It's also not even clear that this sort of precision is worth chasing. Just consider how many more people there are who speak English as a second language than are trans (this has already potentially caused questions about the UK census)
You can't dismantle the master's house with the master's tools.
I can't tell if pro-Palestinianism already had its moment of immoderate greatness or if philosemitism is having its own.
From a purely cynical perspective, it seems like it would be easier to tamp down on certain attitudes about Jews if there's a general woke regime that reacts horrifically to any perceived attack against any victim of history, the more the merrier.
Having an administration or people hellbent on dismantling that entire system (and whose main talent is exacerbating negative polarization)make exceptions for one group seems suboptimal in comparison. This is how normal people get ideas.
I wonder if Trump and co. are going to regret some of their choices now (e.g. picking Vance instead of the most whitebread, "don't scare the hoes" candidate they could find).
Especially given that Trump-adjacent people like Vivek and Vance himself have been mocking the idea that Joe Biden was going to stay in the race.
Historically, the distinction was "gender"= social norms for manhood and womanhood, while "sex"= biological X/Y/ gamete status. A child raised in a distant lab by sexless robot aliens, with absolutely no conception of human society, might not have a "gender"; but they would still have a "sex."
If blank slateism is true, yes.
That's kind of the problem. The ideological fortress is of use to larger groups than just the trans activist segment that captured it so now people don't have a way to disentangle themselves from ridiculousness like Tickle without losing their motte entirely. And they haven't found it because
That version of gender did have real uses as a rhetorical countermove against the sex-determinist appeal-to-nature fallacy
If they were only attacking the fallacious version of that argument then trans activists would have a thinner wedge to work with. You can accept that it's ludicrous to assume static or totalizing gender roles without accepting that gender has nothing to do with sex (which is where we are) or the sort of doctrinaire blank slateist/anti-sex-based role position that came to dominate.
Putting aside deeply illiberal solutions that both sides refuse to even consider, it seems like the most viable solution suggested by your post is to simply cut down on college as a necessary rite of passage.
How many people really need to spend four years (and an increasingly large amount of money) on a degree, if we're being honest?
I think the cancellation attempt right as his book was coming out damaged him more than it appeared at the time.
He can't become a "serious" right wing intellectual, either by gaining a patron in the Trump admin or being welcomed unto the Ezra Klein show and other such places when they need a steelman of what the Republicans are doing (by his own account the GOP is now too dumb to support them on its own - I suppose his behavior is congruent with his claims there).
So he's trapped in the Twitter/Substack attention economy and so has to find a niche. The current one works for him since he just seems to be of a disagreeable and trollish nature in general, and there is a lot in Trumpism to disagree with.
Since we just had a discussion on whether #MeToo has run out of steam last week: Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs jailed by judge after sex trafficking indictment
Combs was arrested Monday in Manhattan, roughly six months after federal authorities raided his luxurious homes in Los Angeles and Miami.
A conviction on every charge would require at least 15 years in prison, with the possibility of a life sentence.
The indictment describes Combs as the head of a criminal enterprise that engaged or attempted to engage in sex trafficking, forced labor, interstate transportation for purposes of prostitution, drug offenses, kidnapping, arson, bribery and obstruction of justice.
Combs and his associates wielded his “power and prestige” to intimidate and lure women into his orbit, “often under the pretense of a romantic relationship,” according to the indictment.
It alleges that Combs used explicit recordings as “collateral” to ensure the women’s continued obedience and silence. He also exerted control over victims by promising career opportunities, providing and threatening to withhold financial support, dictating how they looked, monitoring their health records and controlling where they lived, according to the indictment.
This sounds very similar to the tactics used by Keith Raniere, which bodes ill for Diddy.
He's always been a Weinstein figure in hip hop (both in the sexual deviant sense and because he fit the stereotype of record/studio owner screwing artists over better than any Jewish exec in hip hop at this poinnt). Most of the stories centered around his homosexuality in perhaps the most openly homophobic genre. But, as with Weinstein, this goes way past the lurid stories passed around for years.
Funnily enough, I was just watching a video of one of the victims of Raniere [talk about the FBI's recalcitrance to take on the case up until it became public, at which point "speed of government" ceased to be a joke.
In this case, I wonder if Cassie's very public lawsuit against Diddy, facilitated by the Adult Survivor's Act and its extension of the statute of limitations (the same thing that got Trump in trouble with E. Jean Carroll) is what opened him up to a more vigorous investigation?
So, a MeToo win or not?
Probably not. Elon Musk is essentially powerless and the regime will get him someday, probably soon.
How is Twitter's debt situation looking? That might get him first.
Canada turned racist because their newcomers were subcontinental...If Canada had opened their borders to Mexico and Vietnam instead of India, Trudeau would still have a job.
Canada already had a bunch of "subcontinentals". Sure, the proportion got worse but terms like "Bramladesh" predated the recent wave of temporary foreign workers. There is a general sense that immigrants have gotten worse, but this is true within the same group.
Canada's biggest problem in terms of generating populist backlash is that it has the worst housing crisis in the G7 and everyone wants to/has to live in the same few places. You can't drop those amounts of people into such a market without massive backlash.
People hated it when it was the Chinese middle and upper classes competing with them for housing and their hate grew proportionally the more people they had to compete with. They'd hate Mexicans too.
That's probably why the preference cascade has been so total: talk about culture and you get suppressed as a racist. Housing? Everyone gets it. No amount of gaslighting or talking will change reality.
The disillusionment is also just half the issue. The people who haven't become disillusioned may also be suffering direct damage from absorbing whatever fashionable stuff is coming out of academia.
Very stupid way for a seasoned political operative to put it then.
I'm not sure exactly why people on right in the USA are till on the "thin blue line" team. Perhaps its because the median cop is more conservative. Perhaps its being more comfortable with authority and generally being more conscientious - leading to less altercations
You clearly know why the right says it's for police.
"Thin blue line" is not a content free slogan, it doesn't just mean "pro-cop". It says something about the right's view of society that explains why they're pro-cop. The right has told you why and you clearly heard them.
Is the right so insincere that their given explanation doesn't suffice and we need to speculate ?
Why should we so strongly privilege puberty because it's "natural"? Many things are natural, such as dying of a heart attack at 50 or getting prostate cancer by 80.
It's because it's both natural and we have a long track record of that path working.
It's a very difficult problem to come up with an alternative pathway that leads to physically and mentally healthy humans at our current level of tech. Unconstrained thinking is probably not a good idea when it comes to complex biological and psychological changes.
It becomes even more absurd to even attempt this in the name of people with disordered relations to their own body, when puberty itself may help resolve that disordered relationship.
Then I see no reason to declare that they're making a mistake. By the values they hold, it's the right decision.
Maybe people's intuitions that living their values will make them happy are just wrong. Maybe this is especially true for a group that is prone to a bunch of other mental disorders.
She said the assessments would address what she called "diagnostic overshadowing" - when patients' other healthcare issues were overlooked in cases of patients questioning their gender.
...
"What's unfortunately happened for these young people is that because of the toxicity of the debate, they've often been bypassed by local services who've been really nervous about seeing them," Dr Cass said.
"So rather than doing the things that they would do for other young people with depression, or anxiety, or perhaps undiagnosed autistic spectrum disorder, they've tended to pass them straight on to the Gid service."
We can't exactly take it for granted that mentally ill people are holding values that will actually make them happy , or that they have a reasonable understanding of the risk they're taking on (especially when faced with dubious information from medical practitioners)or have reasonable expectations for these treatments.
Or hell, that their stated euphoria and relief will be lasting.
We're forced to deal with a messy world that doesn't always readily cough up pathways to our desired when we ask. I'm all for overcoming biology, and I think that people who understand what they're getting into are entitled to ask for even imperfect solutions.
Society is entitled to say no. My doctor won't give me SARMs for some reason.
Discussions like this make you feel the void left by any natural law or common understanding of virtue.
I don't think Elon gives a shit about migrants crossing the border or deporting illegals.
The split over immigration that ended with Vivek exiled for criticizing American icon Ferris Bueller began over legal, skill-based migration.
Most of the party is already aligned on the illegal bit.
Kamala lost women and minorities relative to 2020
Can't overestimate the body blow of losing Latinos to a guy they've been trying to protect Latinos from since he came off the elevator escalator. Total narrative collapse.
Only thing worse would be losing black people. That'd be existential.
Diablo 4 players, how likely do you think it is that Elon Musk is bullshitting about his global ranking? What time investment would you need to get into the top 20?
There's always someone complaining about dating. Both males and females. Of all races.
White men , unlike Indians and Asians, don't complain about racial barriers specifically. The other groups have all of the standard grievances plus the feeling that their race is disfavored by the majority.
So they're probably the winners, as a race.
I feel like Canadians used to be very smug about being a first world nation. America with +40% niceness and +20% multiculturalism basically.
I don't know what happened. My social circle has narrowed in terms of ethnic Anglo/native-born Canadians outside of a few at work and my media diet is extremely Americanized (and hyper-guilt driven) so maybe I don't see it as much (or people really are just tired after the recent migrant wave). On the other hand that may be true of Canadians themselves, which might explain the increased pessimism. Or whatever common factor drove the hope-and-change era around the time I arrived in both countries is just done everyone is now more pessimistic.
I am utterly unclear as to the mechanism that allows blame to propagate forward through time and generations but doesn't allow credit and pride to propagate as well.
Other countries didn't succeed in becoming first world nations because Canada/America/the West's success is based on their exploitation. Simple.
The positives have to be weighed against the negatives. Maybe certain classes of immigrants are net-negative and a better immigration policy would be able to discriminate against these people but I don't think the UK is at the point where all immigration is net-negative.
Do you see this "better" immigration policy on the horizon anywhere in Europe? Is anyone calling for cutting out sub-Saharan Africans or MENA migrants specifically while maintaining your hypothetical improved immigration system?
If not, why not?
You can't have a left-wing Joe Rogan because the next time he strays from the line on COVID or anything else, they'll get what Rogan got. Friedland has already had one brush with cancel culture for utterly inane reasons. He got past it because he was too small to be the priority target. Whoever sits in that spot will go down for something.
This whole discussion is a bunch of evangelicals sitting around trying to figure out why they can't make movies that appeal to outsiders while refusing to mention the mile-long faith statement and guidelines they need everyone working on the film to sign on to and the essential points of doctrine that must be squeezed in. There haven't been many good movies about Mohammed for a reason.
You can have a left-wing person who's at Joe's level. You can't have a left-wing Joe Rogan because Joe Rogan isn't a partisan warrior. That's how he got so big!
Even desiring a left-wing Rogan is telling on themselves. Not everyone sees their media consumption as a way to bring about the Kingdom. It's just more of the same: people need to be educated -> people resist and flee our spaces -> well, we should just colonize that outlet too so they have no escape. Doesn't work as well with new media.
Their primary motivation is profit and status, and for the money people behind the scenes, it's profit. They care a lot less about culture war than you do.
The problem for your theory is that a lot of the creatives gain status by parroting or reproducing the tenets of their side of the culture war. Look at things like Amandla Stenberg's victimhood complex because she's -half - black, or how entire works like Eternals are marketed on "diversity", or the asinine changes made to Snow White because Peter Dinklage decided other dwarves getting jobs was problematic.
If you're a mediocre creative on a mediocre show that was hired because of inclusion standards to a work that far predates you and is frankly beyond your competence, what do you have to sell but The Message^(tm)? You have to dance with the one that brung ya.
Hollywood looks the way it does because Hollywood has always been full of both "creatives" and studio execs who are actually very bad at their jobs and make bombs regularly.
Sure. The odd bit is that what's happening now is that Hollywood is incredibly IP-heavy compared to the past and even IPs with a track record are suddenly bombing despite us knowing they can appeal to their audience.
Nobody spends time on theories about why Sony comic book movies suck. They suck cause Sony sucks. Nobody wonders why Coppola took a huge shot and failed with Megalopolis. It happens.
It is worth wondering why successful franchises like MCU and Star Wars seem to be going against their audience desires (and outright being hostile to their fans) and suffering though.
I wouldn't say that they're burning money just to Subvert Expectations cause they hate people. In fact, it's probably because they've been successful with these franchises that they think they can experiment with drawing in new audiences without their contempt for the legacy fanbase costing them.
The theory is that they don't have to choose. They can serve their diversity goals (both in front of and behind the camera) while also making more money because there's an untapped market of female nerds who want to push the MCU as far as it's gone with the male cast.
It's a weird sort of incumbent's arrogance that they can have it all, made worse by their ideological commitments.
Carini may have been outmatched, but she easily could have fought the round out defensively, run away, survived to the bell, and thrown in the towel between rounds
I have little sympathy for the inclusive side here . When Lucia Rijker fought a man it seemed like the gulf in power surprised both of them (the man was then emboldened and quickly finished her). I can see why it'd be demoralizing.
But it was noted that multiple people were warning Carini not to participate.
I can see how she was mentally defeated/checked out before she stepped in there. The punch just confirmed what she was being warned about.
Self-aware would have been to drop out before the debate. Honorable would have been doing what he suggested and being a one-term President.
Nothing about dragging this out, making every Democrat an accomplice and then haranguing them (some of the leaks imply he's not just a stubborn man but a deeply rude one) for complaining that you'll drag the ticket down is sensible or honorable.
The Democratic party may agree to pretend that him stepping down now is some honorable act of service. But that's just a face-saving measure.
- Prev
- Next
He's prone to lying (and unserious, unnecessary lying at that) and people feel they have to sort of piece together what they think he means this time.
More options
Context Copy link