"She saw at least nine girls being carried out of their classrooms, kicking and screaming. She recognised some of them as regulars at her stall. 'It was a heartbreaking sight,' she says. She later saw a witch doctor enter a small prayer room with his assistants.... 'Women are softer and physically weaker,' [said Zaki Ya, a spiritual healer with 20 years of experience]. 'That makes them more susceptible to spiritual possession.... Science is important but it can't fully explain the supernatural... Non-believers won't understand these attacks unless it happens to them.'... Academic Afiq Noor argues that the stricter implementation of Islamic law in school... is linked to the surge in outbreaks... The theory is that such a constricted environment could be creating more anxiety.... To clinical psychologists like Steven Diamond, the 'painful, frightening and embarrassing symptoms' often associated with mass hysteria could be 'indicative of a frustrated need for attention. Might their remarkable symptoms be saying something about how they are really feeling inside but are unable or unwilling to allow themselves to consciously acknowledge, feel or verbalise?'"
From "The mystery of screaming schoolgirls in Malaysia" (BBC). Much more at the link, with interesting photographs of life in Kelantan, Malaysia and of a $2,000 "anti-hysteria kit" (containing formic acid, ammonia inhalants, pepper spray, and pain-causing bamboo 'pincers' intended to drive out evil spirits).
August 14, 2019
August 13, 2019
The "Who's on first?" of dog names.
"While extremely high I decided that the greatest dog name ever thought of is Askim, because when people ask me his name and I tell them about 50% of the time they’ll awkwardly bend down and ask my dog it’s [sic] name. It’s hilarious...." That is from the amusing subreddit Am I the Asshole?
Once you know people don't like your joke, is it okay to keep having your fun?
Once you know people don't like your joke, is it okay to keep having your fun?
"I've been watching my boys' online behavior & noticed that social media and vloggers are actively laying groundwork in white teens to turn them into alt-right/white supremacists."
"Here's how: It's a system I believe is purposefully created to disillusion white boys away from progressive/liberal perspectives. First, the boys are inundated by memes featuring subtly racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic jokes. Being kids, they don't see the nuance & repeat/share. Then they're called out for these jokes/phrases/memes by parents, teachers, kids (mostly girls) at school & online. The boys then feel shame & embarrassment - and shame is the force that, I believe, leads people to their worst decisions. The second step is the boys consuming media with the 'people are too sensitive' and 'you can't say anything anymore!' themes. For these boys, this will ring true - they're getting in trouble for 'nothing.' This narrative allows boys to shed the shame - replacing it w/anger. And who is their anger with? Women, feminists, liberals, people of color, gay folks, etc etc. So-called snowflakes. And nobody is there to dismantle the 'snowflake' fallacy. These boys are being set up - they're placed like baseballs on a tee and hit right out of the park.... These are often boys from progressive or moderate families - but their online behavior & viewing habits are often ignored.... [I]f your kid says 'triggered' as a joke referring to people being sensitive, he's already being exposed & on his way.... [W]e need to stay engaged & challenge our kids without shaming them. I'm lucky, my kids are smart and have a smart, critical, progressive dad who isn't afraid to call bullshit when he sees it. But I've seen SO MANY white boys falling prey to this system. So beware."
Tweets Joanna Schroeder, who's lucky, because her kids are smart. She suggests that mothers of white boys observe their interaction with media and intervene, explain what propaganda is, and "watch political comedy shows with him, like Trevor Noah, John Oliver, Hasan Minhaj. Talk about what makes their jokes funny - who are the butt of the jokes? Do they 'punch up' or down?"
I agree. Don't just leave your white boys to the manipulations of right-wing media. I would add don't leave any of your kids — be they white boys or no — to the manipulations of media — right-wing or left. And it's not just about kids. Save yourself. If you're only seeing right-wing propaganda, you'd better put on your own oxygen mask before you expend your waning energy saving the children.
How will you know whether YOU are the propaganda?
ADDED: Titania McGrath satirizes the Joanna Schroeder thread!
Tweets Joanna Schroeder, who's lucky, because her kids are smart. She suggests that mothers of white boys observe their interaction with media and intervene, explain what propaganda is, and "watch political comedy shows with him, like Trevor Noah, John Oliver, Hasan Minhaj. Talk about what makes their jokes funny - who are the butt of the jokes? Do they 'punch up' or down?"
I agree. Don't just leave your white boys to the manipulations of right-wing media. I would add don't leave any of your kids — be they white boys or no — to the manipulations of media — right-wing or left. And it's not just about kids. Save yourself. If you're only seeing right-wing propaganda, you'd better put on your own oxygen mask before you expend your waning energy saving the children.
How will you know whether YOU are the propaganda?
ADDED: Titania McGrath satirizes the Joanna Schroeder thread!
"For decades, Placido Domingo, one of the most celebrated and powerful men in opera, has tried to pressure women into sexual relationships by dangling jobs and then sometimes punishing the women professionally..."
"... when they refused his advances, numerous accusers told The Associated Press.... Eight singers and a dancer have told the AP that they were sexually harassed by the long-married, Spanish-born superstar in encounters that took place over three decades beginning in the late 1980s, at venues that included opera companies where he held top managerial positions.... In addition to the nine accusers, a half-dozen other women told the AP that suggestive overtures by Domingo made them uncomfortable.... The AP also spoke to almost three dozen other singers, dancers, orchestra musicians, members of backstage staff, voice teachers and an administrator who said they witnessed inappropriate sexually tinged behavior by Domingo and that he pursued younger women with impunity. Domingo did not respond to detailed questions from the AP about specific incidents, but issued a statement saying: 'The allegations from these unnamed individuals dating back as many as thirty years are deeply troubling, and as presented, inaccurate.'"
AP reports.
AP reports.
If someone insults you, you could just walk away, or you could stand your ground like somebody in a gangster movie, like Chris Cuomo.
According to the NY Post, this clip, in which Cuomo strongly objects to the epithet "Fredo," is said to have been "filmed Sunday on Shelter Island and sent to a right-wing website and blog, before being shared on Twitter."
I've got to say — and I have only watched the clip and not read any of the commentary about it — I have no problem with what Cuomo did here. He returned words for words, he defended himself, and he acquired complete submission from the man who provoked him. Maybe some people think the guy who said "Fredo" won because he got his video and Cuomo lost his temper. But I don't think Cuomo is out of control. I think he knew what he was doing and chose to do it. It's quite similar to what Trump does, and I don't think Trump is raging and having melt downs when people who hate him are saying he is. Same thing with Cuomo.
The little man who made the video asserts that he believed Cuomo's name actually was Fredo. Cuomo won't let him back down: "You did not think that… stand up like a man. Own what you said." Manhood is at stake. A hypothetical fight is discussed: "I’ll f–ing throw you down these stairs like a f–ing punk… you’re gonna call me Fredo, take a f–ing swing? I’ll f–ing wreck your shit."
Cuomo doesn't hit the guy. It's macho posturing. Notice the theory, propounded by Cuomo, that the guy is trying to get Cuomo to hit him so he can bring a lawsuit against the deep-pocketed son of a gov.
A man in NY yesterday approached CNN's Chris Cuomo and called him "Fredo"— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) August 13, 2019
Cuomo: "You're going to have a problem"
Man: "What are you going to do about it?"
Cuomo: "I'll fuckin ruin your shit. I'll fucking throw you down these stairs"
Credit: "THAT'S THE POINT with Brandon" pic.twitter.com/4iWwzaSQpF
I've got to say — and I have only watched the clip and not read any of the commentary about it — I have no problem with what Cuomo did here. He returned words for words, he defended himself, and he acquired complete submission from the man who provoked him. Maybe some people think the guy who said "Fredo" won because he got his video and Cuomo lost his temper. But I don't think Cuomo is out of control. I think he knew what he was doing and chose to do it. It's quite similar to what Trump does, and I don't think Trump is raging and having melt downs when people who hate him are saying he is. Same thing with Cuomo.
“Don’t f–ing insult me like that,” the Queens native fumes. “You call me ‘Fredo’ it’s like I call you punk b–ch, you like that?”Oh, Queens! See? Like Trump. It's how they talk in Queens. Don't be prejudiced against the Queensman.
The little man who made the video asserts that he believed Cuomo's name actually was Fredo. Cuomo won't let him back down: "You did not think that… stand up like a man. Own what you said." Manhood is at stake. A hypothetical fight is discussed: "I’ll f–ing throw you down these stairs like a f–ing punk… you’re gonna call me Fredo, take a f–ing swing? I’ll f–ing wreck your shit."
Cuomo doesn't hit the guy. It's macho posturing. Notice the theory, propounded by Cuomo, that the guy is trying to get Cuomo to hit him so he can bring a lawsuit against the deep-pocketed son of a gov.
WaPo's Fact Checker gives 4 Pinocchios to Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren for tweeting that Michael Brown was murdered.
"One can certainly raise questions about whether Wilson should have fired as many shots as he did or acted appropriately under the circumstances.... But Harris and Warren have ignored the findings of the Justice Department to accuse Wilson of murder, even though the Justice Department found no credible evidence to support that claim. Instead, the Justice Department found that the popular narrative was wrong, according to witnesses deemed to be credible, some of whom testified reluctantly because of fear of reprisal. The department produced a comprehensive report to determine what happened, making the senators’ dismissal of it even more galling. Harris and Warren both earn Four Pinocchios."
Glenn Kessler at The Washington Post.
We talked about this subject last night, here, where I accused Warren and Harris of "crudely, clumsily groping for black voters" and said it was "cynical, damaging, and patronizing."
Glenn Kessler at The Washington Post.
We talked about this subject last night, here, where I accused Warren and Harris of "crudely, clumsily groping for black voters" and said it was "cynical, damaging, and patronizing."
August 12, 2019
At the Big-and-Little Café...
... compare and contrast.
(And by all means, remember the Althouse Portal to Amazon, for the purchase of items small and large.)
"Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris’s controversial Michael Brown tweets, explained."
"The tweets claimed a police officer 'murdered' Michael Brown. But that’s not what investigators, including those from the Obama administration, concluded" (Vox).
I looked on Twitter to see if Harris had addressed her credibility problem. She tweets a lot but has nothing new since the WaPo fact-check went up at 3 a.m. She should respond. Quickly. In the meantime, in the category of racial politics, she's got this:
I would have written "stepped onto that elevator," but I'm not going to criticize "Dude's gotta go," because Trump himself uses casual, slangy lingo. They say it's not "presidential," though.
Warren and Harris reiterated the protesters’ narrative in two separate tweets on the five-year anniversary of the shooting, using the moment to call for action against systemic racism and police violence....Fine line?! That's written as if Warren and Harris were speaking out right after the death, before the investigation. But they wrote this week — both calling it "murder" — 4 years after the investigation concluded that the killing was justified. They're not walking a fine line. They're crudely, clumsily groping for black voters. It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing.
The tweets expose the fine line that Warren, Harris, and others calling attention to police brutality have to walk. Individual police shootings and killings can and do help draw attention to genuine, broader issues surrounding police violence and systemic racism. But because the original narrative around the shootings can simply turn out to be wrong as we get more evidence, there’s a risk that attaching calls for reform too much to individual shootings and killings can backfire....
I looked on Twitter to see if Harris had addressed her credibility problem. She tweets a lot but has nothing new since the WaPo fact-check went up at 3 a.m. She should respond. Quickly. In the meantime, in the category of racial politics, she's got this:
Trump’s vilified minorities and immigrants since the day he stepped down that escalator and announced his candidacy.— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) August 12, 2019
Dude’s gotta go.https://t.co/3iiA9Owl8g
I would have written "stepped onto that elevator," but I'm not going to criticize "Dude's gotta go," because Trump himself uses casual, slangy lingo. They say it's not "presidential," though.
"He said that criminalizing sex with teenage girls was a cultural aberration and that at times in history it was perfectly acceptable."
"He pointed out that homosexuality had long been considered a crime and was still punishable by death in some parts of the world.... He said people in Silicon Valley had a reputation for being geeky workaholics, but... [t]hey were hedonistic and regular users of recreational drugs. He said he’d witnessed prominent tech figures taking drugs and arranging for sex.... When I later reflected on our interview, I was struck by how little information Mr. Epstein had actually provided. While I can’t say anything he said was an explicit lie, much of what he said was vague or speculative and couldn’t be proved or disproved.... [E]arly this year Mr. Epstein called to ask if I’d be interested in writing his biography. He sounded almost plaintive. I sensed that what he really wanted was companionship. As his biographer, I’d have no choice but to spend hours listening to his saga. Already leery of any further ties to him, I was relieved I could say that I was already busy with another book. That was the last I heard from him. After his arrest and suicide, I’m left to wonder: What might he have told me?"
From "The Day Jeffrey Epstein Told Me He Had Dirt on Powerful People" by James B. Stewart (NYT).
From "The Day Jeffrey Epstein Told Me He Had Dirt on Powerful People" by James B. Stewart (NYT).
"... how beautifully endearing she is so stunned that someone is being kind to her..."
It is stunning how much folks miss that this is amazing because of how unkindly Serena has been treated and how beautifully endearing she is so stunned that someone is being kind to her and how amazingly easy it is for Bianca to do that https://t.co/c2nlynzJBn
— 🇬🇾🗽Sydette THE RETURN OF THE DAYWALKER 🗽🇬🇾 (@Blackamazon) August 12, 2019
"Never mind the long tradition of lounging on the fabled spot — a scene perhaps best evoked by Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck in the 1953 film 'Roman Holiday' — sitting on the Spanish Steps is now subject to a fine of 400 euros..."
"... or about $450, under new municipal rules that ban a variety of activities in the city’s historic center. The regulations are intended to 'guarantee decorum, security and legality' by prohibiting actions that are 'not compatible with the historic and artistic decorum' of Rome’s center, according to the city’s website.... Dozens of startled people, most of them presumably tourists, were reprimanded on a broiling Wednesday afternoon by a small force of municipal police officers — this reporter counted at least eight — who admonished step-sitters by blowing twice on their whistles and gesturing stiffly to stand up.... A tired-looking father with a stroller in his hands and a toddler on his shoulders, was coming down the steps when he was stopped by a cry of 'Hey Mister.' The stroller, an officer said, cannot touch the steps. The father grudgingly complied.... 'You see one stroller — we see millions of them. This is a historic monument that has to be preserved,' [the police officer] said, declining to give his name because he was not authorized to speak to reporters. He asked to be identified as 'a municipal police officer who loves Rome.'... The Rome newspaper Il Messaggero said Wednesday that photographs of empty stairs 'were not an image of strength, but of desolation.' The newspaper accused the mayor of trying to apply 'Swiss rigor' to what was a quintessentially Roman spot for relaxation."
From "Rome’s New Rules: No Sitting on the Spanish Steps (and No Wading in the Trevi Fountain)" (NYT).
Famous tourist attractions are too crowded these days. You travel to see something, and it's full of people, and way too many of them are taking pictures of themselves. It affects who travels, and I suspect the city would prefer the travelers who spend a lot money, the people who stay at that hotel at the top of the steps and not the people who'd like to lounge on the steps eating street food.
ADDED: Audrey Hepburn totally littered that ice cream cone!
I've never seen "Roman Holiday," but, boy, does it look bad. Is Gregory Peck a bad actor? I see that the role was originally offered to Cary Grant:
From "Rome’s New Rules: No Sitting on the Spanish Steps (and No Wading in the Trevi Fountain)" (NYT).
Famous tourist attractions are too crowded these days. You travel to see something, and it's full of people, and way too many of them are taking pictures of themselves. It affects who travels, and I suspect the city would prefer the travelers who spend a lot money, the people who stay at that hotel at the top of the steps and not the people who'd like to lounge on the steps eating street food.
ADDED: Audrey Hepburn totally littered that ice cream cone!
I've never seen "Roman Holiday," but, boy, does it look bad. Is Gregory Peck a bad actor? I see that the role was originally offered to Cary Grant:
Grant declined, believing he was too old to play Hepburn's love interest (though he played opposite her ten years later in Charade.) Other sources say Grant declined because he knew all of the attention would be centered around the princess. Peck's contract gave him solo star billing, with newcomer Hepburn listed much less prominently in the credits. Halfway through the filming, Peck suggested to [the director William] Wyler that he elevate her to equal billing—an almost unheard-of gesture in Hollywood.I'm just noticing that Hepburn's character, a princess, is named Ann. Ann, with no "e." Strange! I wonder if I'd noticed that years ago, I might have eventually gotten around to watching this movie. I have seen the other Hepburn-as-Italian-tourist movie, Katharine Hepburn as an aging spinster in "Summertime." Generally, I'm not big on the cliché movie idea of woman traveling and finding herself by getting into a sexual relationship. Oh, I don't know. It could work on me. I love "A Room With a View." The Italian city in this one is Florence:
I'm embedding this tweet mainly because I'm fascinated by this picture of Elizabeth Warren.
The substance of the piece is banal beyond belief, but I pity the political writers who have to keep talking about the 2020 presidential race:
Anyway, the picture. Let's take a closer look:
"OLD DRINKS" — created from "cold drinks" with the placement of an "IF YOU LOSE YOUR MONEY" sign. That's rich, and I'm going to credit the AP photographer, John Locher, with deliberately framing his photograph to catch text that is relevant, meaningful, and humorous: Yeah, she's so happy to be striding in waving a big "Hi, I'm here with the old socialist idea of taking your money."
Now, she also looks fantastic. Any more energy and she'd look insane. The clothes are completely casual but perfectly crisp and cheerful. Elizabeth Warren is 70 years old, but look how trim and sprightly she is! If she were any thinner, I'd be worried about anorexia.
And look how happy she is, even in that incredibly depressing Nevada environment, walled in with teal-trimmed white cinderblock. She seems to be bursting through the door... even though the door opens in the other way, so somebody is holding it open for her. It took me a long time to notice that her pose isn't part of a bursting through the door motion.
IN THE COMMENTS: GingerBeer senses the mystic chords of memory:
ADDED: Classic bursting-through-the-door action:
"Unless Elizabeth Warren builds appeal outside her core constituencies, it will be challenging for her to pull ahead of frontrunning Joe Biden, who has built his own beachhead of support among moderates, working-class whites, and African-American voters."https://t.co/YIn9z79y02— Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) August 12, 2019
Anyway, the picture. Let's take a closer look:
"OLD DRINKS" — created from "cold drinks" with the placement of an "IF YOU LOSE YOUR MONEY" sign. That's rich, and I'm going to credit the AP photographer, John Locher, with deliberately framing his photograph to catch text that is relevant, meaningful, and humorous: Yeah, she's so happy to be striding in waving a big "Hi, I'm here with the old socialist idea of taking your money."
Now, she also looks fantastic. Any more energy and she'd look insane. The clothes are completely casual but perfectly crisp and cheerful. Elizabeth Warren is 70 years old, but look how trim and sprightly she is! If she were any thinner, I'd be worried about anorexia.
And look how happy she is, even in that incredibly depressing Nevada environment, walled in with teal-trimmed white cinderblock. She seems to be bursting through the door... even though the door opens in the other way, so somebody is holding it open for her. It took me a long time to notice that her pose isn't part of a bursting through the door motion.
IN THE COMMENTS: GingerBeer senses the mystic chords of memory:
ADDED: Classic bursting-through-the-door action:
"The theory that we are living in a computer simulation may sound bizarre, but it has found adherents."
"The technology entrepreneur Elon Musk has said that the odds that we are not simulated are 'one in billions.' Professor Smoot estimates that the ratio of simulated to real people might be as high as 10¹² to 1.... [I]f our universe has been created by an advanced civilization for research purposes, then it is reasonable to assume that it is crucial to the researchers that we don’t find out that we’re in a simulation. If we were to prove that we live inside a simulation, this could cause our creators to terminate the simulation — to destroy our world. Of course, the proposed experiments may not detect anything that suggests we live in a computer simulation. In that case, the results will prove nothing. This is my point: The results of the proposed experiments will be interesting only when they are dangerous."
From "Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out/Experimental findings will be either boring or extremely dangerous" by philosophy professor Preston Greene (NYT).
Greene overstates his argument. I see the danger. In fact, I see more danger than he does. Whether the higher civilization would destroy us if we caught on to their game or not, knowing that we are only somebody else's simulation would change the meaning of life for us. It would disrupt how we care about ourselves and other people. I think we could still find value in our existence, but it would be different and difficult. What if I'm nothing? Well, I'm still all the me I ever was, so I'll carry on, perhaps more carefree. But what about the next generation and the next?
But where Greene goes wrong, I think, is in undervaluing the knowledge that we don't live in a computer simulation. Once the idea of a simulation is out there and growing, with very smart people saying it's almost certain that we do live in a simulation, it's having an effect on us. It's dispiriting! If the idea catches on and people come to believe it, really believe it, the way masses of humanity believe in God, then what happens to human life? Finding out that the theory is wrong would have a big effect!
Now, I can see that Greene is careful when he says "the proposed experiments may not detect anything that suggests we live in a computer simulation." To fail to detect the simulation is not to prove there is no simulation. But it's some assurance, and that could be quite meaningful to those who've fallen into the Muskosphere and have come to really believe that all of our world is some aliens' computer game. It can stop Muskism from spreading and fostering strange new behavior and nihilism.
And if we're worried, as Greene is, about the effect of the experiment on the "higher civilization," it's not just that if they knew we knew about them, they might destroy us. They're also seeing that we're beginning to figure out what's going on, and if we do an experiment that makes us think the theory is false, the aliens are more likely to keep the experiment going.
From "Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out/Experimental findings will be either boring or extremely dangerous" by philosophy professor Preston Greene (NYT).
Greene overstates his argument. I see the danger. In fact, I see more danger than he does. Whether the higher civilization would destroy us if we caught on to their game or not, knowing that we are only somebody else's simulation would change the meaning of life for us. It would disrupt how we care about ourselves and other people. I think we could still find value in our existence, but it would be different and difficult. What if I'm nothing? Well, I'm still all the me I ever was, so I'll carry on, perhaps more carefree. But what about the next generation and the next?
But where Greene goes wrong, I think, is in undervaluing the knowledge that we don't live in a computer simulation. Once the idea of a simulation is out there and growing, with very smart people saying it's almost certain that we do live in a simulation, it's having an effect on us. It's dispiriting! If the idea catches on and people come to believe it, really believe it, the way masses of humanity believe in God, then what happens to human life? Finding out that the theory is wrong would have a big effect!
Now, I can see that Greene is careful when he says "the proposed experiments may not detect anything that suggests we live in a computer simulation." To fail to detect the simulation is not to prove there is no simulation. But it's some assurance, and that could be quite meaningful to those who've fallen into the Muskosphere and have come to really believe that all of our world is some aliens' computer game. It can stop Muskism from spreading and fostering strange new behavior and nihilism.
And if we're worried, as Greene is, about the effect of the experiment on the "higher civilization," it's not just that if they knew we knew about them, they might destroy us. They're also seeing that we're beginning to figure out what's going on, and if we do an experiment that makes us think the theory is false, the aliens are more likely to keep the experiment going.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
