When is a smile a "smirk"? The dictionary says, when it's affected or simpering or silly and conceited looking.
But I'd like a deeper psychological explanation of what is supposed to be in the mind of the smirker and how observers of smiles decide they have a window into that mind. My hypothesis is: People see what they want to see. That means: When people tell you what they think they see about the inside of another person's head, they are opening a window for us to peer into their head.
And, of course, that means that if we talk about what we think we see in the mind of the observer of another person, we too reveal ourselves. We express misunderstandings and expose ourselves to being misunderstood. That's human life. I think it's quite wonderful, but it can be dangerous and painful.
Here are some the OED's examples of the use of "smirk":
?1570 T. Ingelend Disobedient Child sig. D.ivv Howe many smyrkes, and dulsome kysses?My son John had a couple tweets yesterday pushing back against Slate:
1601 B. Jonson Fountaine of Selfe-love Palinodia sig. Mv From Spanish shrugs, French faces, Smirks, Irps, and all affected Humors.
1675 W. Wycherley Country-wife iv. 56 He has the Canonical smirk, and the filthy, clammy palm of a Chaplain.
1718 Lady M. W. Montagu Let. Sept. (1965) I. 439 A jolly face and a stupid smirk in his countenance.
How is it OK to make a national news story out of not liking someone's smile? Mocking someone's smile is as bad as telling someone they have to smile more, and we're all supposed to think the latter is blatantly offensive, right?— John Althouse Cohen (@jaltcoh) January 21, 2019
Slate's Facebook post of this article calls the kid's facial expression "the smirk of evil." I don't know how adults can sleep at night after publicly trashing a kid and calling him "evil."— John Althouse Cohen (@jaltcoh) January 21, 2019
So I clicked through to the Slate article, "The MAGA Teenager Who Harassed a Native American Veteran Is Still Unnamed, but We’ve Seen His Face Before." This is by Ruth Graham, from January 19th and with no update, and it's really creepy. Here are the last 2 paragraphs, which tell us so much about what's inside Ruth Graham's head:
But I think the real reason the clip has spread is simpler: It’s the kid’s face. The face of self-satisfaction and certitude, of edginess expressed as cruelty. The face remains almost completely still as his peers hoot in awed delight at his bravado. The face is both punchable and untouchable. Many observers recognized it right away."It wins." It. There is no person anymore. No "he," just an "it." There is no human, just an empty mask, as Ruth Graham sees it.
The face is in this photo of a clutch of white young men crowding around a single black man at a lunch counter sit-in in Virginia in the 1960s, and in many other images of jeering white men from that era. The face is the rows of Wisconsin high school boys flashing Nazi salutes in a prom picture last year. The face is Brett Kavanaugh—then a student at an all-boys Catholic prep school—“drunkenly laughing” as he allegedly held down Christine Blasey Ford. Anyone who knew the popular white boys in high school recognized it: the confident gaze, the eyes twinkling with menace, the smirk. The face of a boy who is not as smart as he thinks he is, but is exactly as powerful. The face that sneers, “What? I’m just standing here,” if you flinch or cry or lash out. The face knows that no matter how you react, it wins.
Looking into her mind, I think — and I show myself in saying this — that she believes she is and loves herself as a person of great empathy for human beings, and she is simply oblivious to the humanity of the teenager who she fears is harassing and mocking a person who looks to her like the kind of person she thinks of as Victim. She doesn't realize that she, a good person, could engage in victimizing, and when she looks in the mirror and smiles at herself, the expression on her face is never a "smirk."
Posts
233 comments:
1 – 200 of 233 Newer› Newest»Sick sick woman.
They're always the last ones to realize what's going on just before they're carted off to re-education camps or cattle cars. They never do realize they're propping up the evil.
Alternate awful take: Old man repeatedly approaches teenage boys in park.
The pasted on nervous smile is a reflex to try to distance yourself from an uncomfortable and incomprehensible situation.
Would they have preferred a sneer, snarling look on the beleaguered kid's face. Duh. OF course they would because then they (and we know who they are) would have more ammunition to try to stereotype and destroy this kid.
We are rapidly approaching dangerous territory.
Yellow vests. Right now, decent people should be demanding the jobs of every columnist who (a) said vicious things about these kids, and (b) did not retract and apologize. Enough is enough.
We are rapidly approaching dangerous territory.
Too late.
You can make up any lie you want. The kid is wearing a MAGA hat. He deserves to be lynched by the leftwing mob.
Hillary lost and that shit never ends.
The old man walked into the crowd of teens, banged his drum in their faces, and he brought his camera crew.
He then lied to the WaPo about "build that wall" - nobody on any tape said that. But even if they had - so what?
The harassing party was the old man and his camera crew. "go back to Europe." That is on tape.
Chimps react to facial expressions. Details at 11.
Women have too much in the U.S., as I've often told Althouse.
We've been kissing women's asses my entire life, and I'm 69. We've been handing women everything they ask for my entire life.
You know what women want now? They want us to quit kissing their asses and to notice the demon in them. They're furious with us for buying into their innocent little girl routine.
Women will continue to ramp up the evil until we notice that demon in them.
Temujin said...
They're always the last ones to realize what's going on just before they're carted off to re-education camps or cattle cars. They never do realize they're propping up the evil.
First they came for the socialists, and I blamed it on the socialists.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I blamed it on the trade unionists.
Then they came for the Jews, and I blamed it on the Jews.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to sblame it on.
"Smile."
Read some of the tweets from lefty celebrities. Some are calling for his death. It is getting really scary out there, and it isn't coming from the right. Here's one from the producer who is known for projects such as Beauty and the Beast and the Twilight Saga. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/01/hollywood-producer-calls-for-covington-catholic-kids-to-go-screaming-into-the-woodchipper/
People see what they want to see. That means: When people tell you what they think they see about the inside of another person's head, they are opening a window for us to peer into their head.
Roshomon doesn’t work the way that our intellectually hypertrophic commenter R/V thinks it does.
The basis of bigotry is a belief by the bigot in the bigot’s superiority to the object of their bigotry. They can’t give it up because they are addicted to the frissons of superiority they get. How are you going to get somebody like R/V to admit that he is likely wrong and that he has been wrong all along when that is just going to make him feel bad about himself, where if he just sticks to his guns, and pretends that the facts are different than they are, he gets to keep his stash of feel-good hormones?
Ruth Graham should be sued and fired and shunned forever. Never allowed to work again.
Ruth Graham is the one who has bashed GHWB's service dog - Sully recently. She's definitely not well.
I hope this kid and his family SUE SUE SUE SUE SUE.
Sue the leftwing smear and lie machine into the ground.
Some fantastic lawyer needs to step up and step in and sue the SHIT out of SLATE.
I detest Trump but I’ll probably vote for him again out of self-defense.
Ok, one comment before I leave for work: a new story will arise today- it has to, to take the heat off the MSM for the twin fiascoes of the last 3 days. When it does, please, for god sake, verify it before you trust it.
From the homophobic taunting to the demand that he enable his own punishment, where have I seen this before?.
"Now lean forward and choke yourself."
"I will give you three seconds, exactly three fucking seconds, to wipe that stupid grin off your face, or I will gouge out your eyeballs and skull-fuck you!"
Ruth G = wow that is some powerful creepy leftwing hate.
She knows what's in the teen's thoughts? No. She has no clue. But he's wearing a Maga hat, so she feels she has every right to lie and hate on him. Slate feels they can harass a teenager with lies and hate and that is OK?
The kid is wearing a Make America Great Again hat - so the leftwing brown-shirts feel they have every right to harass him.
Lawsuit.
The AP report had the good sense to use a descriptive for Sandmann: "teen at center of confrontation". I talked about about how that phrase ignores the role of the camera in an earlier post.
But attaching the word "harassed" calls for evidence.
GWB smirked. Kavanaugh smirked. Now Catholic white boy smirks. If I were in the MSM, I might start believing that smirk is a dog whistle aimed at white males.
One side is talking about the objective facts on video, another is talking about what a single tightly framed photo suggests to them is happening inside of somebody’s head. That side refuses to acknowledge that there is a far wider set of facts outside of the frame of that photo. The whole purpose of cropping that stuff out was to allow room for the imagination to work and create a reality around it that comports with the reality they feel in their own hearts.
Althouse gets her mojo back.
A smile is a smirk when libtards want to be mad about it. See George W. Bush.
The smiling teen is responsible for slavery in America, segregation, and the fake Nazi salute done by some teens in Wisconsin. Wow - that MAGA hat sure is powerful.
White people in 2019: 100% white. 0% people.
We should drop the “people” and just go back to calling them “whitey”.
It’s far more truthful.
Sue.
"It wins." It. There is no person anymore. No "he," just an "it." There is no human, just an empty mask, as Ruth Graham sees it.
Hey, I'm sure Graham has called out the left before for exactly this.
No? Huh.
This is radical leftwing harassment.
The kid and his family should sue.
Blogger Michael said...
Sick sick woman.
1/21/19, 8:01 AM
--------------------------------
It's not an illness. It's an evil.
When you're smilin'...keep on smilin'
the whole world smiles with you
The face is the rows of Wisconsin high school boys flashing Nazi salutes in a prom picture last year. The face is Brett Kavanaugh—then a student at an all-boys Catholic prep school—“drunkenly laughing” as he allegedly held down Christine Blasey Ford.
Both of these episodes have been thoroughly debunked. I guess Ruth Graham doesn’t keep up with the news? She’s every bit as loathsome as a person who claims to believe “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”
Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown are treated like innocent babies while this guy is an official adult racist because of a hat.
Obama smirked quite often. It’s just that the press was smirking along with him.
"An affected or simpering smile; a silly, conceited, smiling look."
See also: Bill Kristol
I want to See Ruth Graham's life destroyed.
I want Slate - out of business.
For the common good.
For the common good.
For the Children.
I wonder if, at some point years prior to 1933, Germans decided that all Jews just had punchable faces.
Both of these episodes have been thoroughly debunked.
These things are held onto because they are too valuable to the left. The Wisconsin boys just came on the news the other day characterized as “Nazi salutes.” I pointed out the facts of the matter, you know what the response was? “You know that Wisconsin is full of Nazis.” So it didn’t matter. They just serve as touchstones for the bigotry. Truth doesn’t enter in to it. Buwaya is right.
Radical Leftwing harassment cannot stand unanswered.
And the person who made the Wisconsin Nazis remark was no left-wing ideologue. They voted for Bush!. This stuff works. And now Google has shut down a popular pro-Trump meme site with no explanation. Future elections are going to be played out on these terms, and they own all of the heavy artillery. Trump had his mouth, but good luck ever finding another like him.
I see a nervous smirk; I don't think that kid wanted to be there, but with a camera in his face he knew if he turned and left he'd be called a "coward unable to face people with different opinions," or some other insult. Once they shoved a camera in his face, he was in a Catch 22. No matter what he did, we'd be arguing about whatever the camera team edited it to and complained about. Did I miss a part of the video where he does anything but stand still and take a drum in his face?
Ruth Graham is a long time Christian basher, with her name as a hook.
I can't help wondering whether it's possible to be aware of this ongoing level of evil, even at "arm's length" via an aggregating entity like yours, without becoming a participant.
When a leftwing smile doesn't matter:
"A photo of a smiling Obama and Farrakhan did emerge, but mysteriously only after President Obama left office.
no Slate rage on that one.
"Both of these episodes have been thoroughly debunked. I guess Ruth Graham doesn’t keep up with the news? She’s every bit as loathsome as a person who claims to believe “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”
My older sister is a far left lib who worships every word written by the WAPO. I bet she would deny today any knowledge of any videos which exonerate this kid. She would just act dumb like Ruth Graham is doing.
The smile could just as easily be characterized as being self conscious and awkward. There's some ambiguity. How is it possible to characterize the act of banging a drum four inches away from someone's face as an act designed to mollify and calm the situation down? I just don't see how this can be read as a friendly gesture.......I wish some journalist would call the activist out on this. In the one interview I saw with him (on CNN natch), there wasn't a single skeptical question.
Watch this video if you want to see what really happened. The Black Israelites were calling the kids all kinds of nasty names, and the Native American walked through the crowd and started drumming in the one kids face....https://www.facebook.com/TheRedRightAndU/videos/315137145796869/UzpfSTEwMDAwMDA5ODgzMjgyNzpWSzoyMDk4OTExOTgwNDAwMDc4/
If that man shoved a drum in my face like that, I would not have smiled I would have told him to shove off.
"Get you drum and your camera crew out of my face or I'm calling the police."
My understanding was these kids had taken a bus from Kentucky to march in the pro life rally.
Probably his first time in DC.
I tend to think the kid was thinking "this is the kind of crazy stuff I heard takes place in DC, and now I'm in the middle of it."
I say that because when I went to the 1980 DNC convention in NYC as a teen, I had the same feelings and smile on my face when a gruff New Yorker walked by me and I could hear him say to his friend "what the fuck was he smiling about?"
I was surprised he took such notice. I've commented about that experience here before.
If you really want to see a smirk, go back to Peter Strzok's testimony in front of Congress.
He is a native American and a vet. That's all great but that is something that is not known. All he really is - a old crazy man with a drum in your face, and a camera crew in your face - and a lie for the Washington Post(D) to pedal.
But Peter Strozk lied for Hillary. He is a hero! according to the loyal Party Cultists.
"she is simply oblivious to the humanity of the teenager"
She is oblivious to the humanity of any of the deplorables.
@JAC: "How is it OK to make a national news story out of not liking someone's smile? Mocking someone's smile is as bad as telling someone they have to smile more, and we're all supposed to think the latter is blatantly offensive, right?"
I appreciate the sentiment and all, but it's a little late for these how-is-it-OK lamentations. This is what progs do. This the culture war in your face. This is what they want. This is done with intent. If the Cohens and the Althouses truly want it to end, they must draw a line and take sides. So far, it seems, they prefer isn't-that-awful while aiding and abetting progs when it counts.
"Looking into her mind, I think — and I show myself in saying this — that she believes she is and loves herself as a person of great empathy for human beings, and she is simply oblivious to the humanity of the teenager who she fears is harassing and mocking a person who looks to her like the kind of person she thinks of as Victim. She doesn't realize that she, a good person, could engage in victimizing, and when she looks in the mirror and smiles at herself, the expression on her face is never a "smirk.""
This is as close to a self-aware apology as I've seen from our hostess.
Ruth Graham--casual, smirking racist. We seen her face before. It is the smirk of the self-satisfied virtue signaling, while making assumptions about the lives of others.
Sad.
The same creepy brownshirts who would destroy a teenager for wearing a Make America Great Again hat - and a smile - these same brownshirts want to control you and have power over YOU.
It's time for Ruth Graham to face consequences for her hatred, her lies, and her brownshirted Nazi leftwing Neo-fascist racialism.
She must be destroyed.
Hollywood, the Catholic Church, and the media don't realize how much distrust and hostility they have generated not just by their scandals but by their reaction to those scandals. I switched around a few channels this morning. Fox News covered it, but so far as I could see the other channels ignored it. Well, that's something. They're not further demonizing a group of high school students on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
Get in their faces and drum back twice as hard.
Certain people, like Ruth Graham and other lefty commentators, believe they can see a person's innermost thoughts by just looking at them. The technical term for this kind of person is "moron."
Sieg Smile.
It's time to punch back twice as hard.
With a lawsuit.
As of Monday morning at 10 am, the Washington Post has slightly adjusted their hit piece to note that an "unverified" video showing a quite different set of events, has been posted. Nothing to change the Post's mind, of course.
Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...
Some fantastic lawyer needs to step up and step in and sue the SHIT out of SLATE.
1/21/19, 8:20 AM
There's at least one offer to represent them.
Archiving tweets for their legal counsel.
This is why I rarely smile in photographs - some of us just can't affect a natural looking smile on command. He obviously knew he was being filmed and had to stand there with a forced smile on his face for an uncomfortably long time. If he'd done anything else he'd have been accused of looking dismissive, or angry, or condescending, or whatever the progs thought would paint him in the worst possible light.
DBQ said: "Right now, decent people should be demanding the jobs of every columnist who (a) said vicious things about these kids, and (b) did not retract and apologize."
One problem is that most of the outlets these people work for have already written off large pieces of the total audience.
What drives people to want to control others so thoroughly? Seriously. Do they think they’re making our society or culture better? ‘Cause they’re not.
Stereotyping is wrong, except when it's not.
Judging people based on how they look (or dress, or speak) is wrong, except when it's not.
Making assumptions about someone's inner motivations (thoughts, true intentions) and assuming bad faith is wrong, except when it's not.
If you're one of the good people then all the things you say are wrong are a-OK...in most cases they're even required.
Mary Beth-
Excellent. Good news. More please.
I want Ruth Graham and Slate sued into the ground. Enough of this leftwing bullying and intimidation. Enough.
Tim in Vermont said: "The basis of bigotry is a belief by the bigot in the bigot’s superiority to the object of their bigotry. They can’t give it up because they are addicted to the frissons of superiority they get."
Yeah, this describes contempt, which is harder to root out than hatred.
It was only seen as a simpering smirk because people thought, or KNEW, that the student approached the Indigian during his sacred drumming rite meant to appeal to the Great Spirit to heal the Earth from Whitey's depredations (I assume. Isn't that what those noble savages do?) planted himself centimeters from him, and thrust out his racist Caucasoid grin genocidally in his face in a premeditated hate crime against an innocent POC.
Context is everything.
Now that we know better, people STILL see it that way because it's already been implanted in their brains. Annd they like it.
Mind readers, all. I'm surprised the dictionary definition for smirk depends on knowing the mind of the face maker. Seems rather nonsensical, and creepy, that the look on someone's face can take on multiple meanings depending on what motivates it; a smile now, a smirk later.
It's a smile. There is light in his eyes--not hate or derision.
Google "Ruth Graham Slate." She only seems to write polemics. And she's not one to talk about smirks.
The Left has started lecturing me about the importance of forgiveness and how anyone who doesn't welcome convicted felons back into society with open arms is a terrible person (and most likely a racist/bigot/sexist/whatever to boot).
A convicted felon who has served their time is supposed to be treated as just as worthy of a job, etc, as anyone else. Someone who has murdered, raped, robbed, and all the rest is entitled to equal consideration and should be assumed to be a good, decent person the moment their sentence ends. Ok, fine.
Contrast that with the Left's demand that this kid/these kids be ruined for life. Several tweets yesterday explicitly said that they should be "unemployable forever." If you are a white kid guilty of some (imagined) racial offense you must be punished without mercy forever. If you commit a violent crime or two you must be welcomed back into society's good graces and anyone who objects to that is a bad person.
The teenager said that he was sitting there when the drummer boy came up and got into his face. Why can't the media print his side of the story?
This is by Ruth Graham, from January 19th and with no update, and it's really creepy.
[...]
Looking into her mind, I think — and I show myself in saying this — that she believes she is [list of self-congratulatory beliefs/character failings]
What it is, and she is, is stupid. (Yeah, I know, Slate writer, redundant.) It isn't creepy that a stupid person writes stupid things. What's creepy is that stupid vicious stuff like this exists at all, and that it apparently works on a lot of stupid people. What's creepy are the non-stupid people hiring the stupid people and directing them to produce this kind of propaganda. Dimwits like Ruth Graham aren't the real problem.
There is a victim there - one was created out of partisanship and hatred, bigotry and intolerance. What kind of broken mind can do that to a young person who has behaved so properly, and then refuse to acknowledge the mistake or accept responsibility enough to even say "I'm sorry". Newsrooms and individuals across the country need to be apologizing today for their cruelty and the outright bigotry they conveyed so passionately just one day ago. Imagine this happening to you or your child.
Here's great example of a Ruth Grahamism:
The boys know they’re being recorded—some of them are even seen capturing the moment themselves—but either their homosocial glee is too orgiastic to be dampened by the instinct for self-protection, or they don’t think anyone who matters to them will care. (And yes: Where are the adults?)
It seems like our society is playing Russian Roulette, and no one knows for sure how many chambers are in this particular pistol.
Each day, another pull of the trigger, and 'click'.
After a few empty clicks you can almost believe there is no bullet in the gun.
I am Laslo.
Exceptionally good blogging, Althouse.
Brava.
Can anyone suggest how this young man should have looked instead, how he should have smiled, what behavior would have been better, becuase there obviously must be some approved way of smiling and conducting yourself when confronted like that from an obvious hater? Let's hear it. How would he have avoided your hateful bigoted response. Funny how it's his fault there are so many proud bigots out there.
It looks like a smirk to me. It goes with teenager. Probably a cover for inexperience in reality - trying what works on the other kids.
Oh, Professor, I meant to mention: that commediene you like, Kathy Griffin, has repeated called for the kids to be doxxed/identified and for them to be punished by the public.
She's asked several times for the kids' names and verification of their identities. She posted the school's info and encouraged people to contact them. She explicitly called for the kids to be doxxed.
She's helping incite the online rage mob. She...isn't a good person. Maybe she's not someone you should support/patronize?
https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1086927762634399744
https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1086932616392011776
"She doesn't realize that she, a good person, could engage in victimizing, and when she looks in the mirror and smiles at herself, the expression on her face is never a "smirk."" What a great sentence that perfectly encapsulates the lack of self-awareness that exists today amongst many political commentators.
As a (not young) mom I see a young man that is trying to bolster his self-confidence. My son has worn that smile when he is nervous and uncomfortable.
I would like someone to ask Kristen Gillibrand if this is how she would like her sons to be treated. Has she seen this expression on their faces? She said she wants to fight for other kids as hard as her own...well let's see her get to it.
You can tell a crack addict all the facts in the world about the devastating effects of the drug. It won't make any difference. It's not that the facts are in dispute, it's that the facts are completely irrelevant.
For a certain type of person, self-righteous outrage is like that.
Sometimes, while helping (P)eople, you crush a few of them. Behold the future.
We are trying to deny humanity of young men. I’ve said it about a million different things, and this is one of those times
The germans didn't believe they were complicit in gassing jews either. But this lady would be very happy with a great big "R" on ever white male, every republican and every anti-abortionist.
She is very evil.
"smiling while white" is now a "face crime".
Just more spawn from the same beast that produced Kavanaugh, It’s obvious by looking at him! It’s the banality of evil! This is the smirk of genocide, and as if genocide wasn’t bad enough, now we are piling on climate change, which hits reservations the hardest! If it weren’t for Shlump, these kids wouldn’t have felt empowered to hurl insults at the tribal elder, they would have knelt at his knee and opened their heart to the wisdom of his drumming!
See how easy it is to write stuff from their point of view?
“Boys will be boys” is right up there with “manifest destiny” as a mantra of evil.
Its interesting to see how the effectiveness of these leftist smears lessen with every application. A lefty smear like this used to get a good 3 day head start before it was debunked and even then their media friends could drag their feet recanting. Now it seems like the smear only has a shelf life of 24 hours before it falls apart. I don't think the chin wagging liberals on sunday morning had time to bloviate about this smear before it became untouchable and "lets not be hasty and wait for more facts to come in"
I dread the day Slate discovers Bitchy Resting Face.
I don't believe that Ruth Graham - or most Leftists - hate "hate". That's just a left-wing cover story. Like Stalin's loving the Peasants so much he just *Had to* destroy the Kulacks or put people in the Gulag.
100-1 Ruth Graham would hate White Catholics no matter what they did. Posing as the defender of minorities against "White Privilege" is just a clever way of expressing it.
I agree that people need to start filing lawsuits. If you're not a public figure - people don't have a right to slander you with impunity.
Won't someone please consider this from the poor media's perspective? Trump addressed the nation Saturday with a diabolical plan to end the shutdown and extend DACA, a plan carefully crafted by his best propagandists to sound reasonable. There was only so much the media could do to directly expose how unreasonable the plan really was because reasons. So the only way they could do their job was to go wall-to-wall with whatever story happened to be on offer that exposed the true character of the guy who proposed that ineffably awful plan. The media had no way of knowing in advance that the Russian-hotel-lying story that was supposed to get them through the weekend would promptly be blown up by (of all unimpeachable people!) Robert Mueller. So that put the media on a long holiday weekend needing a new story fast. Good thing MAGA-Covington came over the transom ready to go. Yes, that story also led to some embarrassment, but that's the kind of sacrifice a committed journalist has to be prepared to make in service not only to the profession but to the American People as well as all that is good and holy. And from a career perspective, a willingness to take one for the team like that won't go unrecognized. So stop blaming the media!
I admit that I was tricked by media reports stating without qualification that the teenagers interrupted and got in the face of peacefully demonstrating Native Americans. Context is everything. The press get things wrong all the time. Whenever I have personal knowledge of the subject of a story,it is almost always wrong re some key facts. But we have to get information from somebody and I don't think the conservative media is any better.
That said, I'm not sure I buy that the boy was trying to defuse the situation. He was standing his ground which he had every right to do. If he were trying to make peace he probably would have tried to say something.
One story said that the boys were doing an offensive "Haka" dance. What - they all practiced how to do such a dance because they thought they might find a group of Indians they wanted to harass? Obviously it was a school song/chant and its origins are immaterial.
Let’s compare what is happening to this young man with what happened with the women who told Louis CK to go ahead and masturbate. Now let’s compare how the perpetrators will be handled. Louis CK list his platform and his livelihood. Will anyone who has threatened this young man or added to his trauma be similarly punished?
Or do we not recognize this young man could even be traumatized by this public treatment?
One story said that the boys were doing an offensive "Haka" dance. What - they all practiced how to do such a dance because they thought they might find a group of Indians they wanted to harass?
“Was that over the top? I can never tell!” - The Joker
But you know what? I would have thought they went over the top in the Kavanaugh hearings, but people bought it.
Blogger Gk1 said...
Its interesting to see how the effectiveness of these leftist smears lessen with every application.
Wishful thinking.
PJ wrote: Yes, that story also led to some embarrassment, but that's the kind of sacrifice a committed journalist has to be prepared to make in service not only to the profession but to the American People as well as all that is good and holy.
Heh. I'd like to see some "committed journalist" sacrificed over this. Not gonna happen. They won't even admit error like poor Steve Uhr just did. Instead they'll just keep collecting their inflated salaries provided by _____.
That kid is someone's child, who was doing his best to figure out a weird and charged situation, and that woman is a human shitstain.
Don't care if I am making her into a negative object.
Or how about the young man who was tried for causing the suicide of Tyler Clementi because he taunted Tyler for being gay to a few friends. Was that worse for Tyler to go through than being taunted as a racist by CNN and The Washington Post? What if this were a fragile young man like Tyler? Would the journalists who piled on be held similarly accountable?
Do we tell this young man it gets better? One day you will feel at ease again, even after celebrities and journalists smeared you as a horrible person?
"I wish some journalist would call the activist out on this. In the one interview I saw with him (on CNN natch), there wasn't a single skeptical question."
Asking a skeptical question of a POC, especially a holy Elder and shaman like Phillips, would be racist.
“ “That said, I'm not sure I buy that the boy was trying to defuse the situation. He was standing his ground which he had every right to do. If he were trying to make peace he probably would have tried to say something. ”
He was a 16 year old at a protest among other protests. He had no responsibility to defuse the situation. Nobody was in danger. People were disagreeing and it was peaceful. Nothing about this falls on his shoulders. It all falls upon the people who wanted to make a story out of it
Glad to hear there are lawyers offering to sue. The media is going to continue doing crap like this until it costs them. They have been getting away with it for far too long. It would be an added bonus if newsrooms all across the country banned their reporters from using Twitter. That platform is just trouble. We don't need to know their every thought as soon as they think it.
"I don't know how adults can sleep at night after publicly trashing a kid and calling him 'evil.'"
I think he's low-grade evil; He engaged in a staring contest with an elderly man with a smirk on his baby face with a group of MAGA smiling friends keeping their distance. I would put the kid on a work detail and forbid the use of that evil red cap. Don't try to sugarcoat evil; it's unbecoming of you. Get a restful night's sleep, young man (JAC), and wake up less shallow and naive than the day before.
All of this is predictably sad and pathetic.
When you categorize those that disagree with you as evil, it gives you permision to do whatever you want to them. It's OK to lie about evil people, to slander them, even to physically attack them. Today there's a subset of people who firmly believe that anyone who supports Trump, anyone who would wear a MAGA hat in public, is pure evil. This gives them permission to lie about them. It also gives them permission to uncritically believe any lie that's told about any Trump supporter that puts them in a negative light without any doubt or skeptisism. After all, they are the "other", part of an evil enemy tribe that must be destroyed.
And even when the truth comes out, that lies were told, it doesn't matter. They'll still hate Trump supporters and excuse any lie that's told about them, because they're the evil other.
Phillips is "keeper of a sacred pipe", HAHA!
For proper identification you need variant instances
none of these termed as smirk!?
My favorite is Smugface.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/15/the-seven-faces-of-donald-trump-a-psychologists-view
In this instance I'd say *SMIRK* is term of choice for the inner state they believe they are concealing.>>>
Projection
The leftwing Brownshirts on the Nazi left will destroy whoever they want to destroy - facts and reality be damned.
The Guardian's review of the first episode of the new series of Grand Tour--
?Anyway, here is Clarkson in pale jeans, bellowing “WE’RE BACK!” to wild applause from a studio full of white people, which means season three is under way. Time to gingerly crack open the shed door and see what they’re up to in there.?
White people! The horror!
Well John Altco- why do you keep voting for these fascists?
never bring a smile to a drum fight
The Rashomon effect.
I would put the kid on a work detail
In Siberia (Alaska?), with one sheet on the bed. We could call the camp a “Gulag.”
That'll learn ’em!
*Pictures of Trayvon Martin with guns, weed, etc*
"That doesn't mean anything! You can't take those few pictures and assume they say anything about that boy or his character! How dare you even suggest it!?"
*Picture of Catholic school kid w/awkward smile, wearing MAGA hat*
"This tells us everything we need to know, doesn't it? We all know this kid and what's in his heart and character--let's burn him to the ground based on our assessment of this one image."
Maybee said ...
do we not recognize this young man could even be traumatized by this public treatment?
Moms can make boo-boo go away with kiss
Trump can help heal by sending these kids signed MAGA hats.
Unfortunately, the media won't consider a retraction until libel litigation ensues. I don't think the record will be corrected until the kids litigate.
Also unfortunately, this isn't Nathan Phillips' first trip to the victimization box. The last one turned out badly, and this one will, too, and hopefully CNN, MSNBC and the NYT will go down with him.
If Nathan Phillips is in fact 64-65 years old, then his Vietnam veteran status will be checked thoroughly. Men born in 1953-4 would have been only 18 during the Easter Offensive in the spring of 1972, the last big battle of Vietnam.
That said, I'm not sure I buy that the boy was trying to defuse the situation.
@steve uhr, an intelligent person would have stopped after your first paragraph. I, for one, do not care what you choose to buy, not buy, contemplate buying, or anything else. You’ve conceded that your inherent bias made you gullible. Who cares about anything else?
He was standing his ground which he had every right to do.
Nice of you to concede that.
“One story said ...”
Still gullible. You’ve learned nothing from this fiasco. Not. One. God-damned. Thing.
I once read an article by a law prof who derided the fashionable but incorrect invocation of the Roshomon effect to explain and/or hide or excuse simple lying, deceit and nihilistic subjectivity. It was pretty good.
Phillips, the kid, and Trump should get together for a peace pipe summit. I'm sure the shaman can bring the good stuff.
I wonder why these leftists want to take our guns?
that she believes she is and loves herself as a person of great empathy for human beings, and she is simply oblivious to the humanity of the teenager who she fears is harassing and mocking a person who looks to her like the kind of person she thinks of as Victim
Do you think those ideologies of the 20th C that murdered millions of innocent people did it in the name of Evil?
No, they did it in the name of what they considered to be the greatest good. They did it in the name of a future without the evils of the past. They did it because they knew history was on their side.
LLR Chuck; "Exceptionally good blogging, Althouse. Brava."
LOL
Its now "safe again" for the LLR's to dip their toes back into "lets pretend to stand up to the left waters".
Initially, of course, and even some still, the LLR's went all in 100% on the lefty narrative.
Unexpectedly.
The Left never gives up.
If you Google or Bing '4200 women called FBI to report being raped by Kavanaugh" you won't find one hit that relates to the FBI story. Everything you will see for 23 pages makes it look like Kavanaugh was guilty.
We are leaving piles of shit for future generations to find.
I wish some journalist would call the activist out on this. In the one interview I saw with him (on CNN natch), there wasn't a single skeptical question.
This is the key nugget to understand modern "journalism". The core value of journalistic professionalism is what we might call "professional skepticism". Essentially this means that even if something looks true and seems likely true based on other knowledge the journalist is supposed to validate it.
When it comes to anything usable in politics this simply doesn't happen. What we saw in this case was "journalists" accepting the word of their allies and repeating it as fact. So called journalists leap to the story most helpful to Team Blue and walk back to less good stories only as others force them to by revealing facts inconsistent with their own conclusions. [We can call this the roesch/voltaire strategy]. A true journalist's ending position is the story which best fits the facts and circumstances. Modern political journalists end up on the most politically advantageous story which cannot be disproven. And now the left lies about evidence because even the current method isn't biased enough for them.
This is not journalism: it's advocacy. And not particularly intelligent advocacy at that.
If anyone was still assuming that this is all about Trump, this (and the Kavanaugh incident, and dozens upon dozens more over the last decade) should clear that up.
What you have here is plain tribal war. As should have been clear long ago. The trouble is not going to be "fixed" by replacing Trump with a milder figurehead. You don't just have political differences, but a split in identity.
YoungHegelian said...
Do you think those ideologies of the 20th C that murdered millions of innocent people did it in the name of Evil?
No, they did it in the name of what they considered to be the greatest good. They did it in the name of a future without the evils of the past. They did it because they knew history was on their side.
This is such a great point.
And, of course, you do not have journalism, but a propaganda system.
RG either suffered from a temporary bout of diversity, and is now ashamed of her colored preconceptions, or was displacing a long-held prejudice on a convenient target. Probably both in a culture that has normalized each character trait, flaw, really.
Blogger Drago said...
LLR Chuck; "Exceptionally good blogging, Althouse. Brava."
“LOL
Its now "safe again" for the LLR's to dip their toes back into "lets pretend to stand up to the left waters".
Initially, of course, and even some still, the LLR's went all in 100% on the lefty narrative.
Unexpectedly
N. R. O.
100-1 Ruth Graham would hate White Catholics no matter what they did.
Unlikely. She hates this kid because he wears a MAGA hat. White Catholics who join BLM marches to chant "Pigs in a blanket, Fry'em like bacon" are a completely different story.
buwaya said...And, of course, you do not have journalism, but a propaganda system.
Would it kill someone to find out who's pulling the strings?
Yes, probably.
the left are terrified African Americans might support Trump. So - they must turn everyone on the right into a racist. A simple message like "Make America Great Again" is now the KKK.
Immigration and Customs officers are now - KKK.
A teenager wearing a MAGA hat must be destroyed.
Behold - the modern corruptocrat party.
Would it kill someone to find out who's pulling the strings?
No one is pulling strings. Activism is figuring out how you can contribute and doing so of your own initiative. Plus supporting your allies of course. That why so many of them screw up so badly. They're dying to help out so when an opportunity comes along their enthusiasm prevents critical analysis and therefore prevents understanding.
"As a (not young) mom I see a young man that is trying to bolster his self-confidence. My son has worn that smile when he is nervous and uncomfortable"
My thoughts were that it may have been the fake smile of a kid trying to defuse the situation. A lot of women go through life fake smiling. Part of it is a defensive strategy to defuse male aggression. It wasn't a funny situation, for the kid, so why was he smiling? My memory of the kid's story is that he was smiling to defuse the situation. It wasn't a humorous smile, but a defensive one. When he gets older, he will learn a stoic look, or even a neutral smile. But I expect that his age doesn't yet allow that sort of response to provocations by elders, and especially much older males. About the only thing he can do, without crossing the societal bounds of male hierarchy, is a defensive smile. Sure, a lot of guys his age would have engaged the older male. But these boys seem to be well trained in these societal norms. Engaging is what fascist Antifa thugs do. It isn't what Catholic schoolboys do.
No one is pulling strings.
Is this why the Left is so leaderless?
It-people who work for major "news" outlets, trashed this kid.
Screw them. Sue all of them.
Immigration and Customs officers are now - KKK.
A teenager wearing a MAGA hat must be destroyed.
Kamala said one of those things. Has she said the other?
"Would it kill someone to find out who's pulling the strings"
Ask Seth Rich.
Big Mike,
In Steve's defense, I will point out that he expressed explicit and argued disbelief about that "One story....", so he has learned something.
There are lots of "political entrepreneurs" about, aka "activists", characters looking for attention, celebrity, and money. They are usually free agents, though many are not.
The propaganda system mines everything for material, including whatever these free agents provide, when they do. But most material comes from the system.
The process of propaganda is in blasting out material that suits the message, that is, in selecting that which is suitable or creating it if needs must. And of course leaving out the unsuitable.
Politicians are figureheads and flunkies, actors and entertainers. They sing and dance for pay. The Democrats are "divided" only in so far as a slew of new actors are trying out for parts at the moment. Soon enough the producers will hire the cast, assign roles, and they will start rehearsing the script.
Is this why the Left is so leaderless?
Yes, but "leaderless" is not really different from the right is it? Nor is that a problem.
The key differences are (1) the left controls institutions (education, NGOs) which they use to train their acolytes, and (2) they fund and reward their footsoldiers for this activity so their participation rates are much higher.
The only part of the right which is even close to as well organized is the pro-life movement. Even there the professional element is far less because the funding isn't available.
One thing to keep in mind is that the MSM probably almost intentionally overreacted here due to the Catholic angle. They desperately want to believe in the evil of Catholicism, because Roman Catholicism is central to their fear for the unfettered right to abortion in regards to the Sumpreme Court. We saw this in vivid display in the Brett Kavenaugh hearings. Things are likely to get much uglier with the, likely very soon, replacement for leftist Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Kavenaugh replaced a squishy conservative. That means that the Court likely won't shift that far as a result of his joining it. But Justice Ginsburg has anchored the progressive side of the Court for decades. Trump replacing her, with a Republicant Senate to confirm, likely means a strong 6-3 conservative majority. Compounding this, likely the most likely candidate is Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a woman who appears to joyishly live the Roman Catholic Church's teachings on birth control and abortion. #MeToo won't work on her nomination. About the only thing that might is to "other" Roman Catholics, which appears to be fairly common on the left over the last several months. Battlefield prep.
The problem for the Democrats is that this is a high risk strategy for them. The feminists don't care - abortion is too important to them. But the Democratic Party had been, for probably better than a century, the party that represented Roman Catholics, while the soul of the Republican Party was in the descendants of New England Puritans (and yes, that religious belief was on full display during the Civil War with their demand for the abolition of slavery essentially on religious grounds). The older groups of Roman Catholics have found a home in the Republican Party, as the Democratic Pary has become the Godless Party, as evidenced by the five conservative Justices either being Catholic, or attending Catholic services (Thomas is Episcopal, attending Catholic services, and I think that it is Kavenaugh who is the opposite). Imagine that being 6 conservative Catholics, with one liberal one, and two liberal Jews (one of whom may be the next one to depart the Court after Ginsburg).
It is a high risk strategy because the demographic that the Democrats are willing to shut down the government to attract, the Hispanics, tend to be fairly religious Roman Catholics. Not the type of RC that Nancy Palsi is, who has apparently been refused Communion over her abortion stand, but rather old country Catholics. Our PHX house is in a heavily Hispanic part of town. All the houses in our subdivision have little windows with a Cross grate over them to keep out the evil spirits. You see candles with Christian scenes all over the place for sale. And medals of saints hanging under the mirror in cars. It is subtle, but ubiquitous. I don't see how the succeed long term in "othering" Roman Catholics, without losing a substantial number of their desperately needed Hispanic demographic. We shall see.
Blogger chickenlittle said...
Here's great example of a Ruth Grahamism:
“The boys know they’re being recorded—some of them are even seen capturing the moment themselves—but either their homosocial glee is too orgiastic to be dampened by the instinct for self-protection, or they don’t think anyone who matters to them will care. (And yes: Where are the adults?)”
Where, indeed, are the adults?
It’s time to lawyer up.
As a lawyer, I'll donate my time to help sue the pants off of these idiots who purposely started and then lied about the incident with the Covington kids and/or any media outlet or public person who jumped the gun and defamed the Covington kids.
Keep it up, leftists. Keep blaming people for things they didn't do.
How many is those who made comments don’t have children?
If
Kathy Griffin doesn’t, does she?
She would just act dumb like Ruth Graham is doing.
It's not acting. It's willfully malicious.
And when the powder keg inevitably explodes, they'll have no one to blame but themselves.
I once read an article by a law prof who derided the fashionable but incorrect invocation of the Roshomon effect to explain and/or hide or excuse simple lying, deceit and nihilistic subjectivity. It was pretty good.
I once read a law prof's accounts of experiencing a video one way, only to experience the same video radically differently the next day. The difference was caused by the expectations set by the fraudulent framing of the video -- in other words, the experience of viewing the same video in radically different ways demonstrates the Rashomon effect.
The press get things wrong all the time.
Yeah. And it's just amazing how it always seems to go in one direction, isn't it?
One thing to keep in mind is that the MSM probably almost intentionally overreacted here due to the Catholic angle.
If there's not already a continuous drum circle sound RGB to keep the Catholics away, there will be now...
"A teenager wearing a MAGA hat must be destroyed."
Anyone wearing a MAGA hat must be defeated. There, fixed it for you.
No respectable person wears a swastika armband either.
The effect doesn't explain the extreme disinterest in getting more information via further videos by one side.
Remember that day one and two is all we were allowed to see from Charlottesville.
"Where, indeed, are the adults?"
It's the presence of adults that caused the whole abusive incident. Which makes them fully responsible for their actions, and the abuse.
All this discussion over SMiLE-ing and nothing about Brian Wilson?
Wilson touted Smile as a "teenage symphony to God". It was to be a twelve-track concept album assembled from short, interchangeable musical fragments—the same novel production method used for the group's biggest-selling hit yet, "Good Vibrations". Its contents ranged from musical and spoken word to sound effects and role playing, featuring innovative sounds and vocal arrangements, references to early Americana and Romantic poetry, comedy sketches, found object explorations, and influences drawn from classical, folk, doo-wop, pre-rock and roll pop, spirituality, and the nascent psychedelic movement. The lead single would have been "Heroes and Villains", a Western musical comedy, or "Vega-Tables", a satire of physical fitness.
Teenage.
God.
Best selling.
Sound effects.
Role playing.
Early Americana.
Heroes and Villans.
So many parallels. So much to work with...
They desperately want to believe in the evil of Catholicism, because Roman Catholicism is central to their fear for the unfettered right to abortion
Which is funny because the Catholic Church is today is very big on some pretty left wing causes. Anti-death penalty, redistribution of wealth, gun control, social justice, etc.
My daughters go to catholic grade schools and get a heavy dose of left of center views in their curriculum.
The leftwing media and radical leftists in Hillarywoodland trashed him for wearing a MAGA hat.
His innocent smile - just an excuse. They twisted the context for their daily dose of outrage for the hivemind.
Just a guess now, but I expect we'll be learning a lot more about this Phillips clown. Debunking the popularly held myth that a leftist doesn't need a camera to make an ass of themselves. It started with a lie and grew from there. Check this bullshit out:
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/politics/native-american-elder-speaks-on-lincoln-memorial-standoff
Now he "doesn't know what he was doing". No less a bullshitter than this blog's mentally defective trolls. He has a national monument recorded with pictures and text, exposing his lies. Trumpit is envious, no doubt, of the national attention whores.
“It wins." It. There is no person anymore. No "he," just an "it." There is no human, just an empty mask, as Ruth Graham sees it.”
This is a ridiculous and nutty observation. She IMAGINES what is in the kid’s head. Lots of imagining what other people are thinking, lots of projection too going on these last several days, here and elsewhere. Over the top nonsense by both sides.
“Which is funny because the Catholic Church is today is very big on some pretty left wing causes. Anti-death penalty, redistribution of wealth, gun control, social justice, etc.
My daughters go to catholic grade schools and get a heavy dose of left of center views in their curriculum.”
True. My two youngest went to Catholic grade school and high school and there was a noticeable difference in the slant as compared to Lutheran school that my two oldest attended. I preferred the Catholic education for my kids.
“Keep it up, leftists. Keep blaming people for things they didn't do.”
Oooooo, what ya gonna do, bigmouth internet tough guy?
Watch the cockroaches scurry now the kids have legal representation and they are checking MSM's twitter feed. Run RATS, RUN! https://www.mediaite.com/online/journalists-and-celebs-rush-to-delete-tweets-slamming-maga-hat-kids/
Has Smugglypuff been reached for comment? (Maybe that is her/his/its comment above, under the name "Inga.")
My three children went K-12 in Catholic education and I didn't sense any institutional bias, left or right. They were taught to be responsible citizens right from Kindergarten. And I say this as a religious "free-agent" though raised as a Lutheran, so no implicit bias on my part. Best money ever spent. Especially compared to St. Paul public schools, (make that any larger city's public schools).
"Oooooo, what ya gonna do, bigmouth internet tough guy?"
For starters, tell you to shut your disgusting cunt mouth, you decrepit hateful old crone.
Next, we are going to engage in lawfare against the corrupt lefty media and celebrities that attempted to destroy those kids lives.
In the future, perhaps we will consider a dual use for the wall with mexico. Could make a convenient place to line up evil cunts for execution.
Gk1 is on the case. Don't know as I'd want to be a Hollywood writer/producer on record urging destruction of Sandmann's future career prospects, or a Slate writer calling his face punchable, defending those statements on cross examination by a good plaintiff's lawyer. The Tweets are coming down all over MSM, and you better believe that's the only reason CNN published this kid's letter in full, and took down its headline accusing him of taunting and harassing the Vietnam era drummer boy.
Ah, what would thread would be complete without the raving of the neighborhood psychotic who wears his mom’s jeans?👖
Oooooo, you’re sooooo scary.
“Best money ever spent. Especially compared to St. Paul public schools, (make that any larger city's public schools).”
I agree! Catholic school tuition was money well spent for sure.
Oooooo, what ya gonna do, bigmouth internet tough guy?
You just keep thinking nobody's going to come to your door when the dam bursts, keyboard warrior.
You people have no idea of the shit you're stirring. None.
“You just keep thinking nobody's going to come to your door when the dam bursts, keyboard warrior.
You people have no idea of the shit you're stirring. None.”
Psycho, another one.
4) My parents, uncles, & aunts, receive messages stating they are pieces of shit parents and won't be able to protect #MichaelHodge forever... seriously what kind of behavior is this?
Just how long do you think the rest of us are just going to sit back and keep taking this shit from thugs like you, Inga?
How long?
Ruth Graham wrote: The boys know they’re being recorded—some of them are even seen capturing the moment themselves—but either their homosocial glee is too orgiastic to be dampened by the instinct for self-protection, or they don’t think anyone who matters to them will care.
BTW, Graham's editor changed "too orgastic" to read "too orgiastic."
We respond to your thug behavior blaming an innocent kid for something he didn't do, and we're the psychos?
Keep it up. Just keep pushing it.
President-Mom-Jeans said...For starters, tell you to shut your disgusting cunt mouth, you decrepit hateful old crone.
I probably have a generational reaction it, but in any event I'm not in the censorship business. I don't like that language, I wouldn't use that language, I don't establish any language standards for my fellow commenters. But I don't think it's anything worse than what the other side has said.
Comedian Kathy Griffin, among others, tweeted out photos of students at Covington Catholic High School smiling and standing in front of a Native American man banging a drum during the Indigenous Peoples March.
“Name these kids. I want NAMES. Shame them,” Griffin tweeted Saturday. “If you think these fuckers wouldn’t dox you in a heartbeat, think again.”
With all due respect, if you truly believe someone is psycho, unless you have proper training, you are nuts to engage with them.
I’m serious.
Sounds like someone wanted show-off the fact that they've got a creative writing certificate.
Ha! 3:35
"t in any event I'm not in the censorship business. I don't like that language, I wouldn't use that language, I don't establish any language standards for my fellow commenters"
It's bluster and a sign of weakness, or that's what I think when I see that kind of language. Better to ignore somebody who is really just trolling.
"It's bluster and a sign of weakness, or that's what I think when I see that kind of language."
Off to your fainting couch, Tim. The mean person on the internet called the evil bitch who cackles in glee at the leftist media lynching children said some bad words!
Cuckservatives are not going to be the ones who stand up against the continuing destruction of anyone who stands in the way of the left's power. If you are going to just bend over and take it then get the fuck out of the way.
Meade wrote: With all due respect, if you truly believe someone is psycho, unless you have proper training, you are nuts to engage with them.
I’m serious.
I believe that Inga is a retired psych nurse with years of experience, so she probably feels capable. That's also why the "Nurse Ratched" thing was so funny when she played that while Trooper played Randle Patrick McMurphy.
Royal ass Inga: "Over the top nonsense by both sides."
That is the quintessential what-about-ism from the person who used to pretend it was a thing.
Why are people worried about that high tech lynching?
Both sides are worked up.
Fucking grotesque.
Fucking monster.
Post a Comment