Reflections, Reflections

In a way, what I can say is: it took them long enough (to go for the blogging vying the money/corporate bottomline/angle).

This is another good article on blogging developments (by Sarah E. Needleman, The Wall Street Journal)

In its short lifespan, blogging has largely been a freewheeling exercise in online self-expression. Now it is also becoming a corporate job.

A small but growing number of businesses are hiring people to write blogs, otherwise known as Web logs, or frequently updated online journals. Companies are looking for candidates who can write in a conversational style about timely topics that would appeal to customers, clients and potential recruits.

And look at the salary (!):

"It's wonderful to write every day," Ms. Halvorson says. "The only challenge is keeping up with this rapidly changing blogging technology, like audio and video blogging," she adds. She earns an annual salary in the mid-$40,000s, she says.

Gary Hirshberg, Stonyfield's chief executive, says he plans to hire one or two additional full-time bloggers within the next two years. "The blogs give us what we call a handshake with consumers, a bond of loyalty and mutual trust that's different than the typical selling relationship, where it's all about price," Mr. Hirshberg says. "With the blogs, we are giving a little bit more access to us as a people with a mission."

Mr. Hirshberg says he looks for candidates "who are comfortable writing in a colloquial voice and who aren't overly programmed in their approach to writing." He adds, "You have to be conversational, and that sounds simple, but it's not."

Last paragraph, well said.

Heather Hamilton, who works for Microsoft Corp. as a staffing programs manager for marketing and finance, suggested that she write a blog to help in recruiting and has been doing it since last year. Hers is one of about 1,500 blogs written by Microsoft employees (available at Microsoft.com/community/blogs). She writes about what it is like to work at the company, jobs she is filling and hiring trends. "When I started my blog, I didn't realize it would become part of my job," she says. "I wanted to help people think about Microsoft as a career destination."

Blogging as a job has emerged as companies of all stripes increasingly see the Web as an important communications venue. Blogs allow firms to assume a natural tone rather than the public-relations speak typical of some static Web pages, and readers are often invited to post comments. While some companies are hiring full-time bloggers, others are adding blogging duties to existing marketing or Web-editing positions.

But now we have already another problem - how to distinguish between real sincerity in blogs and the company shill?

Gone are those days...

.

Today is 'World No Tobacco Day,' an annual observance started by the World Health Organization to detail the damage done by tobacco smoke worldwide and to discourage people from using tobacco.

According to the WHO, tobacco use kills approximately 3.5 million people worldwide per year. That equals 10,000 people per day.

In addition, the health related costs from tobacco use are $200 billion per year according to a study conducted by the World Bank.

The WHO also estimates that by 2020, tobacco will kill more than 10 million people annually worldwide. That would make it the leading cause of death and disability in the world, taking more lives than HIV, motor vehicle accidents, suicide, homicide and death in child birth combined.

The focus of this year's 'World No Tobacco Day' is getting health care professionals to encourage people to stop smoking. Right now, only a small percentage of health care professionals are trained to get people to stop smoking. The WHO wants to raise awareness of this and increase the training doctors, nurses and other health care professionals get in this area.

---

More lives than AIDS? That is a lot. More power to the WHO. (I hate cigarettes and smoking).

.

"Everything worth saying has already been said. The challenge is to say it again."

From a thread at Ace.

---

Cool.

Goethe has some really great quotes. I will collect some later to put here.

I've never read Goethe, btw. When I started to read this comment, my first thought was, "Remember what Goethe said? And you think we have actually read Goethe to remember anything?"

;-)

Can we ever have hope to someday have read a lot? Is it worth it?

I want to live.

Zorba, the Greek, comes to mind (complete with principal sound track music).

Trrrling... trrrllinng... (those are the beginning strumming chords of the Zorba film sound track, in case you didn't listen carefully :-)

.

You know that I should be working but am too tired to do so when I actually waste precious minutes of my life and soil my blog with anything to do with Paris Hilton... this apparently is her fiancé. They seem to deserve each other in their moronicness. Ah, celebrity culture...

And a blond Greek.. yuck. Manly Greeks have dark hair with dark penetrating eyes... ;-)

---

Jack said (in the comments to this post):

Richard Cohen (whom I generally refuse to read) had a fairly good article in today's Washington Post about America's obsession with Paris Hilton. I wanted to tell him that no, America's not obsessed with Paris Hilton, just the American media — until I saw your weblog entry.

I found the article. Here are my comments to what he wrote:

" that same utter indifference to being a spectacle. She is buoyed by our celebrity-obsessed culture, which in itself is just an adjunct of the need to sell. "

To the point. Why does she like to appear so much, to be a "vapid celebrity," is a bit of a mystery so far. Most stupidly rich kids don't. They have better sense, but she actually wants it and works hard to have the celebrity attention.

"The shows that feature the comings and goings of the famous — the riveting saga of Brad and Angelina — are merely trying in their own way to aggregate an audience so that they can sell products through commercials. The creation of celebrities — of national brands — is an essential part of that process."

But it's more as well, it's not just on the consumerism side, it's the circus in the bread and circus equation.

"It is of a man expressing the sentiments of his generation, the lost one,"

So much has been lost in just one generation. Debasing people, privacy, sex is now such a norm, such a legitimized way of behavior for society.

---

Jack said:
"Oh, well. In conclusion, you have to admit that this is a better comment than the one that just popped into my head: When's the video?"

You know, it would be easy to call you "sick" for thinking that, but I did startle for a second when I realized, on second thought, that there is actually a real possibility of this happening, given Paris' psychological profile.

"Since that stupid video came out, I haven't been able to get away from that name. It's like the entire country's infected with a disgusting disease."

Yep, the worst of capitalism with the worst of liberalism, that is the Paris Hilton cultural disease in a couple of words.

---

"I wanted to tell him that no, America's not obsessed with Paris Hilton, just the American media — until I saw your weblog entry. "

Now how am I supposed to feel? :-)

What started as an inane and innocent way to blow off some stress after a hard day, by engaging in a little celebrity jab, turned out to be one more horrible contribution to this ocean of debased celebrity culture, eh? You think I have actually contributed to this idiot's celebrity status? In my defense, I have to say, they are retarded, it's not my fault. :-)

If everyone pointed out how retarded she is, she would not be a celebrity.

p.s. The funny thing is, I felt like expounding more on how retarted the couple is/looks, but I felt guilty attacking these kids when they haven't done anything to me, personally. I doubt that they will ever have even 1/1000th of this consideration for anyone in the world, including me, but still, it seemed like anything more was just a cheapshot.

At the same time, the whole celebrity culture system is not innocuous. And how she debases sex in so many ways (including this new hamburger commercial, which I have not seen) isn't innocuous either. Hilton is a more vapid variation of Madonna. Cohen was wrong when he said:

"You can be famous for being famous for a while, but ultimately you have to be famous for something. It's a rule."

He kind of meant "you have to be famous for some talent, some feat." In our world, you can be famous for being simply rich. Not just menial rich, anyone obscenely rich can be very famous. And keep being famous.

There is also the pornographic aspect of Hilton. So many people in society crave debased sex, debased human behaviors. At the moment, there are strong currents to make that quite the norm in society. And anyone who objects is attacked as "prude, backwards" or something similar.

Just so much has been lost in this respect in a couple of decades.

---

On a tangent, yesterday I came across this article "Journalists must stop being in denial: bloggers are here to stay," by John Naughton in the Guardian, which is a pretty good analysis of some blogsphere phenomena.

Large swathes of the journalistic profession (though not, I am glad to say, either The Observer or the Guardian ) are still in denial about blogging. In that sense, they resemble music industry executives circa 1999, denying the significance of online file- sharing. But the claim that blogging is a threat to journalism - that inside every blogger is a 'journalist-wannabe' trying to escape - is just daft.

What's happening is a small but significant change in our media ecology. All journalists worth their salt have always known that out there are readers, listeners or viewers who know more about a story than they do. But until recently, there was no effective way for this erudition or scepticism to find public expression. Letters to the editor rarely attract public attention - or impinge on the consciousness of journalists.

Blogging changes all that. Ignorant, biased or lazy journalism is instantly exposed, dissected and flayed in a medium that has global reach. (If you doubt that, ask Dan Rather and CBS.)

Conversely, good reporting and intelligent commentary is passed from blog to blog and spreads like wildfire beyond the jurisdiction in which it was originally published. This can only be good for journalism in the long run, if only because, as my mother used to say, sunlight is the best disinfectant.

And I was thinking about the Cohen piece. If I took my content of observations about the Hilton phenomenum and polished the writing, I'm at the same level of writing that this Cohen piece is (which I don't think is high, it's not bad, but it's not a difficult piece to write). I may not be able to market my article to even the jr. highschool newspaper, because of lack of expertise in journalism selling and marketing, but as far as writing level goes...

Please note, I am not implying that Cohen (or myself) are at the pinnacles of journalism or writing, but this is exactly what the Guardian piece is about. There is a lot of writing that is produced in journalism that is not particularly clever, well-researched or high-level writing, but the authors have a monopoly of the selling and distribution means. The blogosphere is starting to crack that monopoly.

p.s. I don't know who had the terrible idea to institute the word "blogosphere"... It sounds awful with this "o" in the middle. People, the word is "blogs," so it should be "blogsphere." It doesn't matter that there is this word "atmosphere," "blogos" just sounds awful. I expect the world to change. Quickly. :-)

.

you realize you haven't checked Drudge Report for an entire 48 hours... :-)

.

From Cantanima, the struggle for life of a little spider clinging to his windshield on his speeding car.

I also like spiders (well, not the big ones, I mean, they are fine on TV, but not next to you). But I don't like to kill the little ones, the ones that pop into your house. So, unless their web is at a very inconvenient place, I just let them be and live happily making their little picnics on their webs. I don't know much about them as well, but they do catch flying insects (and whatever else they like), so they are good for killing these other bugs naturally.

I know that in the Middle East, spiders are considered as bringing good luck.

.

From Ace: Ten Minute Mega-Teaser for Batman Begins. Film promises to be dull, just like the majority of these recent super hero flicks.

I read a few of these superheroes comics when I was too young to understand anything more than the storyline. To give you an idea, I read Donald Duck at the same time and it was just as entertaining, but I don't remember reading much Batman comics. So, my reference point for Batman is the great TV series, with the comics "POW" words exploding on screen when there was a fight and the classic "he will not be able to escape this certain death" ending that left you hanging for each weekly episode.

But today, the problem with all these mega-million super-hero Hollywood productions is that they have a lot of beautiful takes, fantastic special effects, a sprinkle of philosophy, but it's ultra vapid as far as content goes. It's flaky drama, predictable or insipid romance, stupid quests. Ugh.

AND... to really crash this Batman project as far as my enjoyment is concerned, if a movie is vapid, at least what the producers can do is fill it with gorgeous, charming men. At least the title role, but, what have they done? He is ugly!! Good God, if you are going to make a James Bond type movie, spy or super-hero or human-hero, it's all the same, it's just empty Hollywood glitz action, the very least these movie producers could do, is to cast a gorgeous guy to play Batman! I mean, it's the role for a most handsome man, the suave millionaire who deep-down is your great hero and not your Enron filth or Trump puffed pastry.

It just has to be on the Pierce Brosnan level for the big screen. Even Adam West, who was not all that magnificently looking, did quite well as far as charming exuding wealth goes when dressed up as millionaire Bruce.

Also, I don't even know what this female role is supposed to be, but it seemed just as uninteresting. The only Batman female character I have a reference for is Catgirl, which, given the stupid 60's mentality about women, is all infused in the TV Catgirl, didn't get any better on screen.

However, I would go see this Batman in a theater just because of the beautiful scenery, many of those shots will come alive on a big screen. But I'll probably want to walk out the Batman theater and go right into a second film feature to remind myself that there are films out there with content, that leave you thrilled or emotionally satisfied or intrigued and not just this empty Hollywood fast action vacuum puff covered with glitter.

.

In case my million of readers have been wondering, this will be a very busy week... so little or no blogging. I've been enjoying dropping around other blogs and participating in their threads these last couple of days. Haven't come across any news that was that eye-catching for blogging either.

Later...
.

Cute.

Gay men's chorus ad pulled from newspaper

The Buffalo [N.Y.] Jewish Review newspaper has refused to run an advertisement featuring the Buffalo Gay Men's Chorus because it "might influence young people to experiment with a sexual lifestyle that could be harmful to their health," says the newspaper's editor, Rita Weiss.

"On a very practical basis, there is the possibility of influencing some young people whose sexual development is not yet complete," she told the Buffalo News. "They could get AIDS. They could try out a lifestyle that is life-threatening."

Weiss told the newspaper that she is also concerned about "the perpetuation of the Jewish people" in the face of demographic trends, including young Jews who stay in the gay lifestyle. "They can't produce children," she said. "And you can't build a people with adoption."

[...]

Temple Beth Zion rabbi Harry Rosenfeld and Stuart G. Lerman said that "to exclude or oppress members of our community because of their sexual orientation would be denying their humanity."

"The reason given was that the paper did not want to condone homosexual behavior," they wrote. "The editor made it clear that, in her opinion, publishing the ad would offend subscribers."

A few things struck me about the above article, published in a pro-homo activist publication, the Advocate.

The major one is the attempt by pro-homos to frame every form of discernment and choice by society regarding what will be promoted as a healthy lifestyle as a form of discrimination. This attempt can only be achieved if pro-homos equate human sexuality and lifestyle with sexual orientation. The newspaper above did not discriminate based on sexual orientation, but on behavior, lifestyle, and sexuality. These are very different things. Pro-homos have made it one of the pillars of their political cult to disingenuously treat them all as equal.

As I have written before:

Human sexuality is the full aggregate of a person´s psychology (both conscious and unconscious), their intellectual thinking, their attitudes, their values, their desires, their dysfunctions, their emotions, and their behaviors about sex/body/intimacy. It is like equating a button on your computer to the entire computer. Human sexuality encompasses sexual orientation along with millions of other things and can never be equated.

The aggregate of sexuality/behavior/lifestyle is very different than the minimal, murky, dumbed-down concept of sexual orientation. If the paper had rejected an ad for a BDSM Choir, it would have been similar. People do not choose to have a violent sexual orientation, neither are they born with it. It is a dysfunctional development, just like some aspects of homosexuality. Therefore, to say that society can no longer discriminate based on behavior, lifestyle, political activism, and sexuality is to deny a most fundamental human right of discernment to society. This has nothing to do with discrimination that "denies someone their humanity." And is that a sugary, melodramatic distortion of the paper's reason to reject the ad or what?

Mainly what homo activists have done is to apply the following manipulative logic:

To discriminate based on sexual orientation is wrong, therefore society must accept homosexuals regarding their sexuality (not just sexual orientation), which includes all the behaviors and all the lifestyles and all the political activism of all homosexuals, otherwise you are discriminating against "the person and their humanity."

This is absurd and a full violation of human agency, not to mention how it violates fundamental religious precepts.

---

Another issue that relates to the above article is regarding how society is panicky and uncomfortable with the reality of bisexuals. From personal observation, I have seen more bisexuals than homosexuals in society (and if researchers would ever get their act together regarding more precise stats on the issue, we would have the numbers confirmation), yet the media/political noise that homos are making far exceeds bisexuals. Not only that, bisexuals are currently made invisible while homos are propped up in the spotlight. One very clear explanation to this phenomenon is that society (meaning the bulk of heterosexuals) loves to think in terms of a "us versus them" category, with clean, very marked divisions. Which also explains why so many people are dying to believe in the homo gene theory. And why people usually brand all married folks as heterosexual and all single adults past a certain age who don't have a partner as closeted homos.

As a recent example, at the gym I go to, I went to ask a (married) woman who has been going to the gym a long time if she knew what the marital status of a certain guy was. Her reply was, "No, I have never heard him talk about a wife, never, and... if someone here isn't married then it's obvious they're homosexual. So that's what he must be."

After that second of shock in hearing exactly how most people stereotype others but usually don't say it outloud, I said, "Well, he can't be homosexual, at the most bisexual." This is what I was able to mutter, being so struck and sickened with the possibility that the man in question might not be straight as I had been thinking. It was the first time the thought had crossed my mind.

She was totally puzzled, "Why do you say that?"

"Because he was flirting with me, a lot." I replied.

And then she expressed total shock at my reply and I realized why. Guess what category she had dumped me in as well?

Good God, it's like living in the Middle Ages with these retards and the grossest, most primitive stereotypical thinking humans can muster.

.

From Clayton.

When you think society will never stop doing this, it's such a losing education battle, it always brings a little relief to see someone raising awareness on this issue. And this same romanticizing is being done with dysfunctional sexuality today. All forms of dysfunctional sexualities are being completely romanticized and legitimized, reinforced quite often by pornography and the detestable pro-homos.

.

This is a question I had thought of before, which came up again (for me) in a thread at Ace:

On a more serious inquiring note, I find it really intriguing how humans are so different with drawing abilities. Why are most people not able to draw well? What makes it so hard to see something in 3D and trace it in 2D format on a piece of paper?

For me, at least, to draw a copy of an existing drawing or photo to another piece of paper is infinitely easier than to draw the exact same thing if I were looking at it in a real, 3D space. Does that have to do with how our eyes see things? Is it just lack of training or practice?

Also, do most of your drawing abilities come from your genes, you are born with them? Is that why some people can do it effortlessly and others not at all? How much can a human being actually learn to draw?

.

I liked this one :-)

From PostSecret:

I am unable to post all the postcards I receive every week. I regret that I can't share the power, vulnerability and courage of each and every secret mailed in. Hopefully, I can compile a book with many of the equally gripping secrets that have not been posted here.

After reading the blog, it's scary to realize that some readers will think that just because someone revealed a secret that, therefore, this revelation is a valid way to think or to act (the only problem was in it being a secret).

What is amazing is that it's such a simple idea, yet, the result is so powerful.

.

Fun from TimT:

STEREOTYPIST WANTED

Must be able to Stereotype at a speed of over 40 biases per minute (40bpm). We want the faster prejudgers in the business!

:-)

Who do you think stereotypes faster, liberals or conservatives?

.

It looks normal from the outside, but once you get inside you either laugh or you have an anxiety attack... Imagine if you're in there and someone stops on the outside and it seems they are looking at you...

.

From Globe and Mail Update:

Researchers performed two independent studies on three groups of women; those who currently attended yoga classes, those who did aerobic exercise, and those who had not done any yoga or aerobic exercise in the previous two years. The women were asked to fill out questionnaires, which asked them questions about their self-image and eating habits.

Regardless of age, the yoga practitioners reported less self-objectification, a better self-image, and fewer eating disorders than those who did not practise yoga, according to the report.

In addition, the study also found the more hours a women practised yoga per day, the more likely they were to have a positive self-image and healthy eating habits.

By coincidence, I bought an intro to yoga book (just some exercises and a little on breathing and meditation) last week and it's sitting unopened on the shelf.

They actually have yoga classes at the gym I go to, but I hate these gym yoga classes, because they are always ultra advanced and the stupid instructor always says the same "Oh, it doesn't matter you're a beginner, it's easy!" And you can't even begin to put your toes in the contorted way your entire body should be in and you feel like you are going to die in another 3 seconds, since for your starting pose you need to make your head face the back of your ankle and then twist your elbow to touch the center of your back, subsequently balancing all your body weight on your two pinkies for at least 15 minutes. The golden touch comes when yogi-bear then beams,"Now meditate about how good it all feels!" Thirty minutes later, your bubbly yoga teacher walks over, and cheerfully inquires, "So, did you like the class?" And you can no longer untangle yourself into a normal standup position and need to be shipped home in a FedEx carton.

.

Divorced dad from Australia was replying to a fun questionnaire when he said this:

5. Do you eat duck?

No way - that'd be cannibalism.. but being divorced, in lots of ways I have to eat my pride... does that count?!?

:-D

I don't see too many people concerned about this question, but I certainly think it's a highly important question. I believe most people don't ask it because the cloud of social denial hanging over the issue of child abuse in society is still profoundly thick. Most people don't want to acknowledge one or more of their co-workers (who seem so nice at work) could be abusing a child.

This issue came up on a comment at Onkroes, also blogged here, where he said:

Thanks for popping in Alessandra, and needless to say I agree. If we kept it in mind we couldn't function, out of fear if nothing else.

The thing that keeps getting to me is this: I work in a large company (employees 40,000 people worldwide), and it stands to reason (and probability) that a percentage of them are indeed very sick or twisted individuals. Yet they will almost certainly come across as 'normal' if you met them in your everyday life. And every company or group of people stands comparison to the same laws of probability. Worrying? Probably. Can we do anything about it? No.
Just be very choosy about your friends, eh?

---

My reply:

Hi, you wrote:
Can we do anything about it? No.
-----------------
Never think like this! :-)

I've actually given some thought to this question: statistically speaking, large companies such as yours will contain sexual abusers and other dysfunctional people.

1) I believe the company should do more to find out who of its employees are child abusers, specially if it's ongoing.

2) I believe there are certain rights issues regarding you are your co-workers. Who has the right to force you to work alongside a child abuser? Should you not be able to have the right to choose?

3) Making child abusers unemployed does not solve the child abuse problem unless there are strong services in place to shelter the kids. The foster parent scheme is a disgrace and highly abusive. It's a larger problem.

4) I think it's your fundamental responsibility to care for and shelter your kids, but don't forget there are other children who are being tortured. We can't turn our backs on them.

---

Just thinking outloud here, one idea that came to mind was that a company would have its employees do a lie detector test every 1-5 yrs regarding child abuse activities.

I am sure there are tons of legal complications involved, but isn't that a starting point for thinking about what a company could do to identify abusers? Rapists too.

---

I sent an email to the Volokh blog inviting them to discuss the matter. Any other thoughts from anyone?

.

Reza Alavi for "New flag of Iraq", 2003



the actual Iraqi flag is here.

.

A simple train picture, but the colors and lighting turned out so nice. Really captures that afternoon in a train feeling. from andorol.

.

From Onkroes:

I'm amazed by people, the sheer stupidity and ignorance, the overwhelming selfishness, the disgusting self hate, the arrogance.

I'm not talking about a personal event this time, but about stuff you find on the internet.
[...]
From grown men renting plastic dolls to f*ck, to assholes vandalising other people's property for fun, from ch1ld p0rn to fecophelia (that's eating sh1t if you didn't know), from legal slavery to racist violence, from self-harm to religious intolerance, from spiritual m*sturb*tion to bonsai animals, from sheer hatred to acceptable casualties, from illegal wars to stop-and-search.

The list is endless, but I thought I'd stop there. You name it, there's a web-site for people who do it, or admire it, or support it, or hate it for that matter.

Why are people like that? Who are these people?

---

I don't know if we could get through the week keeping in mind just how sick the world is... the sheer quantity of heavy duty sick puppies is not trivial.

Undoutedly.

---

Update May 17, 2005:

Michelle Malkin is pointing to a pair of homo parents who have made a t-shirt saying:

"My daddy's name is Donor." This T-shirt made by Family Evolutions, a company that specializes in products for homosexual parents, really says it all. The child is the son of the company's founders, a lesbian pair.

From Dawn Eden:

Most of all, the homosexual-marriage campaign is about the selfish interests of adults—not what's best for children. Look at the face of that little boy. He's old enough to have some idea of what it means to have a daddy named Donor. Do you think he's happy about it? Do you think he considers that worth celebrating? Or did his lesbian parents stick him in that T-shirt because they thought they'd have some harmless fun at his expense? Besides, he makes such an adorable shill.

And now...from Ace:

The Japanese are selling a Russian Roulette toy-gun & game. For kids, of course.

Even more disturbing than the concept is the art chosen to adorn the package.

Boy, that kid looks like he's having all sorts of fun having his brains blown out (make-pretend, of course).

Because you know all boys aged 8-13 really want to re-enact that scene from The Deer Hunter.

It's like a competition in the world to see who can legitimize the most mental problems, the Japanese Russian Roulette for kids, the homos and their millions of mental problems, including opposite-sex hatred...

At least, Japan has spared us the theory that their Russian Roulette orientation is due to a not-yet-found gene... if only the Japanese paid more attention to pro-homos, they could call anyone who objected to their social sickness as full of hate and bring on their Russian Roulette Pride parades... with a Bang!

---

New update:

I'll try to blog on this article regarding the Sex Party in Canada later, but it's a great example of people with all kinds of dysfunctional sexuality issues trying to legitimize themselves by saying anyone who disagrees with their views and practices is fearful of sexuality. This line, by the way, is the same disengenuous one used in the "homophobic" concept.

Perhaps not so surprising, but equally disgusting, is how they conceive of and posit themselves to be sexuality "healers." How many mental problems does a person need to have to go around asking strangers to fondle them sexually? And, on top of it, call this "health and healing?"

NAMBLA, pro-homos, pro-prostitution and pro-porn folks, the Sex Party, are all variations on the same "legitimize my sexual dysfunctions" theme.

.

Why? Dogpile now allows you to compare search results from Google, Yahoo, and Ask Jeeves. Nice.

Reference: El Telendro (in Spanish)
.

Beautiful writing at Impensável - in Portuguese:

Com estes pedaços já escassos de frio de Maio faço casulos para sonos espessos de inverno e, apressado, adormeço; o livro que leio tomba com o estrondo de ainda uma vez falhar equilibrá-lo sobre os outros, na mesinha-de-cabeceira. Sorrio benévolo da aselhice destes gestos de mundo acordado e durmo sem escrúpulos a noite apócrifa.

.

Ego-yan is this retarded Canadian filmmaker making a splash at Cannes. From CNN - regarding how pornographic his latest movie is :

Yet Egoyan wondered why viewers were so complacent about a scene in which a performer (Colin Firth) viciously pounds an audience member's head on the floor for heckling his partner (Kevin Bacon).

"It really is interesting to me how people respond to the sexuality but not to the violence," Egoyan said at a news conference, responding to reporters' questions about why he went as far as he did in sex scenes involving Bacon, Firth, Alison Lohman and other co-stars.

"No one says that it goes too far when he's bashing his head against the floor. No one ever talks about that. That's the most gory scene I've ever done, and people don't have a problem with that. It's weird. We're still really kind of obsessed about sex."

[...]

Lanny and Vince's sexual conquests, including a threesome with the woman who ends up dead, are presented with steamy explicitness, sometimes as comical commentary on their lifestyle of debauchery.

Karen also is lured into Lanny and Vince's carnal activities, including a lesbian encounter with a woman in an "Alice in Wonderland" getup.

Bacon figures it may not be the movie's sex that disturbs people so much as the naturalness of it.

"Sex is often times all right to see as long as the participants are clothed, or some sort of piece of furniture is put in the way of the nudity," Bacon said. "One of the things about the movie is that when we have sex, we're naked.

"That's what kind of flips people out, which I don't understand. Sometimes, personally, I leave some of my clothes on, but usually ... I don't know about the rest of you. It is unfortunate that people find that so disturbing. To me, I think that the sex in the movie is incredibly appropriate."

Well, I don't know about the rest of you, specially this Ego-yan tool, but when people bash other people's heads against the floor, they usually send them to the hospital. You mean, Mr. Ego-yan, that you didn't have your actors really bash one of their heads on the floor, such as in real life? And if they did, would you also not understand if there was a scandal? I really don't understand all this fakiness either. And people not wanting to see your retarded pornography which you want to pass off as cinema... Really...

I haven't seen the movie and do not plan to see it. But I hope the reviewers slam it. Just by the review, it reminded me of "Gegen die Wand" by Fatih Akin. Why do some of these turds that direct film nowadays think they have to shove all this full nudity, full contact, full action sex in our faces? It's gross. I don't want to see two or more prostitutes (the real profession name of these "actors") perform sexual acts in front of a camera and have that presented to me as a "movie."

Someone please educate this Ego-yan tool that's why, in real movies, actors don't perform all the sexual acts people do in their private spheres.

And to think Colin Firth is in this crap... Can Firth hit more bottom?

.

From the Chronicle - article on professors who stay active into their old age:

Exhibit A: Britton Chance, 92 years old.

He arrives at his laboratory each day at 7:30 a.m. -- on his bicycle.

An emeritus professor in the department of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Mr. Chance studies cancerous tumors of the brain, breast, prostate, and muscles. He conducts experiments, works with undergraduate and graduate students, and publishes papers. He gave three honors lectures last month.

His hearing is fine, so don't mention the R-word around him.

"Why should I retire?" asks Mr. Chance, who has earned five degrees from Penn and the University of Cambridge and written more than 1,300 scientific articles on topics as diverse as radar and enzymes. "I have good health and a good body and the mind is still functioning."

[...]
Gertrude F. (Gert) Rempfer, 93. An emeritus professor of physics at Portland State University, she works six or seven hours a day to design a photoelectron microscope that will "correct chromatic and spherical aberrations."

Ms. Rempfer raised four children and pursued a career at a time when people "looked askance at you if you had a job outside the house," she says. "I was a little unusual in not really caring what people thought of me."
[...]
Charles H. (Hap) Fisher, 98, -After earning his Ph.D. in chemistry there, he taught at Harvard and went on to spend much of his career at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Four years ago, the graduate of Roanoke College returned to his alma mater as an adjunct research professor of chemistry.
[...]

Then there's Ray H. Crist. He is 105.

Until a year or so ago, the chemist was in the laboratory at Messiah College every day, sometimes for 10 hours at a stretch, doing research on the ability of plants like algae to absorb toxic metals from groundwater.
[...]
Failing health forced him to retire for good last spring. He is writing his autobiography, and he has a paper pending with the Pennsylvania Academy of Science.

"I am at the end of my working period," he says. "I only hope that I could have worked a little bit longer."

Cool.

.

The revolution is on.

And the newcomers are blossoming.

.

So, after going to the gym last night, I was hungry and started thinking about what would be a good way to resolve it, when I settled at stopping by at the supermarket and getting some things to make a nice hamburger (I had no lettuce, tomato, bread, nor mustard at home). I was at the checkout counter, waiting for my turn, when I turn around to gaze in another direction and what do I see? A whole pyramid of Nutella. Oh God! There it was, staring at me, begging me to buy it. As I have mentioned before, I usually avoid buying Nutella at all costs because it's just too good (and the calorie content is slightly different than a lettuce leaf).

"I am not going to buy it... I love Nutella... It's staring at me... But it only comes second to mayonaise in calories.. No.. No.. I don't want to buy it..." I glanced away. I glanced back. I looked away. "Just one... " I cajoled myself. So I went over and, thank you Jesus, it was the small container version. After I got home, I had a really nice meal with a fantastic home made hamburger and Italian grapes for dessert. I wasn't really going to have more dessert, when I thought, "Just a little chocolate taste, like an after dinner sweet." A little while later, half the Nutella pot was gone.

So this morning I wake up and I tell myself, "must have small breakfast, to compensate for yesterday's late night splurge." So I have a small breakfast (which includes some Nutella) and come blog and the thought of it just keeps coming up again and again. Oh, the heck with it...

Now I'll just wait six months before buying it again.

.

So I went to check it out, and God, it's awful.

I almost felt a perverse kind of satisfaction that it was so awful, specially after I noted that my blog was not listed on the blog roll. Teasing...

But this is good.
.

LOL-comments on Ace's Tut post.

.

It took techies long enough to develop this, but a very practical idea has been implemented in California.

.

Another good analysis from Justin Katz on the politics of labeling (conservative Christians):

Communicating with the 'Faces of Hate'

"It is YOU YOU YOU YOU who cause the suffering and harm."

Closing a recitation of the deepest hurts — beatings, suicides, depression — in a blog commenter's life, the above quotation resonates threateningly even through the gauze of anonymity that the Internet provides. The reason, beyond its discomfiting hysteria, is that the accusation is leveled not at a lifelong nemesis, or even an acquaintance, but at a stranger with the audacity to offer his opinion in a forum intended for and visited by those of a disagreeing worldview. In some circles, such is the collective guilt of conservative Christians that an individual can be held responsible for decades of suffering among people whom he has never met.

[...]

In a letter to the paper the following day, professor of English and film studies John Leo expressed his "sense of shame that [Nelson] will soon be credentialed by URI." In Leo's eyes, the only way in which Nelson might cleanse himself of the stain that "clearly marks [him] as an ignorant bigot," would be to follow up with an essay about how the African AIDS policies of "the Bush administration and the Catholic Church . . . are contributing to the unconscionable killing of hundreds of thousands of people."

A few editions later, library and film studies professor Michael Vocino described the notion that Professor Leo might have been "trying to 'exchange ideas' with the student" as laughable. Simply put, commentaries such as Nelson's "cause murder, beatings, humiliation and more for LGBT community members." Leo's reaction, therefore, was a model for the "passion" with which professors should speak to their students. Especially a certain type of student:

The student in question is a fundamentalist Christian and believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible. He has stated that outright in classes, private and public conversations and implies as much in his many columns.

The classification is offered as if, once proven, it is decisive regarding the respect that the student is due. The "fundamentalist Christian" tag marks Nelson as a member of a class that deserves none of the allowances or even courtesies that other identity groups enjoy. Gone is the presumption of extenuating circumstances; the young man's right to comity has been expended by definition. Nelson is among the "faces of hate," in Vocino's words. "Please don't be fooled by them," he exhorts, stating as incontrovertible fact that an "exchange of ideas" is the "last thing they are interested in."

Perhaps the most disquieting quality of conservative Christians' designation as an unprotected class is that it finds such high currency among professionals who ought to know better. Humanities professors have practically made a grammatical Truth of language's ability to dehumanize and disqualify, making violence against individuals appear less culpable.

[...]

---

"It is YOU YOU YOU YOU who cause the suffering and harm."

Liberal/leftwing ideology is so problematic because it is constructed upon an extreme Manichean world and people division. The division itself is already ridiculous, but it has become nothing more than a blame-them-while-never-holding-us-accountable-for-anything game. It gets so extreme that one could call it a cult. Both liberals and conservatives cause suffering and harm in the world, but I see liberals generally adopting the most extremely arrogant, unconscientious attitudes about themselves and others.

---

Update May 14

By coincidence, La Shawn blogged about something related: Liberals Hate The Word ‘Liberal.’

.

Girolamo Savonarola - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Girolamo Savonarola by Fra Bartolomeo, ca 1498

Girolamo Savonarola (September 21, 1452 – May 23, 1498), also translated as Jerome Savonarola or Hieronymous Savonarola, was a Dominican priest and, briefly, ruler of Florence, who was known for religious reformation and anti-Renaissance preaching and his book burning and destruction of art.

Oddly, Lorenzo de Medici, the previous ruler of Florence and patron of many Renaissance artists, was both a former patron of Savonarola and eventually, the target of Savonarola's preaching.

After the overthrow of the Medici in 1494, Savonarola was the sole leader of Florence, setting up a democratic republic. Characterizing it as a "Christian and religious Republic", one of its first acts was to make sodomy, previously punishable by fine, into a capital offence. His chief enemies were the Duke of Milan and Pope Alexander VI, who issued numerous restraints against him, all of which were ignored. [funny... with a nose like that, he looks very obstinate]

In 1497 he and his followers carried out the famous Bonfire of the Vanities. They sent boys from door to door collecting items associated with moral laxity: mirrors, cosmetics, lewd pictures, pagan books, gaming tables, fine dresses, and the works of immoral poets, and burnt them all in a large pile in the Piazza della Signoria of Florence. Fine Florentine Renaissance artwork was lost in Savanarola's notorious bonfires, including paintings by Sandro Botticelli thrown on the pyres by the artist himself.

Florence soon tired of Savonarola's hectoring. During his Ascension Day sermon on May 4, 1497, bands of youths rioted, and the riot became a revolt: taverns reopened, and men gambled publicly. [ah yes, no bread/grape juice + no circus = riots. Will this simple math equation ever change?]

On May 13, 1497 he was excommunicated by Pope Alexander VI, and in 1498, he was simultaneously hanged and burned, in the same place and manner that he had condemned others. He was charged with uttering prophecies, sedition, and religious error. Jacopo Nardi, who recorded the incident in his Istorie della città di Firenze, said that his executioner lit the flame crying, "The one who wanted to burn me is now himself put to the flames." Niccolò Machiavelli, author of The Prince, also witnessed and wrote about the execution. The Medici regained control over Florence.

Oh jeez, do I feel like everyone in the whole world has always known about the above or what? I had absolutely never heard where the origin of the expression "Bonfire of the Vanities" came from... until today. I am sure all of you had read Savonarola's complete biography by the time you were 2. At that age, when I was asking my mom, "Can you tell me the Pooh story once again?" you were asking your mom, "Can we do a comparative analysis between the 3 most famost historians of the Italian renaissance with a special focus on the struggle between Pope Alexander, the Medicis, and Savonarola, I want to discuss a point with my teddy bear. And then can we have Spaghetti-Os for supper?"

Not only had I never heard of the BoftV origins, I had also never heard of Savonarola either (sounds like a big brand pasta sauce to me :-).

And Pope Alexander VI... makes Bill Clinton look like an altar boy...

Bring in Machiavelli and it's party time :-)


From sparknotes:

[...] After returning to Florence in 1494, he witnessed the expulsion of the Medici family, oligarchic despots who had ruled Florence for decades, and the rise of Girolamo Savanorola, a Dominican religious zealot who took control of the region shortly thereafter.

Italy at that time became the scene of intense political conflict. The city-states of Florence, Milan, Venice, and Naples fought for control of Italy, as did the papacy, France, Spain, and the Holy Roman Empire. Each of these powers attempted to pursue a strategy of playing the other powers off of one other, but they also engaged in less honorable practices such as blackmail and violence. The same year that Machiavelli returned to Florence, Italy was invaded by Charles VIII of France—the first of several French invasions that would occur during Machiavelli’s lifetime. These events influenced Machiavelli’s attitudes toward government, forming the backdrop for his later impassioned pleas for Italian unity.

[...] but it was Borgia who would do the most to shape Machiavelli’s opinions about leadership. Borgia was a cunning, cruel, and vicious politician, and many people despised him. Nevertheless, Machiavelli believed Borgia had the traits necessary for any leader who would seek to unify Italy.

In 1500, Machiavelli married Marietta di Lodovico Corsini, with whom he had six children.

Meanwhile, Machiavelli helped raise and train a Florentine civil militia in order to reduce Florence’s dependence on mercenaries. Later that year, he served as Florentine diplomat to Pope Julius, whose conduct as the “warrior pope” he observed firsthand. In 1512, the Medici family regained control of Florence, and Machiavelli was dismissed from office. A year later he was wrongly accused of participating in a conspiracy to restore the republic, held in jail for three weeks, and tortured on the rack. He left Florence for the quiet town of Sant’Andrea and decided to pursue a career in writing. In 1513 he began writing his Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livius, a book that focused on states controlled by a politically active citizenry. It was not finished until 1521, mainly because he interrupted his work on Discourses to write The Prince.

Machiavelli desperately wanted to return to politics. One of his goals in writing The Prince was to win the favor of Lorenzo de’ Medici, then-governor of Florence and the person to whom the book is dedicated; Machiavelli hoped to land an advisory position within the Florentine government. But Medici received the book indifferently, and Machiavelli did not receive an invitation to serve as an official. The public’s reaction to The Prince was also indifferent at first. But slowly, as word spread, the book began to be criticized as immoral, evil, and wicked.

Besides the Discourses, Machiavelli went on to write The Art of War and a comedic play, The Mandrake. After Lorenzo’s premature death in 1519, his successor, Giulio, gave Machiavelli a commission to write The Florentine History as well as a few small diplomatic jobs. Machiavelli also wrote The Life of Castruccio Castracani in 1520 and Clizia, a comedic play. In 1526, Giulio de’ Medici (now Pope Clement VII), at Machiavelli’s urging, created a commission to examine Florence’s fortifications and placed Machiavelli on it.
In 1527, the diplomatic errors of the Medici pope resulted in the sack of Rome by Charles V’s mercenaries. The Florentines expelled their Medici ruler, and Machiavelli tried to retake the office he had left so before. But his reputation got in the way of his ambitions. He was now too closely associated with the Medicis, and the republic rejected him. Soon, Machiavelli’s health began to fail him, and he died several months later, on June 21, 1527.

Philosophical Context

"[A]nyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved."

The most revolutionary aspect of The Prince is its separation of politics and ethics. Classical political theory traditionally linked political law with a higher, moral law. In contrast, Machiavelli argues that political action must always be considered in light of its practical consequences rather than some lofty ideal.
Another striking feature of The Prince is that it is far less theoretical than the literature on political theory that preceded it.

Machiavelli’s book also distinguishes itself on the subject of free will. Medieval and Renaissance thinkers often looked to religion or ancient authors for explanations of plagues, famines, invasions, and other calamities; they considered the actual prevention of such disasters to be beyond the scope of human power. In The Prince, when Machiavelli argues that people have the ability to shield themselves against misfortune, he expresses an extraordinary confidence in the power of human self-determination and affirms his belief in free will as opposed to divine destiny. [this is interesting]

Since they were first published, Machiavelli’s ideas have been oversimplified and vilified. His political thought is usually—and unfairly—defined solely in terms of The Prince. The adjective “Machiavellian” is used to mean “manipulative,” “deceptive,” or “ruthless.” But Machiavelli’s Discourses, a work considerably longer and more developed than The Prince, expounds republican themes of patriotism, civic virtue, and open political participation.

This I had known, how Machiavelli has been vilified. Regarding "The Prince," he did nothing more than to put into a manual format what rulers, politicians, and other power-hungry folks have been strategizing and carrying out, sometimes in much more ruthless and insane ways, for ages. That's why Machiavelli's vilification is quite unfair. I found a text that says the same (in a more elegant way):

An anomalous seventeenth-century commentator, philosopher Pierre Bayle, found it "strange" that "there are so many people, who believe, that Machiavel teaches princes dangerous politics; for on the contrary princes have taught Machiavel what he has written."

Furthermore, anyone who firmly believes in free will versus religious destiny gets points with me. Not that I would put it in the exact same way (but I would have to read what he specifically wrote on the subject first). I don't think we have a "free" will, but we do have a will. Human beings are not "free" in the classical sense, they can control and decide about much less in themselves and in their lives than some people posit (specially those theorists and philosophers of past times). But this imperfect, bound, conditioned, yearning will is all we have against "destiny" and that is precisely why it is so precious.

from wikipedia:

Machiavelli contava su di un principe capace di costruire un forte Stato nell'Italia centrale e di promuovere la liberazione dalle dominazioni straniere assicurando poi la vita indipendente della Penisola. Tale speranza era connessa al giudizio storico sulle cause della catastrofe italiana, da lui ricondotta alla viltà dei principi che non avevano saputo e voluto armare eserciti propri, preferendo assoldare le pericolose e destabilizzanti milizie mercenarie. Nella sua opera il richiamo al riordinamento delle forze politiche e militari è, infatti, costante.

In conclusione, il pensiero di Machiavelli tende ad uno Stato che sia riorganizzato e reso saldo dalla capacità (virtù nel senso latino di virtus = coraggio, abilità) del Principe, uno Stato forte per armi proprie e saldo per fermezza di propositi, con volontà d'azione e sagacia nel governo di chi lo regge. Tali caratteristiche - sottolinea Machiavelli nella sua opera - consentirebbero al Principe di imporre la propria supremazia agli altri governanti italiani, riportando nella Penisola pace ed unità di intenti, sì da scoraggiare ogni minaccia straniera

Seems like some countries I know of today... although many modern "democracies" like to have their strong army AND hire mercenaries...

Le plus ça change...
.

This is good review writing! I really liked it. Tim Apello, from the Seattle Weekly, via rottentomatoes.. (Contains a little swearing, but it's so perfectly used to qualify certain lame movie aspects, that it's excused.)

A period battle epic should be as simple as it is big. It should never flex its brow in thought, only its bloody bulging biceps, to strike a blow for instinctive cinema. Braveheart and Gladiator spring to mind, precisely because they have no mind. Couldn't be sillier. In Braveheart, historical veracity goes right out the window, along with that poor guy director Mel Gibson executes for being gay. Ridley Scott's Oscar-winning Gladiator may be packed with more authenticish decor, but it's not about history, it's about Russell Crowe's iconic coolness, which is even more galvanically jolting than Gibson's.

Calamitously, Scott's Kingdom of Heaven (which opens Friday, May 6, at the Metro and other theaters) tries to be all about history—the lull between the Second and Third Crusades, circa 1184, when Baldwin the Christian leper king of Jerusalem maintained a dicey peace with the Arab conqueror Saladin. Kingdom earnestly preaches on behalf of peace and cross-cultural understanding. (Can't we all just get along?) This is perverse and self-sabotaging, robbing the calls to combat of all their conviction. Instead of a clear collision of good guy and bad, we get a horrendously confusing mosh pit of quarreling factions, with good guys on the Muslim and Christian teams who maneuver to thwart the (Western) warmongers in their midst. A war film about pacifists is like a sex film about George W. Bush's Chastity Pledge for Teens.

Our hero is no man's man à la Crowe but a fucking elf: Orlando Bloom, [too funny :-)]

who's pumped up a few pitiably stringy muscles since Lord of the Rings but still looks like someone Hilary Swank would KO with one punch in Million Dollar Baby. Kingdom's opening is pointedly like the poetical opening of Gladiator, which also needed to get its hero from snowflake-graced northern Europe to the blood-soaked sands down south.
[...]
and finds himself in the leper king's court, a place sumptuous with Ridley Scott set design and way too many characters. Some are admittedly cool: Edward Norton's bloodshot eyes look great behind Baldwin's silver leper's mask; Jeremy Irons sports a cute dueling scar as Baldwin's second banana; [second banana :-)]

[...]
And you couldn't have a less commanding commander than Orlando Bloom.

I didn't understand how Bloom got the role either. It's this wishy-washy phenomenom we're having in the movies with actors like the lame Di Caprio and others.

If you think Bloom's star quality is a black hole, you should see his love interest, Eva Green of Bertolucci's soporific The Dreamers. She plays the reluctant wife of a Bad Guy Crusader, and wants to marry Balian instead—who virtuously refuses. George W. Bush's Chastity Pledge for Teens is sexier than Kingdom's love story and less stupid. Bloom represents an all-time testosterone low in the history of the Hollywood love god.

I must say when I was watching the part of the movie that Bloom starts blabbering why he is refusing Eva Green, I didn't even make sense of what he said, it was so out of touch with reality of the story and the characters. I was like, "What did you just say? I didn't catch the beginning of your insane refusal monologue, given how much attention I was paying to the movie at this exact moment, and now I am even more lost than before. What reason could there be for you to say No that is not absurdly ridiculous?"

And Sibbyla wanting to go from Queen to peasant wife? Right. You used to have all the silk and gold and servants and banquets in the world, but now go tend the pigs from dawn to dusk, in the cold and mud, look 50 after 2 years of this, and die of childbirth by 30. All for Bloom, the elf... Now that would work in real life...

I liked the message of the movie, though. It's not a historical movie, it's just a "nice message" movie, like a "hint, hint" movie for our times. I´ll write my comments on the movie later.

---

Update May 13, 2005:

Jack commented on my blog:
"She looked unhealthily slender; needlessly to say, that is almost certainly historically inaccurate (from what I've read, medievals preferred their women plump)."

Ah yes, but box office profits today come from thin women :-)

I had never seen this actress before, and in KofH I didn't notice she was that thin, since you almost always just see her face (bare), all those veils and jewelry. Or maybe it's because that's where my attention was focused. I found her costumes very beautiful. I got tired of the close up shots on her eyes though. Ok, we've seen she has green eyes, some other shot please... It almost looked like a CoverGirl commercial, over and over again...

I did wonder as one more historical innacuracy thing in the movie about her riding around on a horse, even with a small troupe of guards. It doesn't seem like queens would be allowed to ride around like that, so independently, not important queens anyways. But then there were medieval women who broke all the rules, even in Europe, because they had the power to do it.

Queen Alessandra hopes to break lots of rules if anything goes right in the future. Philistines, Cabbageheads, and other Miscreants are not fit to set the rules in the world, that is what Queen Alessandra believes ;-)

.

For decades, teachers have called them Queen Bees.

They are the girls in school who know just how to push everyone's buttons.

Now, for the first time, new research shows that meanness in girls and aggression begins at an early age.

These are kids as young as four-years old.

We have a dearth of research about women (and girls and teens) and how they act out aggression and violence, or participate in violence systems. This is badly needed research. There is a sort of taboo about the subject (and a lot of cowardice from the part of academic researchers, one might add).

.

I have different directions I can veer into right now and I don't know which one to choose.

What then shall we do?

.

After the Maher disgrace, one bit of apparently good news. An international European sting operation against child pornography networks publicizes its first results (as reported).

Une vaste opération contre la pédopornographie sur Internet a été menée du lundi 2 au vendredi 6 mai dans huit pays de l'Union européenne, dont la France où une vingtaine de suspects ont été arrêtés. Dénommée "Callidus" ("rusé", en latin), l'opération, lancée en Italie, en Suède, au Danemark, en Pologne, en Norvège, à Malte, aux Pays-Bas et en France, a mobilisé des centaines de policiers et de gendarmes et permis l'interpellation d'une centaine de personnes.

[...]

D'après lui, "seuls des hommes ont été interpellés, d'âge et de conditions sociale, professionnelle et géographique très variés". Certains individus sont même des mineurs. Les interpellations ont eu lieu notamment à Mérignac (Gironde), Pau (Pyrénées-Atlantiques), Toulouse (Haute-Garonne), Paris, Strasbourg (Bas-Rhin), Angers (Maine-et-Loire), Grasse (Alpes-Maritimes), Brest (Finistère), Créteil (Val-de-Marne) et Thionville (Moselle).

Leurs ordinateurs ont été saisis. L'enquête va désormais tenter d'établir si les internautes interpellés agissaient en réseau, et si oui, s'il s'agit de réseaux nationaux ou internationaux. A ces fins, ces images seront examinées au centre national d'analyse d'images pédopornographiques installé à l'Institut de recherche criminelle de la gendarmerie (IRCGN) de Rosny-sous-Bois (Seine-Saint-Denis). Une immense base de données de quelque 500 000 photos permet en comparant des victimes, des lieux, des décors, des fonds d'image, de déterminer si des affaires, apparemment différentes, peuvent être liées et de repérer et démanteler des réseaux.

I hope this is not just a media circus, but that this operation will really nail some of these child abusing bastards.

.

I was so thoroughly disgusted with this ("Bill Maher "Jokes" About the Sexual Molestation of Children"), I couldn't even comment on it at first.

The comments on Ace about it are for the most part an example of what we should see everywhere, but we don't. Why???

Here's my comment on the Ace thread:

Maher displayed his mind is so disgustingly evil. The fact that he is allowed to continue blabbering through the mass media after what he said... why do we see only a few good people express their outrage here (and in a couple of other places)? This calls for much more action... Maher needs a beating, a professional beating for the rest of his life.

Clayton wrote:

Jonah Goldberg quotes the noted comedian and talk show host from the Late Late Show on CBS yesterday. I won't reproduce it here--it is simply too offensive for my blog.

It is way too offensive for anywhere. Maher's statement and thinking are a version of the NAMBLA mentality for all types of child sexual abuse.

Deny that there can be extreme psychological violence done to children through molestation and pretend the only type of violence that exists in the world is physical bodily harm. Deny that children at different ages can be thousands of times more vulnerable in their entire mental structure and much more severely harmed than turds like Maher in a similar abuse situation.

Maher is not just putrid, his words are criminal because they legitimize sexual abuse by denying the severe degree of psychological violence that can be contained in sexual molestation actions towards a child.

---

Related entries:
The ACLU and NAMBLA - Again

.

I find this a very interesting subject: Humans, in large numbers and to a large extent, fail miserably when it comes to rational decision making and correct assessment of reality.

From “Biases in Social Judgment:”

Humans are biased toward confirming their theories, are naively optimistic, take undue credit for lucky accomplishments, and fail to recognize their self-inflicted failures. Moreover, they overestimate the number of others who share their beliefs, demonstrate the hindsight bias, have a poor conception of chance, perceive illusory relationships between noncontingent events, and have an exaggerated sense of control. Failures at rationality do not end there. Humans use external appearances as an erroneous gauge of internal character, falsely believe that their own desirable qualities are unique, can be induced to remember events that never occurred, and systematically misperceive the intentions of the opposite sex. (Martie G. Haselton and David M. Buss)

In my opinion, culture (in the fullest anthropological/sociological and psychological sense) is largely responsible for the above, but it would be nice if we didn’t depend on culture to form humans who would do better on all those aspects.

---

.

Clayton Cramer has an excellent post criticizing Instapundit and others who favor peddling profound sexual violence as entertainment and as material to be regarded as protected speech. Excerpt from the end of Clayton's post:

Interestingly enough, the article goes on to mention the so far unsuccessful attempt to prosecute Extreme Associates, but neglects to mention that they make hardcore films depicting rape, torture, and murder.

Instapundit, of course, does not approve: "Someone tell [Attorney General] Gonzales that there's a war on." The same could be said for drug prosecutions, financial chicanery, and a host of other matters under Department of Justice jurisdiction. The materials in question, "bestiality, sadomasochism and simulated rape," are hardly worthy of the protection of the First Amendment.

Some of you may find the following paragraph unpleasant to read (it was unpleasant to write). Here's an unpleasant thought experiment for those who think that these materials aren't worth prosecuting. Imagine if KKK Films made extremely graphic movies which depicted homosexuals being grabbed off the streets of San Francisco, castrated, and tortured to death. Another film depicts a Gloria Allred type attorney kidnapped from in front of a courthouse, gang raped and tortured to death while anti-feminist rhetoric is spewed at her. The third film involves a group of heroic neo-Nazis "arresting" a stereotyped Jew caught in the act of raping a very young looking "Aryan" female, then torturing him to death. Do you think that liberals would still be upset about obscenity prosecutions?

They would be outraged not just because the materials are offensive, but because this sort of garbage can and does encourage unstable sorts to think of this as acceptable behavior.

I simply cannot understand why the whole world does not hold these sorry Instapundit types accountable for what Clayton stated in his last paragraph. It is the crux of the problem.

---

Related entries:
Sin City - Modern Liberal Culture: An Insatiable Appetite for Sexual Violence;

One Axis of the Culture Wars;

Hardcore Hypocrisy - CSUC Fraternity's Porn Film Angers University Officials;

PC Homo Hate-Speech Wars - This Time in Australia;

Discovery: Hitler Quotations;

Glorifying Rape - New Deep Throat Movie;

Large cable firm stops offering hard-core pay-to-view pornography;

Liberals Have Won the Cultural Wars;

Few People Are Worse than Libertarians
.

From Ace, another nicely biting comment on a Penis Day spoof of the V-Day campus events:

This is just unbelievable.

As you may know, dopey female college students (and their semimale hangers-on) have been calling "Valentine's Day" "V-Day" for a number of years, which, in case you don't know, now stands for "Vagina Day." And they talk endlessly about their vaginas, and offer, um, anatomically-correct lollipops (okay, that doesn't make sense, but you know what I'm talking about), and of course stage Eve Ensler's decidedly anti-penis, pro-pooter play The Vagina Monologues.
[...]
Well, now some guys have gotten into the act too, and they're spoofing the whole pudendocentric worldview of Even Ensler and her dopey acolytes. They're staging "P-Day" events, and affirming the worth of their own genitals with spoof-slogans like "My Penis is Majestic" and, for those whose dorks are more academically-minded, "My Penis is Studious."

(Great pick-up line, by the way. Almost as good as mentioning you call your thighPod "Mr. Polite.")

And now-- now! -- college administrators at Roger Williams College have decided that they will not put up with this sort of gob-smacking vileness ("V-Day meets P-Day on campus" by Christina Hoff Sommers).

[read more...]

I think the P-Day activists should take the comparison a little further and do a skit where an adult homo or bisexual trash seduces a teenage boy (or both a boy and girl), just like in the V monologues. And then they all celebrate the "liberation and progress" of it.

It could be a Catholic homo priest too, a lovely re-enactment of how homos liberate their p*'s and sexuality with adolescents...

It would be so nice to see P Day activism spread all over the country and if they were censored, that they would go to court for discrimination.

What is sad about human beings is that there are a ton of issues with violence against women and girls, and the female body, but what do you get as activism against that? A bunch of female homos promoting homo sexual abuse of girls as liberation, that is, they try to take on the role that they complain about in men for themselves. Which is true for a lot of homos of both sexes.

Although I quite like Ace HQ because it's quite sharp on many issues, and many double standards like this one, sexual objectifying of women is one issue where most guys here are as dense and as bad as the reverse coin V monologues.

Either you get these lesbiunn turds or the sexist locker-room guys. Sigh.

---

Excerpt from the Sommers article below:

V-Day has now replaced Valentine’s Day on more than 500 college campuses (including Catholic ones). The high point of the day is a performance of Ensler’s raunchy play, which consists of various women talking in graphic, and I mean graphic, terms about their intimate anatomy. The play is poisonously anti-male. Its only romantic scene, if you can call it that, takes place when a 24-year-old woman seduces a young girl (in the original version she was 13 years old, but in a more recent version is played as a 16-year-old.) The woman invites the girl into her car, takes her to her house, plies her with vodka, and seduces her. What might seem like a scene from a public-service kidnapping-prevention video shown to schoolchildren becomes, in Ensler’s play “a kind of heaven.”

The week before V-Day, the Roger Williams campus was plastered with flyers emblazoned with slogans such as “My Vagina is Flirty” and “My Vagina is Huggable.” There was a widely publicized “orgasm workshop.” On the day of the play, the V-warriors sold lollipops in the in the shape of–-guess what? Last year, the student union was flooded with questionnaires asking unsuspecting students questions like “What does your Vagina smell like?” None of this offended the administration or elicited any reprimands, probations, or confiscations.

The campus conservatives artfully (in the college sense of "artful") mimicked the V-Day campaign. They papered the school with flyers that said, “My penis is majestic” and “My penis is hilarious.” The caption on one handout read, “My Penis is studious.” It showed Testaclese reclining on a couch reading Michael Barone’s Hard America, Soft America.

.