I'm reading the front page of The Washington Post with the wild hope of keeping up to date.

 

I mean, what do they think they're doing? What did they say to each other as they chose to put this material on the front page — right under stories about Zelensky at the White House, the National Guard in Washington D.C., terrorism in Texas, and Hurricane Erin? Let's revisit the legacy of slavery and balance it with closeups of black asses? It's as if they had to meet a racial quota and brainstormed and juxtaposed the first 2 things they thought of. 

"It's tricknological, when white people invoke the holocaust. allows them to step out of their whiteness and slip on fake oppression."

Wrote Doreen St. Félix, in an X post screencapped in an Instapundit post by Ed Driscoll.

St. Félix published an article — in The New Yorker — about the Sydney Sweeney jeans/genes foofaraw. I'd skipped that article — I was Sweeneyed out by the time it appeared — but I see from the excerpt at Instapundit that it contained lines like "Interestingly, breasts, and the desire for them, are stereotyped as objects of white desire, as opposed to, say, the Black man’s hunger for ass." The desire is the object of desire? That's defective writing, and The New Yorker got its lofty reputation in part because of its punctilious word editing. But St. Félix is in The New Yorker, thus making her statements conspicuous and goofier than they would be somewhere else, like X (or a blog). 

Hey! It says "Black man’s hunger for ass" in The New Yorker.

The screencappers of X plunged into St. Félix's X account, homing in on posts with the words "hate" and "white people." Go to the Instapundit link to see what they found. 

What calls me is that new word: "tricknological." The adjective is, apparently, formed from the word "Tricknology," which is in the OED and traced back to 1938. It's marked "U.S. disparaging." It means:

"Why can’t nail biting go the way of body hair?"

Which way did body hair go?

I'm reading Jennifer Hussein's "We’ve Embraced Acne and Body Hair. Why Not Bitten Nails? Nail biters want to know" (NYT).

While acne has been destigmatized to some degree by bold stickers, and body hair appears in ads plastered across buses and trains, chewed up fingers have failed to capture that same cache of authenticity.

"Cache"?! They mean "cachet." A "cache" is a group of hidden things, like a "cache of weapons." Unless you have a box of chewed-up fingers stowed away somewhere, you mean "cachet" — which is prestige or high status.

But anyway, my question is answered. Body hair has gone public, plastered across buses and trains. So this is an article arguing for acceptance of bitten fingernails:

To escape a beauty culture that relies on pretending everything’s always under control, we have to become comfortable showing the tiniest parts of ourselves that are not. "Sit with those nails," [said Dawnn Karen, a former psychology professor at the Fashion Institute of Technology]. "Walk around for a week or two. Don’t get them done. Go through all of the feelings — embarrassment, shame, cringe. Let them pass."

Can we do the feeling where "done" nails seem embarrassing and shameful and — I hate to say it — cringe?

Speaking of words, I see that word up there — "authenticity" (in "that same cache of authenticity"). Just 2 days ago, I had a post "What authenticity means these days," with 4 examples from the current news. That makes me want to do a Friday "authenticity" check. I've already got one — the insane "cache of authenticity" — so 3 more are desirable:

1. "How ‘Fawning’ Is Ruining Your Relationships/Excessive people pleasing can trap you in a cycle of insecurity. Here’s how to break the habit" (NYT): "'When we’re fawning... the fearful part of ourselves chooses dishonest harmony over deep, authentic connection.'... The next time you have the urge to fawn... give yourself an authenticity check: Do I really mean what I’m about to say? Am I saying something I don’t mean to try to appease the other person?" 

2. "When a Close Relationship Becomes ‘Enmeshment’/If you’ve lost yourself in a relationship, it may be time to untangle your identities and establish clearer boundaries" (NYT): "An enmeshed relationship has a lack of clear boundaries, leading to blurred individual identities.... [P]eople in these relationships become disconnected from their authentic selves. 'You get to a point where you don’t even know who you are'.... Is this your emotion, or are you co-opting someone else’s?..."

3. "The Authenticity Paradox/How 'Being Real' Became Performance" (Philosopheasy): "The paradox inherent in Rousseau's ideal of authenticity lies in its dual nature: while it encourages individuals to be true to themselves, it simultaneously demands recognition from others, thus complicating the pursuit of genuine self-expression.... Cultural critics argue that the rise of a 'culture of authenticity' can lead to societal tensions.... The expectation to present a genuine self in every context can feel burdensome... in an increasingly artificial world...."

I'm seeing a lot about the Jeff Bezos wedding, but how do we know he's really getting married?

There are motivations to put on this big show that are separate from any reasons to enter a marriage in the legal sense.

Consider this: "The embarrassing truth Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez haven't revealed about their $20m 'wedding'" (Daily Mail)(reporting that a Venetian official supposedly said no registrar had been appointed for the ceremony).

And here's the NYT: "What to Know About the Wedding of Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez/The second marriage for both is taking place in Venice, Italy, under a shroud of secrecy and amid a swarm of speculation": "Italy has a variety of rules surrounding marriage rites, which can involve religious ceremonies, often performed in Roman Catholic churches. The Sánchez-Bezos wedding, however, will be nondenominational, likely of a ceremonial nature."

What I want to know about that couple is why, with all their money, they have, both of them, engineered their face into that post-human fright mask?

Why would the wedding be any less fake than the faces?

And here's Tina Brown: 

The Jeff Bezos-Lauren Sánchez (circa $56 million) Venice-sinking nuptials, tying up every tender on the Grand Canal (and 90 private jets expected), is the big beautiful buster bomb of high-net-worth exhibitionism. Now that the 55- year-old bride Sánchez has proved that landing the fourth richest man in the world requires the permanent display of breasts like genetically modified grapefruit and behemoth buttocks bursting from a leopard-print thong bikini, she’s exuberantly and unapologetically shown that the route to power and glory for women hasn't changed since the first Venetian Republic.

*** 

Sailin’ round the world in a dirty gondola/Oh, to be back in the land of Coca-Cola!

"I’m surprised by it, it turns into some kind of global catastrophe where people are even coming up with theories to explain it.... It’s nonsense...."

"[T]here are people who have watched the videos and believe that I shared a bag of cocaine, that I had a 'mano a mano' with a Turkish president and that right now I’m having a fight with my wife. None of this is true.... So everyone needs to calm down and focus on the real news...."

Said Emmanuel Macron, quoted in "'It’s Nonsense': Macron Plays Down Video of Shove From Wife/The French president, Emmanuel Macron, was pushed in the face as he left a plane in Vietnam. The bigger issue, he said, was the reaction, part of a string of disinformation by 'crazy people'" (NYT).

How can so many things NOT be true? Such wacky things — all involving hands — and all caught on camera?

1. Here's the hand thing with Erdogan. Come on. That's not nothing!

2. Here's the hide-the-cocaine sleight of hand.

3. And here's the hand of his wife pushing him in the face.

How do all these things happen to one man?

"I was bickering, or rather joking, with my wife. It's nothing."

Said Emmanuel Macron, quoted in "The giveaway sign that Macron was 'furious' with wife Brigitte for viral push in face... as he tries to brush it off as 'joking around'" (Daily Mail).

I'm sure you've seen the video:

French President Emmanuel Macron responds after he apparently got assaulted in the face by his wife Brigitte while stepping off of a plane in Vietnam.

Macron was seen getting shoved in the face before getting off the plane as if nothing happened.

Macron has since responded to… pic.twitter.com/YeEAwdLcxF

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) May 26, 2025

My favorite part is his "Oh, hi" gesture, when he sees that the face push got caught on camera. And that you only see Brigitte's hand, not the rest of her — in the manner of Soupy Sales and White Fang:

ADDED: Here's a different angle:

Things not found on eBay.

I see Pete Townshend recently said, "Four and a half weeks ago, I had my left knee replaced.... Maybe I should auction off the old one."

Quoted in "The Who singer Roger Daltrey going deaf and blind at 81: ‘The joys of getting old’" (NY Post)(I think Daltrey was just setting up a "Tommy" joke: He still has his voice or he'd "have a full Tommy.")

Do they let you take your old knee home with you after a replacement? I'm picturing Pete Townshend's knee in a glass case at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame labeled with some riff on "hope I die before I get old." It would be like those relics of saints you might see in an old cathedral. I'm not Catholic, but I've wondered about the inconsistency with the visualization of Judgment Day of bodies rising up out of graves — as depicted in the "Last Judgment" mural in the Sistine Chapel.

Isn't this why some people don't want to donate their organs — they think they might need them in the afterlife? Wouldn't it be a kick in the head if failing to check the organ-donor box on your driver's license turned out to be the shortcoming that barred you from heaven?

"You mentioned fertility and regret, and I'd like to take both of those concerns head-on."

Said the Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar, arguing against state law that restricts access to puberty blockers and hormones as a treatment for gender dysphoria. Full transcript here. Audio here.

I do want to acknowledge that there is evidence to suggest that gender-affirming care with respect to hormones can have some impacts on fertility. Critically, puberty blockers are -- are -- have no effect in and of themselves on fertility, so I don't think that concern can justify the ban on puberty blockers, which is just pressing pause on someone's endogenous puberty to give them more time to understand their identity. With respect to hormone use, there are some effects on fertility, but the court found that many individuals who are transgender remain fertile after taking these medications. They can conceive biological children. 

"Powered by just a few ounces of an explosive compound concealed within the devices, the blasts sent grown men flying off motorcycles and slamming into walls..."

"... according to witnesses and video footage. People out shopping fell to the ground, writhing in agony, smoke snaking from their pockets. Mohammed Awada, 52, and his son were driving by one man whose pager exploded, he said. 'My son went crazy and started to scream when he saw the man’s hand flying away from him,' he said."

From "How Israel Built a Modern-Day Trojan Horse: Exploding Pagers/The Israeli government did not tamper with the Hezbollah devices that exploded, defense and intelligence officials say. It manufactured them as part of an elaborate ruse" (NYT).

A new chapter in The History of Ears.

I'm reading "From Van Gogh to Mike Tyson: a brief history of ears," a 2009 Guardian article, by Lucy Mangan.

Found after trying to think of a list of famous ears, a list to which Trump's ear will now take one of the top 2 spots. I think Van Gogh's ear still belongs in first place.

I'd thought of the ear Mike Tyson bit off but had forgotten whose ear it was. (It was Evander Holyfield's.)

I'd thought of a movie ear —

Appropriating this video to make assertions about what "what leftism does to you" is deeply sick.

This is what leftism does to you. It destroys the mind, body, and soul. pic.twitter.com/rBHZzp1EeR

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) May 29, 2024

1. The woman in the video does not say anything about her politics or purport to explain herself in terms of politics.

2. It's a tragic case, and you shouldn't be cheaply triumphing or laughing.

3. If you think the old version of this woman shows a natural beauty she once possessed, then you don't know much about beauty filters and makeup.

4. She was trying to be pretty in the old days, and then she decided to try to be something more like what she felt inside and not like what she had to torment herself thinking society wanted from her. The new look, however, expresses that torment. So she remains, now permanently, in thrall to society’s expectations.

"The court heard how the defendant's 'Eunuchmaker' pay-per-view website advertised services including castration, penis removal and the freezing of limbs."

I'm reading "'Eunuch-maker' mutilator jailed for 22 years" (BBC).

I first read about this case in The Daily Record, and it was so ludicrously, shockingly lurid that I didn't think I could write about it. But then I saw the BBC was covering it, so it became bloggable.

But for the sake of decency, I will put the rest after the jump:

"Modesty garments — multiple layers of underwear, flesh-colored shorts and fabric with genital-shaped silicone barriers..."

"... make contact without direct contact possible, and, along with having bathrobes on standby, help provide a modicum of security, further differentiating between character and actor.... Managing sweat and jiggly phallic simulacrums are all part of the grab bag of a body-centric show. A lake scene means water shooting into mouths and splashing into eyes; and fake blood often splatters onto faces and hair — and even onto the front row (choose your seats wisely!). That balance of levity and reverence lives at the heart of intimacy direction, a serious job with, at times, an absurdist bent. 'We’re still adults telling a story about vagina dentata... If it’s not making us laugh, we’ve somehow missed the boat.'"

From a NYT article called "Death by Genitalia? How an Intimacy Director Made Those ‘Teeth’ Work. Creating the sex scenes for the horror musical required close attention to detail, extra communication and some strategically placed silicone."

jiggly phallic simulacrums... "Simulacrums" is fine, but I prefer the plural form "simulacra." Simulacra feels more like genitalia, and I usually say "genitalia," even where "genitals" will do. I have tags for "genitalia" and "simulacra," and I didn't just create them for this post.

The "simulacra" tag began with "Am I the only one who is noticing that the TV talking-heads news shows are shifting their approach to..."

"Women and people of color are not considered the readers of presidential history. And I think that’s related to this emphasis on masculinity."

Said Alexis Coe, author of the George Washington biography, “You Never Forget Your First,” quoted in "Why are historians obsessed with George Washington’s thighs?" (WaPo).

Ron Chernow (“Washington: A Life”) fixated on his “virile form,” particularly his “wide, flaring hips with muscular thighs.” Richard Brookhiser (“Founding Father: Rediscovering George Washington”) remarked on his “well developed” thighs and quoted a bodybuilder who examined a Washington portrait and said, “Nice quads.” Joseph J. Ellis (“His Excellency: George Washington”) wrote that his “very strong thighs and legs ... allowed him to grip a horse’s flanks tightly and hold his seat in the saddle with uncommon ease.”... 

Why does Coe think women aren't interested in male body parts?! It seems to me that the focus on the physical body is especially interesting to women. I think biographies should tell us a lot about how people looked and what sort of physical powers and problems they had. I'd think male authors may tend to want to tell us about the physical attributes of the female characters, so it's good for them to make an effort to depict the masculinity of the men. 

By the way, since when are "wide, flaring hips" considered highly masculine?

"Human remains collections were made possible by extreme imbalances of power."

"Moreover, many researchers in the 19th and 20th centuries then used such collections to advance deeply flawed scientific agendas rooted in white supremacy — namely the identification of physical differences that could reinforce models of racial hierarchy."

 
Said Sean M. Decatur, president of The American Museum of Natural History, quoted in "Facing Scrutiny, a Museum That Holds 12,000 Human Remains Changes Course/The American Museum of Natural History said it would address its collecting of remains, which stretched into the 1940s and included practices now viewed as abusive and racist " (NYT).

"Tonight the touch points are going to include your hand holding another hand, your back against somebody’s back, your hand on someone’s heart space..."

"... and their hands on your heart space, and you’re going to take turns leaning in and out of two long-held hugs."

Said Allie Hoffman, the founder of something called The Feels, quoted in "Extreme Eye Contact and Other Ways of Dating/Forget dinner and a movie: Let’s see if we can gaze into each other’s eyes for three minutes instead" (NYT).

When it was time to touch each other’s “heart space,” some laid their hands directly on the left side of their partner’s chest while others made contact with just the tips of their fingers. Somatic practices like meditation and eye gazing have long been incorporated in relationships.... The innovation here is attaching this mindfulness style to first-time romantic meet-ups....

I can't imagine volunteering (let alone paying) for this kind of thing. Here are the first 2 associations that sprang into my head.

1. In the James Whale movie "The Old Dark House" — which I watched on October 1st, the first day it became available on the Criterion Channel, part of a collection called "Pre-Code Horror" — the owner of the house suddenly lays her hand on her hand on the bare upper chest of the young Gloria Stuart:

"You see adverts on television with models who are very thin, but the mermaid is like a tribute to the great majority of women..."

"... who are curvy, especially in our country. It would have been very bad if we had represented a woman who was extremely skinny."

Said the headteacher, defending his students, who were asked to make a sea-themed statue for their town. The teacher is quoted in "'Too provocative' mermaid statue causes stir in southern Italy/Art school headteacher hails ‘tribute to the great majority of women who are curvy’ amid social media uproar" (The Guardian).

Go to the link to see the statue, which has huge globular breasts and a giant ass. I'd never even thought of a mermaid's ass before, and now I'm trying to think of how the human ass converges with the fish tail in the mermaid anatomy. 

Is the teacher trying to say that because one alternative — "extremely skinny" — is bad, anything else must be good? That's a logical fallacy.

Anyway, what is a mermaid but a sexual fantasy? They asked students for a mermaid, and they got exactly what they asked for. 

"This show unites blue-chip buttocks by the likes of Francis Bacon, Andy Warhol, John Currin and Cecily Brown; dorsal drawings and pastels by Degas, Klimt and Schiele..."

"The bottoms on display are male and female, nude and clothed, seen from a forensic distance or in fetishistic close-up, but rarely lascivious. All together the show is well-bred and understated...."

Writes Jason Farago in "'Rear View,' a Show About Butts, Is Forward Thinking/At LGDR’s new gallery, blue-chip buttocks by 60 artists, from Degas and Klimt to Cecily Brown and Andy Warhol." 

Paul Cadmus, whose retrograde male nudes are enjoying an unmerited revival in attention, appears here with yet more anemic drawings of standing and reclining musclemen, none more consequential than the gents on a Calvin Klein underwear box. (For what it’s worth, the gay male artists in this show all come out looking second-rate, with none of the perverse intelligence of Degas, Schiele and the other straight bros. Did Michelangelo die for this?)....

"A fantasy persists, in the popular imagination, of sperm as Olympic swimmers, racing toward an egg that passively awaits fertilization."

"Clancy and Hazard are both keen to complicate this simplistic picture of conception. Sperm are drawn in by uterine waves, Clancy asserts, 'a special type of muscle contraction that helps control the speed at which sperm reach the egg, propelling them on a journey that would otherwise be too long for them to make on their own.' Hazard also emphasizes the organ’s strength. 'The womb is a muscle,' she writes. 'We can compare it quite accurately to a clenched fist, not only in size, but in power.'"

 
From "What We Still Don’t Know About Periods/The stigma surrounding menstruation may have had severe consequences for research into reproductive health" (The New Yorker).

What simplistic pictures are you keen to complicate in the name of womanly self-esteem?

Sometimes the menu suggests a process of elimination.

Seen yesterday in Hell's Kitchen.

You know, in English, we use the word "noodle" for the body part that is the brain. But other body parts are more noodly!