Speaking of crime and punishment, here’s a thread on prison and recidivism.

In short, we’re told – by a civil rights lawyer who claims that “cops and prisons are killing us all” – that neither custodial sanctions nor more lenient attempts at correction have much impact on rates of reoffending. This is then presented, by the same lawyer, as a reason not to imprison the predatory and murderous, who are apparently deserving of our sympathy. Unlike, one assumes, their numerous victims, and future victims.

And so, we arrive at the strange logic that if a person has been arrested many times for behaving like an animal, many times, and has consequently, belatedly, ended up in prison, thereby allowing the law-abiding some relief from his predation, then this is a bad thing. For which, we, not he, should feel bad.

As noted in the discussion, there’s a reliance, not least among progressives, on the notions of deterrence and rehabilitation as being how one determines whether prison is fitting or effective, or even an obsolete institution, something to abolish. But an antisocial moron with poor impulse control is likely to remain so until he dies, or is killed while engaging in criminal activity.

The concepts of punishment and incapacitation – of stopping a monster’s sociopathic activity and sparing others violation and misery, if only for the duration of his imprisonment – don’t seem to figure highly in progressive circles. Where, as we’ve seen, all kinds of contortions are very much in fashion.

Among the replies and linked tangents are some common, if unconvincing, suppositions. For instance, that habitual violent criminals – say, the kinds of creatures who gleefully sucker-punch elderly women because they happen to be of East Asian descent – will somehow be morally redeemed by “affordable housing” and “access to healthcare.”

Oh, and more “theatre” for schoolchildren.

Update, via the comments, where Darleen adds,

In reply to which, pst314 quotes Theodore Dalrymple:

At which point, readers may register that the limited effect of imprisonment – and lenient alternatives – on rates of reoffending could be construed in ways that, shall we say, diverge from progressive orthodoxy. One might, for instance, infer that those incarcerated for serious criminal savagery – and who, on release, continue being criminal savages – are irredeemable, and therefore undeserving of pretentious sympathy. One might even infer that the wellbeing of such creatures is no longer a concern.

Update 2:

In hindsight, this post has become the first part of a trilogy of sorts. See also parts two and three.

Lifted from the comments, which you’re reading of course – Just Stop Oil loons encounter rival group Just Stop Pissing Everyone Off:

🚨 | BREAKING: Just Stop Oil protestors have been surrounded by “Just Stop Pissing Everyone Off” protestors – preventing them from marching in the road pic.twitter.com/nyZy7qqbFv

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) July 20, 2023

Update, via the comments:

Note the conceit, aired via bullhorn, that their ‘protests’ – physically obstructing thousands of people, including emergency vehicles, for hours, and doing it over and over again – are “peaceful,” benign, and terribly high-minded.

From here, it looks more like a narcissist’s power game, a kind of recreational sociopathy. I mean, if someone gets their jollies from screwing over random people and watching their victims’ exasperation and pleading – if that’s what makes our mighty warriors feel powerful and important – then the term recreational sociopathy doesn’t seem inapt.

And if someone’s idea of being caring and morally superior is to vandalise an art gallery, or to gleefully pour large quantities of oil across a road – an act morally analogous to sabotaging the brakes on random cars and motorbikes – then some questioning of their motives, and of the kinds of people they are, does seem in order.

Jennifer Lahl and Kallie Fell on “queered” health care:

Ah, but “highly gendered” and “offspring-focussed” health care – for pregnant women and their babies – makes it “challenging” for sexually dysmorphic women who wish to be perceived as men, even while heavily pregnant. In short, “Screw the wellbeing of the baby, the inhibited lactation, and the risk of serious birth defects. Just jack me up on testosterone and refer to me as Sir.”

I paraphrase, of course. But nowhere near as much as one might hope.

Somewhat related, Heather Mac Donald on fads, transgenderism, and defaults:

A phenomenon doubtless familiar to regular readers.

And Noah Carl on the unspeakable:

Feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.

I miss the concept of shame. As social correctives go, it was underrated.

Apparently, we’ve arrived at a stage of civilisation in which chunky middle-aged men dress as women and then deliberately piss themselves in public, on camera, as an erotic high, before sharing the recording on social media and awaiting likes. Which is to say, affirmation.

See also, via Stephanie, this. And somewhat related, this item here.

Lifted from the comments, which you’re reading of course. Also, open thread.

And in ladies’ changing room news:

Trying it on is indeed a phrase that comes to mind.

At which point, readers may note how Mr Firico’s professed “non-binary” status doesn’t mean that he’d be content in the men’s changing rooms, as an option, with either being fine, and instead grants, in his mind, an entitlement to violate store policy and the boundaries of women. He’s “not a man,” you see – and by the same logic, if that’s the word, not a woman either – but apparently, that women’s space is his kingdom now. And ladies who’d rather not get undressed near some random male interloper – whether that man is mentally ill or an opportunist pervert – are expected to shut up and comply. Because his identity, or feigned identity, trumps theirs.

It’s all terribly convenient.

Despite his incongruity, Mr Firico doesn’t appear at all curious as to the preferences of any female customers on whom he might be imposing, and his view of the store’s female staff is perhaps best judged by his willingness to ignore their objections while barging into a space not intended for men:

Views as to which party should feel ashamed may, I suspect, differ. And note that any female customers who might feel uncomfortable or degraded by sharing an intimate space with a bearded bedlamite are, again, expected to keep quiet and defer. In this new, inclusive world, there is, it seems, a pecking order.

Despite a subsequent apology by the store’s manager, we’re told that the experience of not getting his own way immediately and entirely without objection was “embarrassing” for Mr Firico, especially as a sales assistant “rolled her eyes.” Readers are invited to say whether hearing of such unspeakable trauma will deprive them of any sleep.

Mr Firico, complete with stunning gown, can be seen here. The clasping of the hands is a lovely touch.

Via ripx4nutmeg.