I went to the woods...: 01/01/2005

Church Buries Fetuses

Yeah. I'm sure that there's some political motivation in there, but the idea that the church is trying to give mothers/family members a place to mourn if they wish is commendable. Although I'm not really all that sure why there's such a to-do over burying them. Did the mothers think that the tissue would disappear? be flushed down the toilet? What is desecrating the memory of these fetuses by having them buried? or are these women not Catholic and they have it in for the Pope? I don't know...all the complaining just seems more like whining (except for the part about the mortuary breaking contract, I'm totally cool with them getting hit for that).

Most Depressing Day of the Year

Really, it's been shown mathematically.

"The model is: ([W + (D-d)] x TQ) /[M x NA]

The equation is broken down into seven variables: (W) weather, (D) debt, (d) monthly salary, (T) time since Christmas, (Q) time since failed quit attempt, (M) low motivational levels and (NA) the need to take action."

Doesn't that just pick up your spirits? It only gets better after this.

Real Gender Bias

This nice editorial demonstrates the oft-overlooked partisan nature of feminist politics (and by saying 'feminist' I am referring to national women's groups, NOW being the most prevalent with the widest reach). Although I must admit that Mr Summers should have had a much stronger point to overwhelm any criticism of that comment (I mean, come on, like he knew that it wasn't going to be inflammatory?) and it is pretty stupid to raise that type of a question in any context other than an honest scientific one, I'm not sure why this story got such national attention as it did. Perhaps people feel that Harvard is a sign of the direction of the country or something...I don't know. Anyway, the editorial makes some nice points by demonstrating the disconnect between national women's groups perceptions of woman achievement and actual achievements made by women.

...as Steven Pinker further degrades the rather emotional reactions that have flooded people's psyches on this issue. As Reason magazine points out, "Can we talk about sex differences in math and science aptitude without yelling?"

Problems Facing America

In this article, Cohen nimbly sums up the primary difficulty of international perception:

"That is America's lot, the poisoned fruit of its power: The world looks to it for peace, for prosperity, for virtually everything. The burden is an impossible one, and one complicated by all the ambivalence that great power inspires. Even as they look to Washington, countries resent the fact that they are obliged to do so."

The answer to the question in the title of his article (What the World Wants From America) is a slight play on Madonna's famously bad song in Die Another Day - Give me everything and nothing.

Male vs Female Laws

If the laws to which this article refers are truly limited only to females, it has a good point, but if not, then she's just one more whiner. After all, I would imagine that if an actor would refuse to wear make-up, he would be in a position to be fired to a similar extent as the woman who work at Harrah's casino in Reno. Just because you may like to have your appearance in a certain way does not in any way mean that an employer has to allow that appearance to remain that way. After all, the employees are a reflection of the store.

And that whole business about presence being the same as absence is a load of something. The law must look at what it can restrict, not what it can allow. It doesn't say that these two things are the same, but that they are equivalent positions (eg both legal) under the law. If I run forwards, this is certainly different from me running backwards, but both positions are legal. This gives a measure of control to the business, but does not decide for the employees whether or not their appearance is more important than that job

Evolutionary Morality

This British study examines the possibility of social responsibility being engrained within our genetic material. Take monozygotic twins and compare their opinions on morality with those of dizygotic twins. It's a nice thought and could have been fascinating, but to do it with any sense of validity, one must minimize social differences (or atleast have a way to control them in some way). Otherwise, they present merely interesting statistics for stupid people to point to as 'proof' of something or other. After all, if morality is entirely a social construction, it's possible that the monozygotic twins would simply learn it in a similar way due to their genetic similarities or that the social treatment of monozygotic vs dizygotic twins differs in such a way as to take on more similar traits or any number of other explanations for such data. It just would've been nice to here Prof. Rushton's opinion on why this wasn't necessary to discuss.

Fashion

Here, Cardin speaks on the inconsequential nature the fashion industry has taken on without blinking. One of the leaders, his discussion of the lack of dressing (and the abundance of undressing) that defines modern fashion is quite revealing. This is definitely the best article on fashion I've seen in awhile

What is a conservative?

Although the writer of this article certainly has an interesting (and quicky rejected throughout the common academic milieu) point of view, he tends to emphasize a racial conservativism (which he finds easily equatable with civilization conservativism) that shadows the rest of his argument. He sees conservativism as the need to conserve the Anglo civilization of our forbearers. This soon translates into a need for increased immigration control (which he tries to equate with most other problems, the most obvious - terrorism - being thrown out to keep up tempo) and other qualities that are often not considered as part of the mainstream conservative movement (which he readily admits and moves him to their admonishment).

His main strings that are never really tied but are simply laid next to each other are those regarding "liberalism" and "economism". These are the internal anti-West movements rotting the core of our civilization. However, he really wants to use the words "postmodernism" and "naturalism", which start to reveal the subtleties of his argument much better. His one interesting point that I need to look at further is that these reinforce each other in regards to modern culture/media...though I tend toward the idea that they simply have not been pitted against each other (after all, conservativism is a much easier and more available target).

Another interesting byproduct is that we get to see what an American white male would say when pushed into a racial position (one that is more often ignored).

"Immigration, overwhelmingly nonwhite, is the main driver of our population growth. About 1.5 million immigrants arrive annually, and immigrant women bear 750,000 babies annually. Immigrants and their descendants accounted for 47 percent of population growth in 1970-1990, and, according to Steven Camarota, Director of Research of the Center for Immigration Studies, for 69 percent of growth in 1990-2000 and 2000-2002. If this continues, whites will become a minority—and, in today's bilious antiwhite climate, a persecuted minority. Moreover, since environmental ruin and resource depletion are mostly population-driven, immigration is the main culprit in sprawl, the energy crisis, groundwater depletion, and so on."*

This type of an argument, completely valid when race rules, becomes the new rule. After all, who wants to be a white American male today (besides a white American female?)? People want the advantages of being American, but no one in their right mind would trade their own culture away for that of modern white America. It reminds us of why we all (white, black, American, Asian, etc...) must be careful that our sense of self (and thus our civilizations) is not based on skin color/race/ethnicity but on principle. We must not be ruled by fear. For if so, globalization quickly turns into turf wars that will destroy it and all those involved.

*Steven A. Camarota, "Immigrants in the United States—2000: A Snapshot of America's Foreign-Born Population," Center for Immigration Studies Backgrounder, January 2001, pp. 1-5;

The Love Drug

This article is fascinating to me for a couple of reasons.

1. The writer starts asking questions throughout the first half without ever coming to good answers, then near the end subsides to an attempt (that never really convinces her, it seems) at hope for the future along the same lines. After all, it can't be possible that the assumptions guiding us from those dark days a few decades ago might just be wrong...can it?

2. 'This may, of course, be a matter of confidence. In a recent survey across 10 countries, British women proved to have the least faith in themselves - or more precisely in the way they look. Only one in five said they saw themselves as attractive, while only one in 50 described themselves as "sexy" '. This deserves some exploration in itself.

I went to the woods...

Monday, January 24, 2005

Church Buries Fetuses

Most Depressing Day of the Year

Friday, January 21, 2005

Real Gender Bias

Wednesday, January 19, 2005

Problems Facing America

Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Male vs Female Laws

Evolutionary Morality

Fashion

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

What is a conservative?

The Love Drug

About Me

Previous Posts

Archives