Further to previous rumblings on the subject of crime, another small but noteworthy point:

Why, it’s almost as if antisocial tendencies were not neatly confined to only one form of expression.

This reply to the above is not, I think, entirely trivial:

Part of the reason that they were so desperate to cancel Live PD is that it showed 6 hours of this every weekend.

— someonesalt (@pervertputt) January 15, 2024

Indeed. As noted in one of our earlier discussions:

Regarding those progressive assumptions and their routine departures from reality, I’d somehow forgotten about this chap:

I’d also forgotten about some of the professor’s peers and cheerleaders – among them, fellow educator Leigh Kimberg, who’s all about “compassion, healing, justice and equity,” and announcing her pronouns to random passers-by. She’s also somewhat miffed by expectations of rigour:

There’s more to be had via the links above, and in the subsequent threads.

Try not to steal anyone’s car while you’re reading.

Update, via the comments:

Apparently, it’s outdated and oppressive for a young woman to be walked down the aisle at her wedding by her father. And so she can insult him and embarrass him by taking away that role. But of course it’s not outdated or oppressive for that same father to be expected to pay all of the bills for the wedding at which he’s being so pointedly sidelined and insulted:

Millennial girl wants dad to pay for wedding, but refuses to walk down the aisle with him.
Also mad her dad talked to friends to solicit opinions.
Dad’s not paying, girl now realizes she can’t afford it- now soliciting opinions from tik-tok.
My kids are going to trade school. pic.twitter.com/OC6Q7FRKhF

— Jason “Storm Chaser” Nelson (@RealJasonNelson) January 14, 2024

She’s “an independent thinker,” you see.

Update, via the comments:

It’s not, I think, hard to see how being very publicly dispensed with as outmoded or embarrassing – as a symbol of oppression and wickedness – might hurt the feelings of a father you supposedly care about.

And yet the above.

Little Madam concedes – albeit as somehow “unrelated” – that her parents do not, in fact, treat her as “property” – a term she uses repeatedly – and have seemingly never done so. Yet this imagined connotation must nonetheless, in her mind, be avoided at all costs. Lest The Patriarchy be empowered. As if it would otherwise occur to everyone else present and shape how they see the wedding. Which strikes me as a little odd.

Over the years I’ve been to several weddings and at no point during any of them did I regard the proud father as someone handing over his property. As if he were reluctantly, under duress, giving away his car. That’s not an idea that popped into my head – or, so far as I can tell, the heads of anyone else present at the ceremonies.

Something precious, yes. But not property.

And so, in order to ostentatiously reject a construal that no-one at her wedding is likely to arrive at anyway, Little Madam has alienated her parents and needlessly jeopardised the wedding in question. That happy day. And now she wants strangers on the internet to back her up and pin the blame on someone else.

Also, filming yourself putting on make-up while being a vain, monstrous bitch is probably not a look to go for.

Also, open thread.

Lifted from the comments: Man thinks his purse makes him a woman:

Misgendered at Walmart~ #MentalHealthCrisis #Unhinged

Gender ideology has made clothes synonymous with gender. Apparently, feminine colors and carrying a purse now define what it means to be a woman. pic.twitter.com/vwMCrIxZIE

— L G B (@L__G__B) January 13, 2024

And so, you must accept and affirm his rejection of himself.

“Why can’t people be more sensitive?” says he, indignantly. And yet, the insensitivity – one might say rudeness – of insisting that others lie on demand and say things that they don’t for a minute believe to be true – this passes unremarked. Imposing one’s psychodrama on random shop assistants – a coerced participation – seems fairly rude to me. But apparently, as so often, the expected sensitivity only goes one way.

And note that the competitively progressive view – as mouthed by our bandana-wearing chappie – is that purses and pink are the very essence and definition of womanhood, the pivotal criteria. The stuff of which women are made. How far we’ve come.

Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

I always start my day this way. || I laughed and I’m not sorry. || The legend of Bum Farto. || “These holes are inhabited.” || He wants to teach you a lesson, repeatedly, with an airhorn. || 1940s IT. || Taking sides. || “Too much cheese” finally achieved. || Tourist attraction of note. || The Women of the Pussy Cat Club, 1970. || Liveliness in Wakefield. || Warfare, 1963. || Neighbours and renovations, 1981. || She paid for an affirming penis and is not entirely satisfied. (NSFW) || The progressive retail experience, parts 528, 529, 530, 531 and 532. || Pouring. || The thrill of salad. || He’s doing it for the little kiddies, you understand. || Mail theft. || The thrill of fluff. || Somewhat fluff-related. || Further to this from last week, question asked. || Feel your age. || And finally, it fits in his hand.

Update, via the comments:

Uncomplicated motives.

If inclined, you can follow me on X / Twitter.

To register with the blog and thereby enable extra commenting options – including @username mentions and live notifications – scroll down to the black ‘Meta’ box at the very bottom of the page. It’s free and quite painless.

No, don’t run away. She wants to tell you about herself:

These people are becoming gender-soup. 💀
pic.twitter.com/mgZRiyCAV2

— L G B (@L__G__B) January 9, 2024

And remember, competitive complication is the name of the game.

Also open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Come, dear reader. Let us visit the publication now laughingly referred to as Scientific American. In particular, an “analysis” piece by Juan P Madrid, in which we’re told,

Dr Madrid, an assistant professor at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, begins his attempt to persuade with a tale of poetic drama:

I know. The very stuff of amazement. Brings a tear to the eye.

Apparently, the word collision is, for Dr Madrid, much too brutal and masculine when referring to the unstoppable convergence of two galaxies, and the ultimate merging of the supermassive black holes at their centres – an event that will entail the sling-shotting of countless stars and their orbiting planets, and which may release energy equivalent to around 100 million supernova explosions, and subsequently be detectable halfway across the universe.

A mere hug, you see. All that kindness.

Here, Dr Madrid’s own use of language – specifically, the word reconsider – is somewhat misleading and just a little coy. The reconsidering he has in mind would of course be enforced by those suitably enlightened, much like the author himself – as hinted at with enthusiasm later in the piece:

So, not so much a reconsidering, then, as a coerced neuroticism. A mandatory affectation, on which career progress may very much depend. But hey, where’s the fun in being a pretentious and neurotic scold if you don’t have the power to make others jump through hoops?

And so, when not detecting neutron stars and gravitational waves, astronomers will be expected to submit their findings to someone of “a different gender or ethnicity” to sift out any language that may conceivably cause distress to those determined to seek it out. “This type of conscious engagement,” we’re assured, “can only be beneficial.” And not, say, a farcical waste of time that’s better spent elsewhere.

Terms deemed “needlessly vicious,” and which render Dr Madrid indignant and reaching for tissues, include cannibalism, harassment, starvation, strangulation, stripping and suffocation:

It’s all terribly oppressive – for the implausibly faint of heart, I mean. And should a colleague carelessly refer to a planet being stripped of its ozone layer by a catastrophic gamma-ray burst, this is obviously “misogynistic language” and a basis for the sternest of hands-on-hips chiding.

Given the unequal distribution of interest, aptitude, and cognitive wherewithal, one might wonder why. Alas, as so often, the mystery persists.

The implication being that hearing an occasional use of the word cannibalism or stripping in reference to astronomical phenomena will somehow, in ways never quite specified, deflect an otherwise promising astronomer from their calling, despite an uncommon focus and years of study. Because female astronomers, and brown astronomers, and especially female brown astronomers, are so immensely delicate and likely to be traumatised by such descriptive terms.

At which point, readers may wish to ponder whether the best people to be doing astronomy, or teaching astronomy, or to be making workplace rules for astronomers, are the kinds of people who mouth dogmatic assertions without any trace of supporting logic, and who are distracted, even distressed, by hearing the word collision being used to describe a collision.

The strange trajectory of Scientific American has been mentioned here before.

Update:

Before anyone quibbles, the phrase “halfway across the universe” is merely a figure of speech. The actual estimate for how far away the gravitational waves could be detected by beings with technology comparable to our own is 3.25 million light years. So, for a hug, plenty of oomph.

Via Darleen, in the comments. Which you’re reading, of course.

Judgement promptly validated. || Ice-cream scoop insertions and other medical emergencies. || Somewhat related: Things done to penises in 2023. || Recovered Kodachromes of New York in the Fifties and Sixties. (h/t, Lancastrian Oik) || Like conkers, I guess. || On crime and incarceration. || Question asked, answered. || Being so clever, he doesn’t believe in sky daddy. || Lion relocation. || If you got rid of the toaster, you’d have space for one of these. || Suboptimal road surface. || Set-up and payoff. || The progressive retail experience, parts 526 and 527. || Pressing oil. || For enthusiasts of diecast model cars, The Little Wheels Museum. (h/t, Things) || I laughed and I’m not sorry. || A little artistic licence. || At last, a shower-toilet combo. || And finally, a hawk encounters a kitten with a force field.

If inclined, you can follow me on X / Twitter.

To register with the blog and thereby enable extra commenting options – including @username mentions and live notifications – scroll down to the black ‘Meta’ box at the very bottom of the page. It’s free and quite painless.

In politically-charged fashion news:

Why yes, since you ask, I am reading the Guardian. Specifically, a piece by Mr Phineas Harper:

Possibly because it tends to look contrived and rather silly, even when celebrities do it. A contrivance that suggests, not so much a high-minded “dismantling” of “gendered fashion,” or “a small step towards gender equality,” as Mr Harper would have us believe, but something closer to tedious self-absorption. The kind of thing one might expect from a disingenuous, noodle-legged Guardian columnist, say. But apparently, this craving for attention, for being the skirt-wearing star of any social gathering, will somehow liberate British women from their supposedly grim, downtrodden existence.

Those of you with an urge to behold Mr Harper in a skirt – complete with tights, trainers, and dickie bow – can do so here. A second ensemble, featuring a bold leaf print, also awaits your applause. Readers are welcome to say whether the word panache – favoured by Mr Harper – is one that comes to mind. Though it occurs to me that the author’s own carefully curated fashion statements rather solve any mystery as to why said garment hasn’t been widely adopted by the menfolk of the nation.

Despite this setback, further attempts are made to entice male Guardian readers into the realm of “floaty Toast midi skirt combos,” including:

Because every man, in every household across these islands, wants to be complimented on his skirt.

And,

Or perhaps the thing being signalled is something else entirely. Like insufferable twattery.

In which we marvel at the mental contortions of our self-imagined betters.

The year began with a tale of oysters and college lesbianism, via Bon Appétit magazine, in which Brooklynite pronoun-stipulator Isha Maratha was keen to overshare. For Ms Maratha, “My first time eating an oyster was an act of queer intimacy.” Indeed, we were told by an obliging editor, “The act of eating an oyster uniquely and intimately expresses her queerness.” And so, we were regaled, at length, with descriptions of mollusc-gobbling, stolen glances, and lemon wedges being squeezed. “There is something uniquely unspoken,” we learned, “between the eater and the eaten.”

We also pondered mass fare-dodging, now at record levels, and its progressive defenders – including those employed to maintain public transport – and whose pre-emptive disapproval of anyone noticing such crimes was remarkable in its vehemence and uniformity. The effects on social trust of a large and growing minority disregarding the law and norms of behaviour, and doing so with a learned impunity, is apparently something one shouldn’t – and mustn’t – register or explore. Because, in the progressive world, noticing habitual and brazen thievery is much worse than indulging in it. And obviously racist.

And we visited the pages of Scientific American, where wokeness is ascendant and thinking simply isn’t done. In particular, an “important analysis” piece in which we were urged – by Tracie Canada, a “socio-cultural anthropologist” at Duke University – to fret about “the violence Black men experience in [American] football,” and in which we were told that the physicality of the sport “disproportionately affects black men.” This was framed to imply, but never establish, some systemic racial wrongdoing – “anti-Black practices” that are “inescapable” – rather than, say, being an unremarkable reflection of the sport’s demographics, in which, at professional levels, black players are a majority. Or to put it another, no less scientific, way – the risk of injury while playing a contact sport disproportionately affects those who actually play it. When this rather glaring logical error was pointed out by readers, the magazine’s editor-in-chief promptly accused said readers of “systemic racism.”

In February, we encountered a suboptimal substitute teacher named Lydia Lamere – formerly Christopher Lamere – who spent lesson time directing students to his overtly sexual TikTok account, and conscripting middle-school children into his cross-dressing psychodrama. When not discussing “kink” and preferred sexual positions with other people’s eleven-year-old children, Mr Lamere found time to tells us, “I’m not a predator, I’m just a woman who happens to be super tall and hot.”

Matters academic cropped up again via an eye-widening overview of racial “equity” policies in various schools and institutions, where expectations of competence are deemed racist and terribly problematic. In New York City, for instance, thanks to “disparate impact” policies, firefighters are no longer expected to be able to read the instructions on their own firefighting equipment. Likewise, in scrupulously progressive Ontario, it is now illegal to use a maths test to determine whether maths teachers actually possess the knowledge that they are being paid to convey in class. Such is the world of triumphant wokeness, in which “suspending proficiency requirements” – and denouncing diligence and competence as “white supremacy,” a wickedness to be shunned – will somehow “benefit” the children on whom these things are imposed.

We also marvelled at a contrived and unconvincing display of forgiveness by Guardian contributor Anna Spargo-Ryan, whose home was invaded in the night by a gang of sociopaths armed with carving knives. It turns out that when being robbed by habitual predators, the progressive thing to do is to sympathise with the creatures breaking into one’s home and driving off with one’s stuff in one’s own car. Ms Spargo-Ryan was hailed by her peers as a “beautiful person” for gushing with pretentious sympathy for her assailants and for wishing to see the burglars spared the normal corrective consequences, presumably so that they might go on to burgle the homes of others, including her neighbours. Which of course they were busy doing. Though it occurs to me that a person breaking into someone’s home in the middle of the night and stealing their possessions is sending a pretty strong signal about how much concern, or how little, the rest of us should have for that person’s wellbeing.

The Pronoun Game, so very much in fashion, cropped up in March, along with a demand that employers accommodate the made-up identities of insufferable narcissists. Even when those made-up identities can change several times a day, with such changes being signalled via colour-coded pronoun bracelets, pronoun earrings, and other pronoun-stipulating accessories. Accessories that all colleagues would be expected to monitor closely, lest “misgendering” ensue, followed by a visit to Human Resources. A scenario that inspired the question of exactly how much farce in the workplace might be considered excessive.

Thanks to Oxford University’s Department of Biology, we beheld some ostentatious fretting about the “numerous negative consequences” of obscure Latin names that almost no-one knows about. According to Assistant Professor of Conservation Science Ricardo Rocha, some “1,565 species of bird, reptiles, amphibians and mammals” are named after “white, male Europeans from the 19th and 20th centuries,” which is apparently a very bad thing. What with all that whiteness and maleness, you see. This legacy of legwork and exploration is, we’re to believe, oppressing the people of Zimbabwe and Botswana, for whom the Latin textbook names of lizards and beetles are foremost in their minds. We were also assured that would-be botanists and biologists are in some way being psychologically injured by the existence of this Latin taxonomy, and by the fact that much of the “flora of New Caledonia” is “named after a man.”

Oh, and we were treated to the creative efforts of artist, educator and “community organiser” Alex Romania, whose juddering and convulsions were artistically enhanced by twenty-five pounds of powdered cheese. When not “investigating bodies of cultural debris” and being showered with atomised dairy products, Mr Romania teaches those less gifted than himself at New York’s Centre for Performance Research and other places of learning.

A fox’s first snow, photographed by Tak:

As is the custom here, posting will be intermittent over the holidays and readers are advised to follow me on X / Twitter, or subscribe to the blog feed at the very bottom of the page, either of which will alert you to anything new as and when it materialises.

Thanks for another 1.5 million or so visits this year and thousands of comments, many of which prompted discussions that are much more interesting than the actual posts. Which is pretty much the idea.

And particular thanks to all those who’ve made PayPal, Ko-Fi, or SubscribeStar donations to keep this rickety barge above water. It’s much appreciated. Should you be gripped by an urge to express encouragement via currency, feel free to use the buttons in the sidebar, top right, or above the comments following this post. Just think of my little face lighting up.

Curious newcomers and those with nothing better to do are welcome to rummage through the reheated series in search of entertainment. You may, and probably will, find things you’d missed. And this, needless to say, is an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

To you and yours, a very good one.