids’ schooling. That includes not only attending school events or packing lunches, but also the less visible work of scheduling doctor appointments, signing up for after-school activities, and responding to emails or calls from teachers and administrators.” One of the reasons is that no matter what instructions they get, schools tend to call the mother first.

“White men get to fail,” said Amanda Litman, co-founder of Run for Something, which recruits young, progressive candidates to run for office. “Women do not get to make mistakes. People of color do not get to make mistakes.” Litman said the argument was not that serious allegations should be treated differently because of a candidate’s identity, but that Platner had been granted an unusual degree of latitude to recover from earlier controversies that a female candidate or a candidate of color would probably not have been afforded.

“It is a very strange thing to move through the world understanding that the one half of the population that never had their humanity doubted on the basis of their genitalia, that enjoys the privilege of being the default category of human, remains the primary arbiter of your physical safety and, sometimes, your personhood.” — from Jill Filipovic’s essay on the Cornell Seven.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

“Jesus is not front and center with these guys”

That’s the conclusion of Bob Smietana looking at Joel Webbon, Dale Partridge and other “Jim Crow theobros” who preach various forms of white male supremacy: pro-slavery, pro-Jim Crow, pro-all-white America (a couple of them debated whether Clarence Thomas deserved to stay). And insisting very firmly that there’s is absolutely 100 percent the only Biblical position on these matters (Mark Noll would like a word). As with Christian misogyny (most of them believe in that too) they’ve taken what they think is the rightful order of society — them on top — and convinced themselves that’s obviously what the Bible says.

Plus using their various platforms to pitch supplements, T-shirts and other lucrative sidelines (or the racism and misogyny are sidelines to milking the rubes) because right-wing rage invariably has grifting attached (side-note: here’s a scam that doesn’t preach hate but does use the gospel as a scamming tool). As Fred Clark says, it’s excellent reporting, not attempting to sanewash or decency-wash these people. As to their motives, it doesn’t matter if they’re merchandizing bigotry to sell their swag or sincere bigots with a side-hustle. Neither one is excusable. Neither one is redeemable — the people may be if they ever see the light, their beliefs never will be. Their twisted faith is a poisonous tree and it will bear no good fruit.

The fruit they bear is the demands we stop caring for people because compassion is a weakness. It makes people object to supposedly righteous things like ICE murders and deporting non-white people to nations they have no connection with. They advocate as cramped and limited a view of love your neighbors as possible. JD Vance says, for instance, “love your family and then you love your neighbor and then you love your community and then you love your fellow citizens and your own country, and then after that you can focus and prioritize the rest of the world.” Worrying about immigrants and refugees when your own people are in trouble? That’s just wrong and un-Biblical!

Not that Vance is in danger of having compassion for people in this country — he is, after all, part of the Toddler’s fascist assault on human decency and American values. And a claim Jesus had a narrow view of who our neighbors are is just wrong. If nothing else, the Bible’s story of Pentecost makes clear all Christians — all races, genders, nationalities — are brothers and sisters in faith. The Toddler administration won’t even admit non-white Christian refugees any more. Only Afrikaaners, whose white supremacy has won Republican support for decades now. Obviously my view of the Bible is no more authoritative than theirs — but faced with two dueling interpretations of the Bible, I think it makes sense, as decent human beings, to choose the more compassionate one. Right-winger Megan Basham insists by telling us the story of the Good Samaritan Jesus was saying don’t help people. Bollocks: if you find someone assaulted by criminals, beaten by the side of the road, decent people don’t need to consult the Bible to know we should help them. Basham, however, has chosen not to be a decent person.

No question, this kind of bigotry has long been part of American (and other forms) Christianity. It’s still a bad thing when people say the quiet parts out loud. They embolden others. They make it seem normal — not in the sense of “there’s a lot of people like that” but “as there’s a lot of people like that we might as well accept this as a reasonable point of view.” No, we shouldn’t.

As the blogger Hilzoy once said, embracing these beliefs is addicting. Feeling rage and hate at some designated group is stimulating and often addictive to the point “you come to rely on it more and more, the fun fades, and it corrodes you from within. The more you nurse your hatred, the larger a part of your identity it becomes. But hatred is a poor substitute for a genuine self, and the more you come to depend on it, the hollower you become, and the harder it is to let it go. It eats away at your values: morality, which we ought to use to make ourselves better people and only secondarily to judge others, turns into a tool we use to excoriate those we hate, and to demonstrate, to ourselves and to others, how very, very different we are from them. Crusades are fought by the righteous, and if you need to believe that you are on a righteous crusade, you will of course need to conscript morality to the cause of maintaining your belief that you are on the side of the angels.

“At this point, as Lewis said, your view of your opponents is driven by your hatred, rather than the other way around. You need “to see grey as black, and then to see white itself as black”, and your needs drive your beliefs. Your intellectual integrity is sacrificed to your psychological needs, your hatred loses any honesty it might once have had, and you surrender to fantasy. This can be hard to undo: once you give up your hold on reality, it’s hard to find your way back. And if you can’t, then you are surrounded by malevolent enemies of your own creation, enemies that can do you real damage even though they are purely imaginary. You are “fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred” which you created in your own image, and which has trapped you.

“This is dangerous. I have watched people get into real moral trouble this way. I have no wish to join them. And the only way I know to prevent it is to be absolutely scrupulous about thinking ill of people. If the facts warrant my dislike, so be it. But the moment I find myself wanting to see grey as black, then I know that I’m going wrong. And as C.S. Lewis said, whenever this impulse “bobs its head up, day after day, year after year, all our lives long, we must hit it on the head.” As I said, not just because it’s unjust to think ill of others when they don’t deserve it, or because it’s ignoble, but because it’s poison.”

I think that applies even if the theobros (and others of their ilk) are faking for the clicks and swag sales. Sell your wares and your podcast by angry outrageous takes on race or gender and you have a financial incentive to stay extreme or get worse. For example podcaster Candace Owens trying to grab attention by declaring she doesn’t believe in a round earth or a flat earth. And that’s assuming the hatemongers have the sense not to start drinking their own snake oil. The mask that people wear can easily become the face and, as Philip Agre put it, “few of us have the skill to hate with a clear mind.”

1 Comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

Intelligence, New York and rebellion: three books

I’m not sure when I first read Stephen Jay Gould’s THE MISMEASURE OF MAN — the 1980s, maybe? — but it certainly hasn’t aged at all.

Gould looks back at the long history of efforts to measure human intelligence and to rank it, not merely between individuals but between groups — man vs. woman, black vs. white vs. Native American vs. Aborigine, native-born American vs. immigrant, upper class vs. lower. Why yes, there was a lot of racism involved; even people who were enlightened and liberal routinely accepted that the white Anglo-Saxon male was the summit of human evolution and obviously more intelligent than anyone else. Knowing this unsurprisingly biased the results. The great anatomist Paul Broca, for instance, admitted that women’s brains were smaller than men’s in proportion to their bodies but obviously, as we know women are stupid, their small brains must be the root cause.

Gould argues the fatal mistake in all the theorists he’s covering was the belief that intelligence was a single, fixed, quantifiable thing (a concept that eventually became “IQ”) and that it was an identifiable physical property of the brain, untainted by education, culture, environment, etc. And that attempts to measure it were always undone by bias; when it became obvious that IQ tests of immigrants reflected how long they’d been in America (and therefore exposed to American culture) the response was that obviously the immigrants who arrived earlier were the smarter, more ambitious types and the later arrivals were the degenerate dregs. This is wonkier than his previous books, getting much more into the technical weeds than they did, but it certainly makes its point well.

WILL EISNER’S NEW YORK is an anthology of multiple smaller works by the creator of the Spirit, all focusing on life in the Big Apple. One section tells stories built around windows, fire hydrants and other features of city life. Another looks at four ghosts haunting the site of the building where they died, even though it’s been demolished and replaced. “Invisible People” looks at the ways people can vanish in the teeming crowds; one, concerning a recluse who can’t convince anyone his obituary was wrong (they’ve never seen him, how do they know who he is?), shows similars fears of loss-of-identity to The Net.

It’s great stuff but not Eisner’s best stuff. Like his Life in Pictures, the tone is too bleak and miserable, plus the women are overwhelmingly unlikable and unsympathetic. It’s surprising, given the women of Eisner’s Spirit series are far more interesting and appealing.

Although the publisher lists Henry Kuttner as sole author of FURY, CL Moore says in the introduction that she collaborated on it (they did lots of work on each other’s stories throughout their marriage); Kuttner’s mark is on the Don’t Trust Authority scenes, hers on the Don’t Trust Love moments. Their story dissatisfied me as a teen, probably because it’s about an anti-hero against a decaying society and I wasn’t really ready for that. And Sam, “who was born into a world he had to smash before it smashed him,” isn’t a typical anti-hero.

Following the nuclear destruction of Earth, the survivors escaped to Venus and settled in domed colony cities under the Venusian oceans. A minority of people, affected by radiation, become immortal, and eventually rule the cities. They can be killed but they have advantages: decades of added experience and knowledge and the ability to make long-range plans. They’re also cautious: the confined, unchanging environment of the cities is destroying humanity’s spirit but the Immortals are unwilling to gamble on the long, dangerous challenge of colonizing the hostile Venusian surface land.

Sam was born an immortal but his mother died giving birth to him. His bitter father had Sam brought up among the lower classes. Sam becomes a tough, dangerous criminal, then slowly gains ambition, leading to throwing his weight behind the land-colonization efforts. The Immortals don’t know what to make of him but hope they can either use him or destroy him. And why does it sometimes seem there’s a guiding hand manipulating everything? There’s a lot of interesting ideas in this novel, and Sam makes a memorable protagonist, a guy who’s doing a good job but lacks many of the ennobling qualities anti-heroes often have.

Fury cover uncredited, top cover by Eisner. All rights to images remain with current holders.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Reading

Mamdani, Manchin, Epstein: quick notes

There are parts of NYC that have a shortage of public restrooms. Mayor Zohram Mamdani’s solution: high-tech port-a-potties with a 10-minute limit. He’s also working on a tech policy to make city services run smoother: “Every confusing step and every dead-end portal makes it more difficult for government to deliver for New Yorkers, and for New Yorkers to trust that government is working to deliver for them. Every straightforward experience New Yorkers have on city platforms rebuilds that trust and our PIT crews will help us do exactly that.”

Former West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin recently announced he’s forming a new political grift — er, group — to push politicians towards the center. At the link, my assumption was that this means pushing Dems rightwards, not pushing Republicans leftwards. Sure enough, he’s supporting Sen. Susan Collins against her Democratic challenger on the ground she always does the right thing. Yeah, like supporting RFK Jr. and Pete Hegseth for cabinet posts. And wringing her hands in concern over the Toddler Administration’s policies, then voting to support them anyway. I called it on Manchin.

Then we have new AG Todd “I’m so over the Epstein Files” Blanche refusing to turn over more files despite a judge’s order. Rep. Thomas Massie has been pushing for the release of the files as well as the impeachment of Hegseth. By a strange coincidence, Speaker Mike Johnson has recessed the House early …

Speaking of Jeffrey Epstein, “Two women whose images as girls ‌were found in pornography seized from Jeffrey Epstein filed a class action lawsuit on Wednesday seeking damages from the late sex offender’s estate for individuals featured in his collection of thousands of pictures and videos of child sexual abuse material.

The lawsuit seeks ​at least $6 million on behalf of more than 40 people, some of whom were in Epstein’s ​so-called “modeling book,” a collection of sexualized images of children seized by federal investigators in ⁠2019 from his New York home, according to the filing, opens new tab in Manhattan federal district court.” Obviously getting money from his estate won’t make things worse for Epstein, but it still feels like a little bit of justice.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics