July 18, 2016

"Despite her delicate features and voice, Disney expects us to believe that Mulan’s ingenuity and courage were enough to carry her to military success on an equal basis with her cloddish cohorts."

"Obviously, this is Walt Disney’s attempt to add childhood expectation to the cultural debate over the role of women in the military. "

Wrote Mike Pence, back in 1999. I'm reading this out loud to Meade....
I suspect that some mischievous liberal at Disney assumes that Mulan’s story will cause a quiet change in the next generation’s attitude about women in combat and they just might be right. (Just think about how often we think of Bambi every time the subject of deer hunting comes into the mainstream media debate.)
At which point Meade says: "I'm bored." And I said: "That goes without saying. It's Mike Pence."

But let's continue:

The only problem with this liberal hope is the reality which intrudes on the Disney ideal from the mornings headlines. From the original “Tailhook” scandal involving scores of high ranking navy fighter pilots who molested subordinate women to the latest travesty at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, the hard truth of our experiment with gender integration is that is has been an almost complete disaster for the military and for many of the individual women involved. When Indiana Congressman Steve Buyer was appointed to investigate the Aberdeen mess, he shocked the public with the revelation that young, nubile, 18 year old men and women were actually being HOUSED together during basic training. Whatever bone head came up with this idea should be run out of this man’s Army before sundown. Housing, in close quarters, young men and women (in some cases married to non-military personnel) at the height of their physical and sexual potential is the height of stupidity. It is instructive that even in the Disney film, young Ms. Mulan falls in love with her superior officer! Me thinks the politically correct Disney types completely missed the irony of this part of the story. They likely added it because it added realism with which the viewer could identify with the characters. You see, now stay with me on this, many young men find many young women to be attractive sexually. Many young women find many young men to be attractive sexually. Put them together, in close quarters, for long periods of time, and things will get interesting. Just like they eventually did for young Mulan. Moral of story: women in military, bad idea.
Random thoughts: Nobody says "nubile" anymore. "Methinks" is one word (one stupid word). Pence's "moral of the story" would seem to justify keeping women out of any workplace (such as, for example, the White House, where Monica Lewinsky once caused all that trouble by being attractive sexually). I'm here to write this only because my mother, sexually attractive, joined the Army in WWII and found a fellow soldier sexually attractive. And what is wrong with Mike Pence that he didn't lean toward demanding that soldiers learn what sexual harassment is and follow the rules?

99 comments:

Clayton Hennesey said...

Googling the term "nubile" immediately returns a number of interesting usages, few boring.

Big Mike said...

Nobody says "nubile" anymore.

Not true. The word is not as common as it once was but yes, it is still in use.

I'm here to write this only because my mother, sexually attractive, joined the Army in WWII and found a fellow soldier sexually attractive.

And she went through boot camp in woman-only barracks behind a barbed wire fence with armed MPs to see to it that no men entered the area. If her experience is like that of a WAC I met during the Vietnam War your mother's drill sergeant told her something along the lines of "There is five miles of c*ck on this base and you're not going to see one G** d*mn*d inch of it until you complete your training."

And what is wrong with Mike Pence that he didn't lean toward demanding that soldiers learn what sexual harassment is and follow the rules?

What's wrong with you that you don't get the impact of young, physically fit, healthy adults sharing living quarters? If today's generation is like the Vietnam-era draftees I went through boot camp with, you can add in loneliness and a desire to make friends far from home.

You're too old, Althouse. You've forgotten too much.

PB said...

If you didn't know Mike Pence had set the first words, you would think it a sensible assertion, but bias overcomes.

Our western attitudes are reflective in his words, but I don't think there should be a problem mixing the sexes or colors or races. Our prejudices get in the way of rational thought and behavior. So what if there's sex? People can make choices and take responsibility for their actions. If the person can do the job and the requirements are appropriate and if competition allows for the selection of the best qualifying applicants, then there should be no problem.

cubanbob said...

Mike Pence Argued In An Op-Ed That Disney’s “Mulan” Was Liberal Propaganda
“Obviously, this is Walt Disney’s attempt to add childhood expectation to the cultural debate over the role of women in the military,” Pence wrote. Obviously."

Althouse quotes an idiot in Buzzfeed who thinks himself smart. Pence was right back then and is still right today. A reasonably healthy middle aged man is considerably stronger than a young in shape woman. And no one is proposing that middle aged men even in the best shape they could be in join the Army or Marines. There is no AA handicap in combat.

RAH said...

Systems that go against human nature fail. Communism fails for that reason and so does housing young men and women together and not expect sex in the barracks

Bob Boyd said...

Meet the new bile
Same as the old bile

AprilApple said...

Pence as a not so smart move.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Karen of Texas said...

PB, obviously you have no clue what is expected of those in combat situations. Or you're being willfully ignorant.

This is about combat unit effectiveness. This moves out of the barracks and into the field as well.

But I'm sure Drill Sgt and other actual military types can add more thoughtful, thorough analysis to this issue. I have a brother-in-law ex military. Iraq. Afghanistan. Multiple deployments. Infantry. Ask him about women in their unit. He is chivalry personified. That is not a good trait to have on the battlefield.

And what Big Mike said.

Ken B said...

Pence did not do the typesetting methinks.

EMD said...

All I have to say about this is I liked Mulan. One of the more underrated pieces of Disneyana.

damikesc said...

I'm here to write this only because my mother, sexually attractive, joined the Army in WWII and found a fellow soldier sexually attractive. And what is wrong with Mike Pence that he didn't lean toward demanding that soldiers learn what sexual harassment is and follow the rules?

As said earlier, she wasn't living with men during training.

And demanding the genders just ignore biological reality is an exercise in failure. It is why Communism doesn't work. You cannot completely change basic human behavior. Men want to fuck women and vice versa. If both are around, no matter the rules, fucking will occur.

People can make choices and take responsibility for their actions. If the person can do the job and the requirements are appropriate and if competition allows for the selection of the best qualifying applicants, then there should be no problem.

Haven't "co-ed" subs had a pretty big problem of women getting pregnant on board?

traditionalguy said...

The Military needs a Hijab over their heads so that good men can control themselves. And we need floor length dresses back of course. We will control this!!! And no showing off ankles to excite the poor guys who need our help to stay virgins until marriage.

And no vulgar talking Presidents either!

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Many of the audiobooks and lectures I listen to use the term "sexually available."

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Now I had heard the WACs recruited old maids for the war.

Ken B said...

Althouse is right. Pence's argument that housing young male and female soldiers together could apply to any workplace. Like say all the young teachers in a school sharing the same dorm might be a bad idea.

John Bragg said...

"And what is wrong with Mike Pence that he didn't lean toward demanding that soldiers learn what sexual harassment is and follow the rules?"

Because there are no such rules. GS-20 Ivy law grad Clarence Thomas flirting with GS-17 Ivy Law grad Anita Hill is doubleplusungood sexual harassment, while Governor Bill Clinton dropping his pants and demanding that $8/hour state clerk Paula Jones "Kiss it" is just innocent flirtation. (Previous sentence not fact-checked). UVa nutjob's rejection by her freshman-fall crush transmogrifies into gang-rape by a half a pledge class backed by an entire university, and Mattress Girl's regrets become retroactive rape.

n.n said...

Human biology 101.

As for women in combat, send in the female chauvinists. Send in the abortionists and Planners. The Islamic terrorists have met their equals in the Pro-Choice Church.

Brando said...

Regardless of the merits of your underlying argument, if you phrase it in a way that can be construed as "a claim that Disney movies are left-wing propaganda for getting women into combat" then you're going to be ridiculed and your point will be distracted away. Didn't we learn anything from Dan Quayle and Murphy Brown? Quayle had an important point to make about the necessity of fatherhood and two parent families, and instead it became "VP picks on fictional sitcom character".

I get that "the leftist media will go at you no matter what you say" but geez, why tee it up for them? At least make them work to spin it.

Graham Powell said...

I'm with EMD - MULAN was a really good movie. Also, whatever feminist use it may have been put to, I believe it's based on an old legend or folk tale.

Nikki said...

Is it possible that Pence is an even worse misogynist than Trump? Oh that's really going to help him get the woman vote. Maybe now 80% of women will despise Trump instead of merely 70%. Good work, continue.

Ken B said...

I confess this post irks me. I don't agree with Pence but I don't agree with misrepresenting him either. The issue isn't "youngsters screwing bad". It is that sexual relationships , especially between commanders and subordinates, can have a disastrous effect on military effectiveness and decision making. Would Althouse have been happy if say her father's commander selected him for a dangerous mission rather than her lover? Is it really so silly to think that sex can mess with emotion, motive, and judgment in a way deleterious to military effectiveness? Because that seems Althouse's assumption.

Mark said...

It still boggles my mind that Trump took someone who adds nothing to his general election hopes.

Both these guys clearly think a woman's place is barefoot, prrgnant, and in the kitchen.

As do a lot of commenters here, apparently. Enjoy your war on women.

Karen of Texas said...

Sorry, Nikki, your numbers are off. You misandrist.

Nikki said...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190403/seven-women-unfavorable-opinion-trump.aspx

Seven in 10 Women Have Unfavorable Opinion of Trump

Karen of Texas said...

Mark. Stop mansplainin. I don't think that either of them feel that way. Perhaps they think it's a woman's choice? Stop making women feel bad who want to be pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen. They actually do exist because they find value in being at home to care for their families.

Karen of Texas said...

And Nikki breaks out the Gallup poll. Hahahahaha!!!

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

One man's "some mischievous liberal" is another man's huge international conglomerate.

Brando said...

"Is it possible that Pence is an even worse misogynist than Trump? Oh that's really going to help him get the woman vote. Maybe now 80% of women will despise Trump instead of merely 70%. Good work, continue."

I don't think Pence could hurt Trump--who on earth would be pro-Trump and then change their mind because Pence is his VP? He probably won't help much, either, except maybe shore up some of the evangelical votes. I think it's a slight net plus.

Nikki said...

"A Washington Post-ABC News poll last month found that 77 percent of women had an unfavorable impression of Trump, including 65 percent who saw him in a “strongly unfavorable” light. Trump’s negative ratings among women are more than 20 percentage points higher than the ratings 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney received at any point in that campaign."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-had-a-problem-with-women-voters-pence-could-make-it-even-worse/2016/07/15/6ee5dcc8-4a01-11e6-acbc-4d4870a079da_story.html

The Drill SGT said...

The start with: What Big Mike and Karen said.

Let's look at the Althouse remarks in reverse:

And what is wrong with Mike Pence that he didn't lean toward demanding that soldiers learn what sexual harassment is and follow the rules?

Nothing in Pence's text involves "sexual Harassment" in the classic sense. Harassment would be on the part of Mulan's superior, not when Mulan comes on to the boss. The Boss is the victim. (of bad judgement, not harassment) As for Aberdeen, though as I recall, there was some sexual harassment performed by Sergeants of both genders toward subordinates, his discussion was of willing peer to peer sexual activities that almost certainly were violations of some sort of orders, but were NOT sexual harassment. It was stupidity by the Army in the name of equality. Noth sets of trainees would do better with "separate, but equal"

I'm here to write this only because my mother, sexually attractive, joined the Army in WWII and found a fellow soldier sexually attractive.

I'm assuming that your father was not your mother's superior and in her chain of command? and that their sexual congress took place "away from the flag pole?". Sexual congress between unmarried soldiers at the time and now, can constitute several UCMJ offenses.

Pence's "moral of the story" would seem to justify keeping women out of any workplace (such as, for example, the White House, where Monica Lewinsky once caused all that trouble by being attractive sexually).

No, Pence is only saying "don't do stupid stuff". Said Differently: "Never ever give an order that you know won't be obeyed."

Putting 18 y/o kids in close proximity and telling them not to f'ck is a losing cause. Don't give that order.

Giving an order to their 20 something superiors not to f'ck the trainees is tough but somewhat doable as long as you put the fear of god into the female trainees about not suborning their male instructors (or female instructors). (I expect the female instructors to have a bit more self control and the male trainees have less practice at suborning as well :) You'll still need to punish the guilty firmly.

Bottom line: Pence is mostly right...

Titus said...

He sounds like a guy from the 50's speaking.

Total culture warrior and not very bright.

Sarah Palin without the charisma.

rhhardin said...

Sexual harassment rules plus stamping of tiny foot can't be defeated.

Nikki said...

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/examining-trump-s-problem-female-voters-n544901

Let's look at our latest NBC/WSJ poll to see how big this issue is:

This month, about half (47 percent) of Republican female primary voters said they could not imagine themselves voting for Trump. (About 40 percent of male GOP primary voters said the same.)

REPUBLICAN female voters, almost half of them can't stand Trump. I'm sure that with Democratic females it must be up in the 90th percentile. I

Chuck said...

If only Althouse had been as tough on Trump, as she is going to be, on Pence.

Pence, as we all know, is not pro-gay and won't be cagey about it.

Nikki said...

Trump isn't pro gay either. Trump is only truly pro Trump. The most incompetant boob to ever run for office.

bagoh20 said...

Combat is nothing like a job. I suspect some women imagine it can be performed under common sensibilities and laws of the workplace. Clue: the object of the job is to kill people dead, bleeding, dismembered, and disemboweled. Imagine the stress claims at human resources. The carpel tunnel injuries alone could be really debilitating.

bagoh20 said...

"He sounds like a guy from the 50's speaking."

We're at war with the 14th century. It will take 21st century thinking to lose.

Karen of Texas said...

To feed the Nikki troll or not?

Poor Nikki. Depending on polls.

You don't get it, Nikki. At this point many women will crawl over broken glass to vote for anyone other than that lying, TREASONOUS, utterly corrup, willfully careless with the security of this nation, piss poor excuse of a candidate Hillary. Trump wasn't my choice, but Hillary doesn't deserve to be anywhere near the Oval Office, let alone sitting in the big chair.

I'm betting there are a lot of women who cringe at the thought of that woman "leading" this country and tarnishing the female brand. That is not who I want to represent how far I've come.

I'm not voting for Trump. I'm voting against that intentional criminal. I can't imagine myself voting for Trump. But guess what? I will because there is no way in hell I'll entertain the idea of voting for her careless highness. This election is the evil of two lessers, and Hillary's evil outshines Trump's by a mile. Trump is only truly pro Trump. Cognitive dissonance much?

Keep being a shill. Keep trotting out those polls. Keep trotting out those scripted talking points. Keep being a traitor to your womanhood. Mysandrist.

Lucien said...

Given the success of units like the 442nd RCT, Tuskegee Airmen, etc. it stands to reason that units that are primarily female or primarily gay would be high achievers that improve the image of all female and gay soldiers. But I doubt that the armed services will have the guts to form units called the "Mad Mamas of Mayhem" or the "Fabulous Fighting Fairies". Instead, everyone will just be spread out in homogeneous, but politically safe ways.

Sebastian said...

"At which point Meade says: "I'm bored." And I said: "That goes without saying. It's Mike Pence."" Or: How Mike Pence lost me.

Methinks the worst we can do at this time is pick a boring VP. Interesting times demand interesting leaders.

And yeah, pointing out that Disney produces liberal propaganda that helps to undermine the effectiveness of the services is very boring. Didn't Pence know that the culture wars were already over?

Methinks, however, that Pence may not be the sole author of this piece.

And furthermore, to use another boring word, I also think that someone who thinks no one uses "nubile" anymore is unlikely to be an authority on current language use or, umm, sexual practices.

Hagar said...

Progressive women are all for other women serving in combat formations.

Bill Peschel said...

Nikki, more incompetent than a woman who pushed to depose Gadaffi without a plan to shore up the country, thereby encouraging refugees to flood Europe?

More incompetent to demand her own barely secured server, order a subordinate to strip intelligence classifications off an email and send it plain text, then destroy 30K emails without ensuring they're personal?

Please define what "incompetent" as a leader is in your world?

Ron Winkleheimer said...



It just occurred to me that the Bible has a story addressing these sorts of situations.

11 It happened in the spring of the year, at the time when kings go out to battle, that David sent Joab and his servants with him, and all Israel; and they destroyed the people of Ammon and besieged Rabbah. But David remained at Jerusalem.

2 Then it happened one evening that David arose from his bed and walked on the roof of the king’s house. And from the roof he saw a woman bathing, and the woman was very beautiful to behold. 3 So David sent and inquired about the woman. And someone said, “Is this not Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite?” 4 Then David sent messengers, and took her; and she came to him, and he lay with her, for she was cleansed from her impurity; and she returned to her house. 5 And the woman conceived; so she sent and told David, and said, “I am with child.”

6 Then David sent to Joab, saying, “Send me Uriah the Hittite.” And Joab sent Uriah to David. 7 When Uriah had come to him, David asked how Joab was doing, and how the people were doing, and how the war prospered. 8 And David said to Uriah, “Go down to your house and wash your feet.” So Uriah departed from the king’s house, and a gift of food from the king followed him. 9 But Uriah slept at the door of the king’s house with all the servants of his lord, and did not go down to his house. 10 So when they told David, saying, “Uriah did not go down to his house,” David said to Uriah, “Did you not come from a journey? Why did you not go down to your house?”

11 And Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah are dwelling in tents, and my lord Joab and the servants of my lord are encamped in the open fields. Shall I then go to my house to eat and drink, and to lie with my wife? As you live, and as your soul lives, I will not do this thing.”

12 Then David said to Uriah, “Wait here today also, and tomorrow I will let you depart.” So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. 13 Now when David called him, he ate and drank before him; and he made him drunk. And at evening he went out to lie on his bed with the servants of his lord, but he did not go down to his house.

14 In the morning it happened that David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it by the hand of Uriah. 15 And he wrote in the letter, saying, “Set Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retreat from him, that he may be struck down and die.” 16 So it was, while Joab besieged the city, that he assigned Uriah to a place where he knew there were valiant men. 17 Then the men of the city came out and fought with Joab. And some of the people of the servants of David fell; and Uriah the Hittite died also.

shiloh said...

"The most incompetent boob to ever run for office."

But he easily won the Rep primary and will be nominated king on Thursday.

>

Now let's talk about the Republican deep bench!

ok, let's not and say we did ...

MadisonMan said...

Methinks the worst we can do at this time is pick a boring VP. Interesting times demand interesting leaders.

Nonsense. VPs are ancillary. They should be boring so as not to detract from the person at the top of the ticket.

The exception is, of course, Hillary, who wants voters to be distracted from her incredible awfulness.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Not that women can't be effective combatants.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges+4&version=NIV

buwaya puti said...

The 50's were a more competent, more effective, more creative era than today. The level of education of the general public, seen in its artifacts like book sales and bestsellers, was vastly better. There has been a general cultural decline since then that has been masked by technological progress, but that progress is now finally slowing down as the underlying human competence degrades.

I agree with Pence. Women in the military is a very poor idea for a host of reasons.

More, I recommend that middle and high schools also be segregated. I have other views on universities, such as abandoning in loco parentis, but in any case mixed dormitories are also a very bad idea.

mccullough said...

Robot soldiers will solve this problem. Sexbots will solve the sexual harassment problem.

The Drill SGT said...

Lucien said...
Given the success of units like the 442nd RCT, Tuskegee Airmen, etc.


One can debate the reasons for success. I'll postulate three of them and leave it to the reader to weigh them.

1. motivation based on perceived or actual discrimination. e.g. win one for our side

2. small number of participants from a large pool of applicants. e.g. cream of the crop.

3. the residual impacts of prejudice resulted in lots of extra training time before deployment. e.g. at a time when pilots were sent into combat with 200 hours of flight time, the Airmen each deployed with more than 1,000. The heart of the 442d was the 100th Battalion, itself the result of merging two pre-war National Guard Battalions.

William said...

I've read that men in foxholes or trenches under bombardment masturbate. Very weird, but it happens. I wonder if women would do the same.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

buwaya puti

Here is a link to a couple of British comedians who do a hilarious job of comparing the 40s to our present day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-3i_auSk5Q

Sebastian said...

@MM: "Nonsense. VPs are ancillary. They should be boring so as not to detract from the person at the top of the ticket." Just to be clear about the interesting VP stuff etc.: \sarc.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

I recall from some of those college-lectures-on-CD things I listen to that it's normal for men in combat to pop boners.

Must be some sort of female equivalent, but I'm at a loss.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

"...her military success on an equal basis with her cloddish cohorts."

Cohort: originally six Roman Centuries, one tenth of a Legion; present meaning, a group of people banded together.

The phrase suggests Mulan possesses, or is in command of, several rather large combat units. Likely Pence means "fellow warriors" rather than "cohorts."

Well, perhaps as Trump said re. the Iraq War vote, we all make some mistakes.

FullMoon said...

AA said

I'm here to write this only because my mother, sexually attractive, joined the Army in WWII and found a fellow soldier sexually attractive.

Housing, in close quarters, young men and women (in some cases married to non-military personnel) at the height of their physical and sexual potential is the height of stupidity.

Was she, or he, married to someone else at the time? How did they meet? Office situation, combat?

FullMoon said...

Chuck said...

If only Althouse had been as tough on Trump, as she is going to be, on Pence.

Pence, as we all know, is not pro-gay and won't be cagey about it.


Not being "pro gay" does not equate to being "anti-gay".

eric said...

The more I hear about Pence the more I like him.

cubanbob said...

Nikki said...
Trump isn't pro gay either. Trump is only truly pro Trump. The most incompetant boob to ever run for office.

7/18/16, 9:20 AM

Only after Carter, then Biden, then Gore, then Obama and of course the FBI certified liar, grifter, criminal and traitor Hillary Clinton. So tell us why you are voting for the certified liar, grifter, criminal and traitor.

Ann Althouse said...

How my parents met is a story I've told many times. It was in an office. My father had made coffee, and my mother smelled the coffee. He was working there because he was a college graduate, a chemical engineer, drafted, and pretty skinny. She was there because her work with men suffering from battle fatigue was cut short when they learned she could type.

Jon Ericson said...

War with women
much better than
War on women
LOL

EMD said...

Mulan is Yentl, but watchable.

EMD said...

Hammond, third definition:

derogatory
a supporter or companion.
synonyms: colleague, companion, associate, friend
"a party thrown by her departmental cohorts"

rehajm said...

Some jobs are high risk/low reward with little upside and methinks these facts are reflected in the quality of the candidates.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

The phrase suggests Mulan possesses, or is in command of, several rather large combat units. Likely Pence means "fellow warriors" rather than "cohorts.

3) derogatory a supporter or companion.

Pence's usage is exactly correct.

Todd said...

Nikki said...

Trump isn't pro gay either. Trump is only truly pro Trump. The most incompetant boob to ever run for office.

7/18/16, 9:20 AM


Really? The most incompetent? What are your matrix? From where I am sitting he is actually pretty competent. He is worth millions that he earned versus the Clintons that stole their money and/or sold out their office and America to get theirs.

What has Clinton ever done that was successful and NOT a criminal enterprise?

More incompetent than President Three-putt? How many wars did Trump start? Did Trump come to the nomination from Congress after being a community organizer?

I would suggest that you reassess your position...

exhelodrvr1 said...

The Drill Sgt,
"I expect the female instructors to have a bit more self control and the male trainees have less practice at suborning as well "

You mean like female teachers do?

Balfegor said...

Re: Buwaya Puti:

There has been a general cultural decline since then that has been masked by technological progress, but that progress is now finally slowing down as the underlying human competence degrades.

I don't think underlying human competence is degrading as such -- our technical schools can still turn out great engineers and scientists, and despite the occasional frustration, I think modern user interface design is generally excellent. If there's a deterioration, it's not so much in human competence, but the distribution of human competence. The heights are as high as they ever were, they just haven't kept pace, numerically, with the increase of the general population. And the median is less competent than it once was, at least in the US.

On the other hand, I suspect the median in, say, South Korea, China, and Taiwan is a lot more competent than it had been in 1950. Though this is not exactly a high bar.

Nikki said...

Karen of Texas,

Good thing you are in the distinct minority. Even a good percentage of Republican women won't vote for Trump and most definitely a huge majority of Democratic women will not vote for him. Hispanics won't vote for him. Blacks won't vote for him, gays won't vote for him, so who does that leave? A percentage of white males and a smaller percentage of white females. I'm sorry the math is too difficult for you.

Clayton Hennesey said...

...where Monica Lewinsky once caused all that trouble by being attractive sexually

There were any number of sexually attractive women about. Monica Lewinsky once caused all that trouble by being the one eager and willing to give the President of the United States a blowjob.

But that's old news. The game now is to guess the array of mammals Hillary will attract beneath the designer wigwam.

Fernandinande said...

Big Mike said...
'Nobody says "nubile" anymore.'
Not true. The word is not as common as it once was but yes, it is still in use.


ngram shows usage mostly flat from 1800 to 1900 (a spike around 1830 - set smoothing to zero), then increasing almost linearly until 1992, then dropping very slightly; if anything it's more common, at least in the books referenced by ngram.

EMD said...

Tomorrow Nikki will be GeorgeIII and then on Thursday, that commenter will be played by Ballsack or Whitley or Jujubee or Josh.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Uh...this is a pretty old interview, right? Why are you holding Pence to this interview, Professor? Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama evolved away from views they held, what, a few MONTHS earlier, and you were just fine with that. Hillary this cycle is evolving HARD away from all sorts of policies she supported when her husband pursued them...and I guess you're fine with that, too.

But for Pence it doesn't sound like anyone's even asking if he still holds the exact same views or if he'd express the exact same opinion (in the same way) as he did 17 years ago.

If only there was a word for treating two people or groups differently in a systematic way when considering similar situations...

damikesc said...

I get that "the leftist media will go at you no matter what you say" but geez, why tee it up for them? At least make them work to spin it.

With the "Murphy Brown" thing, if he simply said "popular culture is popularizing single motherhood as a 'lifestyle choice'", the media would've either said "no it is not" or demanded examples of it. Then the same attacks would've occurred.

The 50's were a more competent, more effective, more creative era than today. The level of education of the general public, seen in its artifacts like book sales and bestsellers, was vastly better. There has been a general cultural decline since then that has been masked by technological progress, but that progress is now finally slowing down as the underlying human competence degrades.

No joke. Hearing imbeciles constantly decry how terrible the 50's were has long been laughable. Just read simple magazines from the 1950's and, even in the "pulpier" ones, the writing is several levels better than what we have now. In the 1950's, it seems intellect was assumed. Today, all people want are credentials with little actual knowledge behind it.

Pop culture in the 1950's in basically every category stands up far better than pop culture today will. And people trusted the government far more because the government was more competent overall (being a lot smaller helps) than it is now.

I have other views on universities, such as abandoning in loco parentis, but in any case mixed dormitories are also a very bad idea.

Given the "rape crisis", I'm amazed nobody has suggested it. It doesn't indicate any serious attempt to "battle rape culture" if you do not at least consider it.

damikesc said...

where Monica Lewinsky once caused all that trouble by being attractive sexually).

When was Monica ever attractive sexually?

A girl doesn't have to be gorgeous for a guy to accept a blowjob from them.

Fernandinande said...

Nikki said...
Is it possible that Pence is an even worse misogynist than Trump? Oh that's really going to help him get the woman vote. Maybe now 80% of women will despise Trump instead of merely 70%. Good work, continue.


George Orwell said of Joseph Conrad: "One of the surest signs of his genius is that women dislike his books."

HoodlumDoodlum said...

But look, the issue is women and for women it's all about choice.
If a woman chooses to join the military, to apply for a position/take a post that's highly sought, occupy that position (beating out others who'd like to have it), good for her - you go girl! IF that same woman then decides to get pregnant at a time that's inopportune to her unit--say in the middle of a deployment on an aircraft carrier, or something similar--and her unit has to scramble to cover her duties (hurting unit performance, cohesion, morale), well, that's her choice, too, and everyone else had damn well better respect it!
You go, girl!
The overall purpose and function of the military isn't as important as an individual woman's choice. Putting the mission ahead of the feelings and decisions of individual women is mysogynistic. Once you understand the priorities, it's all very simple.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Fernandiande said...ngram shows usage mostly flat from 1800 to 1900 (a spike around 1830 - set smoothing to zero), then increasing almost linearly until 1992, then dropping very slightly; if anything it's more common, at least in the books referenced by ngram.

Your reliance on data smacks of mansplaining, pal--watch it. Data is anti-woman; feelings are more valid than numbers.

mikee said...

I'm calling Althouse out for her egregious victim blaming regarding Monica Lewinsky, who was of questionable attractiveness but definite availability to the perpetrator of sexual harassment on a presidential scale, Bill Clinton.

Clinton is the slime in his predation on the intern. Lewinsky is the one slimed by him, literally, and is not deserving of your abuse, Althouse.

Todd said...

where Monica Lewinsky once caused all that trouble by being attractive sexually

Professor! Are you "victim blaming"? If I recall correctly, Monica was a young intern working near and for the most powerful man in the world. She was fairly young and he older, more worldly and the most POWERFUL MAN in the WORLD.

How did "she" cause all that trouble? By not saying "no" when the MOST POWERFUL MAN in the WORLD said "blow me"?

If memory serves, up until that point feminists went out of their way to point out how powerful men unfairly took advantage of subordinate women. That it was the man's responsibility to control himself and not abuse the power structure. Then Bill had his office and his cigars and NOW got on all-fours for him. Same old same...

Todd said...

Sorry mikee, I did not see your comment before posting mine...

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Let's be fair about this:
As a hypothetical, if we knew exactly how much integrating young women into combat units (or all jobs, or certain deployments - make your own example) hurt the overall performance of the military (or their cost-effectiveness, etc), how much harm would you accept in order to allow women to make whatever choices they want/preserve their full, maximum autonomy (in terms of being able to choose whatever job, etc, they want)?

What I mean is - if we knew that allowing women into the Army Rangers would make the Rangers as a whole 5% worse, would you still push for that change? What about 10%? 50%?

I guess what I'm asking is - what trade off is so great that you put something other than women's ability to make their own choices (and impose costs on others)? Is there some such cost?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

The Left says it's reasonable to restrict or even outright rescind my 2A rights because (although it's a Constitutionally-protected fundamental right) my personal liberty can't be allowed to create a harm for society at large--my personal right to bear arms can be heavily restricted in order to put the needs of the group (society) first.

Women's ability to make their own choices (and impose costs on others) is a much MORE fundamental right, though--the needs of the group (say, the military itself or a particular branch/unit/specialty) doesn't matter as much as making sure women can do whatever they want, whenever they want.

Women's rights are REAL rights. Everything else is just provisional ("thank you ma'am, may I retain a few rights?").

But yeah, ours is a patriarchal, man-favoring nation/culture/society. Totally.

Chuck said...

Full Moon:

My cryptically-worded comment above about Pence not being "pro-gay" was a play on a quote from Ann Althouse. Last week, she had pronounced that she thought that Donald Trump was "pro-gay and being cagey about it."

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6329595&postID=6568559262092405906

I agreed with Althouse on that. I too think that Trump is "pro-gay and is being cagey about it." I have thought so from long before Trump began this campaign. I asked Althouse about that subject last year but never got an answer. Her answer, last week, came unsolicited. I suspected that Althouse had thought as much about Trump, from the beginnings of his campaign. But she's not supplied that answer. I cannot understand why her current impression of Trump would not have extended back in time as far as my own impression. After all, Trump hasn't changed his tone or his rhetoric any more than he does on other issues.

For pro-gay advocates with Republican leanings, a Trump candidacy has to hold all kinds of positives. If Trump actually wins, social conservatism is sidelined in American politics, perhaps forever. And simply by Trump getting the nomination, social conservatism in the Republican Party is set back for as long as Trump appears to be a vote winner.

And where better, to advance a pro-gay agenda than within the Republican Party? It is why so much media attention and social pressure is exerted on the Roman Catholic Church. The left-leaning media and social liberals see it as the heart of darkness and a power center for anti-gay social power. Beat down the powers that be within Catholicism, and all the other defenses are rapidly broken down... or something like that. And, the Roman Catholic Church is a particular problem for Catholic Democrats. Gay marriage, abortion; it can't be easy, to be a Catholic and a Democrat. It takes a true master of hypocrisy -- a Joe Biden, or a Dick Durbin -- to pull it off successfully in public life. (I shouldn't say too much about that since I am, like Hillary Clinton and Laura Bush, a United Methodist. And fwiw, Hillary ought to have almost as much trouble being a Methodist as Joe Biden does being a Roman Catholic.)

Fernandinande said...

HoodlumDoodlum said...
Data is anti-woman; feelings are more valid than numbers.


Well, that, too, but I like numbers 'n' shit because they're racist, especially pi.

Anthony said...

I always thought Mulan was conservative propaganda (and I am a conservative so I say that in a positive sense). Granted, this predates the Trump plan, but the Chinese build a wall to keep undesirables out. At the beginning a Chinese soldier sacrifices himself to warn of the Hunnish invasion. The families get the conscription notice and do not avoid the draft. There is no thought that they should try and reason with the Huns or co-exist peacefully. The Huns invade they must be defeated.

Mulan is initially thrown out of the army due to her ineptness, but she views this as a matter of shame not a "Yippie, I am out of the army!" She then shows honor, courage and skill and wins the war.

The Drill SGT said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Drill SGT said...

HoodlumDoodlum said...
Let's be fair about this:
As a hypothetical, if we knew exactly how much integrating young women into combat units (or all jobs, or certain deployments - make your own example) hurt the overall performance of the military (or their cost-effectiveness, etc), how much harm would you accept in order to allow women to make whatever choices they want/preserve their full, maximum autonomy (in terms of being able to choose whatever job, etc, they want)?

What I mean is - if we knew that allowing women into the Army Rangers would make the Rangers as a whole 5% worse, would you still push for that change? What about 10%? 50%?


In feminist theory, the doubling of the candidate pool by adding women will allow the Army to swap out the worst 25% of the male rangers and replace them with superior female rangers, thus increasing Force Effectiveness. Then there are the intangible benefits of a diverse force, so the next time the Rangers need to climb the cliff of Pointe du Hoc or rope into a street corner in Somalia, the enemy will be demoralized by the estrogen power...

Jonathan Graehl said...

'methinks' stood out to me immediately. pence is no intellectual giant. as dull as john kerry, maybe.

The sexual-consequence issues seem to me about the same as if you had similar sleeping situations in college. Yes, the military men (and women?) are higher-testosterone and thus higher harassment/rape/consensual-sex risk than your average college kid.

In retrospect it hasn't seemed that open-gay in the military was a problem. At least not one that's publicly discussed.

I do think lower standards for women in the physical-grunt-combat tier are a huge mistake, and arguably even allowing fit women is a mistake. As for the rape risk (definitely higher in the military than in a civilian job), it's really up to the woman if she wants to subject herself to it.

buwaya said...

Balfegor - "The heights are as high as they ever were, they just haven't kept pace, numerically, with the increase of the general population. And the median is less competent than it once was, at least in the US."

There is a good argument that for this sort of thing the heights are less significant than the median, or at least requires the existence of a significantly sized "smart fraction". We will always have heights, in any population. This is of course uncertain and controversial.

Latest argument on this is Garrett Jones "Hive Mind"

EMD said...

"I always thought Mulan was conservative propaganda"

Any film that shows an individual overcoming collective odds (which is nearly all of them) is conservative in nature. It's funny because Hollywood, sick with progressives, all continuously churn out libertarian/conservative stories.

Henry said...

On the other hand, Studio Ghibli's Princess Mononoke points out that if you give women guns they can wipe out samurai.

buwaya said...

"Studio Ghibli's Princess Mononoke points out that if you give women guns they can wipe out samurai."

But guns are ultimately bad things in Mononoke.
Sex roles in Mononoke are quite traditional, with just the one exception of the wild girl who is a superhuman type. The progressive tinge is very strong in Mononoke though, like a lot else in Miyazaki. Mostly in the environmentalist propaganda.

Henry said...

But guns are ultimately bad things in Mononoke.

Perhaps, but Lady Eboshi's logic in arming former brothel workers and lepers is unassailable.

Richard said...

Nikki, assuming those polls correctly reflect women’s (and men’s) view of Trump, he will be lucky to get 30% of the vote. Obviously the election is over. Hillary will win in the greatest landslide ever. So why are you so desperate to convince everyone on this website not to vote for Trump? Shouldn’t you just be sitting back and basking in the glow of victory for the soon to be President Clinton?

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Moneyrunner said...

Trump and homosexuals. The essay: I believe that Trump doesn't give a shit about homos. His opinion is that people can use any bodily orifice they want to get off. On the other hand, he's not interested in putting his boot in the face of the baker who doesn't want to bake a wedding cake. That takes a true Liberal on the way to fascist paradise. Someone once had a phrase for that "benign neglect" but he's dead.

tim in vermont said...

Mulan was hot and a strong man liked her. It's not like most male heroes are realistic.

tim in vermont said...

Monica was attractive, Hollywood ingenue/sex pot? No.

tim in vermont said...

It was declared by the powers that be that the Democrats should have no bench, thus they struggle to beat Trump. But I am sure the rank and file appreciate all the big money the Democrats collected and don't worry their heads to much over what was bought and sold.

tim in vermont said...

Can you imagine letting the voters choose the nominee? Hillary might not have won and all those 'donations' all of the crony capitalists made would now have been wasted.

That's why the nomination was baked before the first vote.