"Men are exposing their legs in public as a reaction to our public behaviour being so tightly policed in public for the last year. They want to feel the wind’s tactile caress on their skin."

Said Prof Andrew Groves, the director of the Westminster Menswear Archive at the University of Westminster, quoted in "Micro shorts for men: how short is too short?/With lockdown easing, will you be following Paul Mescal and Harry Styles and baring more leg than usual this summer?" (The Guardian). 

This isn't just another men-in-shorts article. This is the news that men are going back to the kind of short shorts runners wore in the 1970s. 

And it's a Gen Z thing. So says Shane C Kurup, a Men’s Health’s editor: “They are the most socially aware, health-conscious generation we’ve ever seen. There’s a strong emphasis among this generation of being comfortable in your own skin and not blindly conforming to a prescribed body type.” 

Great! I'm looking forward to a clown show of atrocious fashion. And I intend to enjoy the fun of the Z kids annoying the millennials. 

FROM THE EMAIL: Amadeus 48 writes:

Your short note on shorts impelled me to dig up the following quote from George Orwell’s “Road to Wigan Pier.” Orwell got so many things right he seems like a prophet:

“One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist, and feminist in England. One day this summer I was riding through Letchworth [a new model town favoured by progressive intellectuals] when the bus stopped and two dreadful-looking old men got onto it. They were both about sixty, both very short, pink and chubby, and both hatless. One of them was obscenely bald, the other had long gray hair bobbed in the Lloyd George style. They were dressed in pistachio-coloured shirts and khaki shorts into which their huge bottoms were crammed so tightly that you could study every dimple. Their appearance created a mild stir of horror on top of the bus. The man next to me, a commercial traveller I should say, glanced at me, at them, and back again at me, and murmured, ‘Socialists’, as one should say, ‘Red Indians’.”

So, the kiddies of Gen Z may find that their ideas have consequences.

Pictures from the Arboretum.

 

 

"After the officer fired, she is heard on the video saying, 'Holy shit. I just shot him.'"

From "Minnesota Officer Who Shot Daunte Wright Meant to Fire Taser, Chief Says/Officials from Brooklyn Center said that the fatal shooting was an 'accidental discharge,' and released body-camera video of the encounter" (NYT). 

“It is my belief that the officer had the intention to deploy their Taser, but instead shot Mr. Wright with a single bullet,” Chief Tim Gannon of the Brooklyn Center Police Department said of the shooting on Sunday of Daunte Wright, 20, during a traffic stop. “This appears to me, from what I viewed, and the officer’s reaction and distress immediately after, that this was an accidental discharge that resulted in a tragic death of Mr. Wright.”... 

Chief Gannon said that Mr. Wright had been initially pulled over because of an expired registration on the vehicle he was driving. The video showed a brief struggle between Mr. Wright and police officers before one of the officers fired her gun.

The topic of race does not come up until the 5th paragraph of this article, where we are told: "Mr. Wright was Black. City officials did not identify the race of the police officer." The gender of the officer is revealed in the first paragraph, but only by way of the pronoun "her." The quoted statement from the police chief avoids pronouns.

It's hard to fathom the incompetence that would be necessary to mix up your taser and your gun. How is it possible that these 2 items are shaped and positioned in a manner that would allow them to be confused? 

FROM THE EMAIL: I received a lot of email on this post, most of it from readers who saw the mixup as something that just can happen, because the 2 devices are shaped similarly and the police officer is under pressure. Some said that the taser is usually positioned on the opposite side of the body from the gun, so that you'd know you have to reach across to the other side to get the gun. One reader said the news has now reported that the police officer in this incident did have the taser properly positioned on the other side of her body. But here's the one email I wanted to post in full, from Mattman26:

The tragic incompetence of the taser-gun mixup ain’t the half of it. Watch the guy trying to cuff Daunte. What’s with all the fumbling around? Cuffs are designed to be slapped on; they practically close themselves around the wrist. What on earth was that cop doing? Had he never done this before? And more crucial: Why on earth would you be trying to cuff a wanted man in the open doorway of a running car? The incompetence is staggering.

"Cambodia’s Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts has said that an Ireland-based photo restoration artist broke the country’s archive law after he digitally colourised and added smiles..."

"... to images of genocide victims. VICE has removed an article showcasing Matt Loughrey’s work, whilst a petition demanding an apology gained traction on Sunday evening.... ... Cambodia’s Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts said on Sunday that the photos 'are in violation of the dignity of Cambodian Genocide victims and of the rights of the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum… We urge researchers, artists and the public not to manipulate any historical source to respect the victims.'... The project received a widespread backlash on social media with many calling it 'tasteless,' 'racist' and 'tone-deaf.'... Cambodia-based photojournalist John Vink was among the critics on Twitter: 'Matt Loughrey in Vice is not colourising S21 photographs. He is falsifying history,' he tweeted."  

Hong Kong Free Press reports. 

I can't imagine that Loughrey thought he was doing something that was anything other than uplifting and kindly, making a nice image of a real person from a photograph captured under horrific circumstances. I don't think what he did was racist, but it was poor judgment — by Loughrey and by VICE. There shouldn't be laws against artistic poor judgment, and I would think the intense disapproval is enough. But Cambodia has its own laws.

FROM THE EMAIL: Colin writes:

The people sent to this prison were tortured and then executed, usually in the most brutal and horrific fashion. After a few months of operation, essentially everyone in Cambodia knew that NO ONE got out from Tuol Sleng Prison. These people in the photos were all facing terror and death with no hope of reprieve or escape. 20,000 people passed into this place, there were just 12 known survivors. Putting smiles on these people’s faces is an abomination. It makes a mockery of what they were facing.

I agree it's bad, but I am nearly certain Loughrey meant well. It's an example of embarrassingly bad judgment, not any sort of evil. It's a shame VICE saw fit to highlight his work. 

AND: The reader Tina emails:

It’s easier to understand VICE’s motive for whitewashing the horror of communist concentration camp victim photos if you first understand that VICE is just a hip iteration of old-school anti-America demoralization agitprop for disaffected truthers types of both political flavors, funded by the usual suspects, as are Al Jazeera, RT, Unz Review, Alex Jones, Voltaire Network, Nation Magazine, etc. Also, of course, they get a permanent pass for concentration camp whitewash stuff because they courageously cancelled Gavin McInnes.

AND: Laura writes: 

Thank you for this post. It prompted me to think remember the work of French artist Christian Boltanski, specifically this piece, Gymnasium Chases from 1991. 

I'm only seeing NBC News covering the "White Lives Matter" rallies that didn't happen.

Headline: "'White Lives Matter' rallies flop as hardly anyone shows up/The poor turnout underscores how the country's unpopular and disorganized extremist movements have been driven underground." 

Is it news when something doesn't happen? You need to establish the foundation that it was supposed to happen and something prevented it. Maybe most news organizations decided that to say these rallies didn't happen is to say that there are very few people dedicated to this cause, and that's not something they want us to believe.

The way NBC News dealt with that is to say that the failure to show up in person should be interpreted to mean that the movements have gone "underground." So a big rally would be bad, but a non-rally would be bad too: 

The poor showing underscores how the country’s unpopular and disorganized extremist movements have been driven underground by increased scrutiny from the media, law enforcement agencies and far-left activists who infiltrate their private online spaces and disrupt their attempts to communicate and organize.

How do you know that what looked like rally planning wasn't just the media, law enforcement agencies, and far-left activists  talking amongst themselves? 

The Anti-Defamation League wants Fox News to fire Tucker Carlson.

WaPo reports in "ADL demands Fox News fire Tucker Carlson over anti-Semitic trope: ‘This has deadly significance.'"

Here's the exact quote from Carlson (which includes his awareness that what he is saying is fuel to his would-be cancelers):

“Now, I know that the left and all the little gatekeepers on Twitter become literally hysterical if you use the term ‘replacement,’ if you suggest that the Democratic Party is trying to replace the current electorate, the voters now casting ballots, with new people, more obedient voters from the third world,” Carlson said. “But they become hysterical because that’s what’s happening actually. Let’s just say it: That’s true.” 

Carlson then referenced the racist claim by name, dismissing it as the motivation for his remarks. 

“Everyone wants to make a racial issue out of it. Oh, you know, the white replacement theory? No, no, no,” he said. “I have less political power because they are importing a brand new electorate. Why should I sit back and take that?” 

The “great replacement theory” was popularized in 2012 by French writer Renaud Camus, who warned that Western countries face an impending White genocide. The phrase has evolved into a bogus notion that a cabal of elite Jews are plotting to replace White populations with immigrants, Muslims and people of color, according to the ADL.

Of course, Carlson was denying that he meant to espouse the "replacement theory." He said he wanted to use the word "replacement" without the extra baggage and to criticize his antagonists for getting emotional over that word. He knew what he was doing, and presumably he loves the media attention he engineered. He's in a creepy love embrace with liberal media. Maybe I should just look away. I would look away, but I just want to nail this down to keep track of it.

FROM THE EMAIL: Several readers are attacking the Anti-Defamation League, saying that it's not what it used to be. For example, one reader says:

The ADL is a D operation and a long standing embarrassment to Jews.... It is a D organization wearing the clothes of a former Jewish group. It is a defamation to Jews, and it is a terrible embarrassment. I don't think for a second ADL actually thinks, Carlson, talking about how black voter dilution is a product of mass immigration, was inviting harm to Jews or anyone else. It is insulting. Insulting that they are posing as if Jews, for a second, think that speaking out against diluting the black vote through mass immigration is hurting Jews, It's a farce they are playing at the expense of diaspora Jews.

***

There is no comments section anymore, but you can email me here. Unless you say otherwise, I will presume you'd enjoy an update to this post with a quote from your email.

"Someone needs to change that headline which seems to state the judge had drugs and thought she was Harry Potter"/"Absolute word salad."/"Confusing headline, for the deceased judge’s sake please correct."

Washington Post commenters cry out in near unison over a wretched headline. 

The headline — here — has now been tweaked — lamely — but I found the cached version and made a screen shot of the 2 headlines. The old headline is shown first and the current headline second:

 

 

 

 

The deceased judge is Sandra J. Feuerstein. I offer sympathy to her family and friends.

Perhaps you will think it interesting that the driver's name is Nastasia Snape. I'm only mentioning that so you don't feel you have to email me to express that interest. But you can email me here if you want to comment.

"A new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds that 55% of Republicans falsely believe Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 presidential election was the result of illegal voting or rigging."

"Additionally, 60% of Republicans incorrectly agree that the election was stolen from Republican Donald Trump." 

CNN reports, aggressively inserting the view that the people who were polled are wrong. I believe that's a very unusual way to report an opinion poll, with insistence that the opinion is wrong and apart from any factual reporting that makes it perfectly obvious that the opinion is mistaken. 

This displays a desperate fear of the opinion, and I don't think it does much good. The urge to stamp the opinion out will tend to make those who hold it grip more tightly: What are they afraid of? Are they trying to get me to move on, telling me there's nothing to see here?

CNN continues:

What is perfectly clear, however, is that Republicans' lack of faith in our current election infrastructure is a direct result of Trump's historic efforts to undermine the legitimacy of the 2020 results.

It's "perfectly clear" why people have this opinion? This is a news article, reporting a poll, and it's making an absolute assertion about why human beings believe what they do. That doesn't inspire confidence. It makes people suspicious, perhaps paranoid. 

FROM THE EMAIL: Cheryl writes: 

“Election infrastructure...” 

Seems like that word is being softened up to mean anything they want it to mean. Wonder why. 

Good catch. I'll boldface the word in the quoted text above. Cheryl's right. There's been a lot of talk lately from Democrats around the word "infrastructure." I was just saying: "It's a propaganda word to the core."

AND: Temujin emails:

Daffodils.

"If a government agent has knowledge that a minor under its care or supervision has exhibited symptoms of gender dysphoria, gender nonconformity, or otherwise demonstrates a desire to be treated in a manner incongruent with the minor’s sex..."

"... the government agent or entity with knowledge of that circumstance shall immediately notify, in writing, each of the minor’s parents, guardians, or custodians. The notice shall describe all of the relevant circumstances with reasonable specificity."

That's a proposed law in North Carolina (S.B. 514). It's quoted and mocked in "I am trying to report gender infractions in my kindergarten but don’t know what counts!" by Alexandra Petri (in WaPo).

What does it mean for a school kid to "desire to be treated in a manner incongruent with the minor’s sex." The school shouldn't be treating their children differently based on their sex in the first place. The child's desire should be meaningless. There should be only one kind of treatment. Unless you're talking about the bathrooms....

Petri writes: 

Who is the person in this state who understands gender well enough to feel that this was something worth enshrining in law and not just arbitrary and hurtful and a sledgehammer looking for a nail?... 

ADDED: Here's the whole text of the bill. The quoted subsection — truly puzzling taken out of context — fits under the heading "Protection of parental rights." The idea is that parents have a right to make decisions about their child's mental health care and about any gender treatments that might be offered to a child with gender dysphoria. 

A reader named Robert emails:

Snippets of comments — received via email — that can be found on recent posts.

There is no comments section anymore, but you can email me here. That (or something like that) has appeared at the end of most posts for the past week. If you're just reading the posts and not looking back to see the things that have come in via email, you're missing some good stuff, so I'll just highlight some lines from the email and give you links in case you want to click back and read:

1. "Every male on the floor below turned to her, looking like they were hoping she was calling to them."

 2. "Things that were on the fringes start to overtake the daily pattern of life. And soon they are no longer a talking point, or cute, or 'quirky.'"

3. "20 year old students were for the most part immature children in 2015 and fledgling adults in 1980."

4. "A scientist does selective breeding to make a smarter sheepdog and is able to breed one (Sirius) with Human-level intelligence."

5. "It’s a guy thing. When a woman asks a question we think we have to come up with an answer."

6. "And she pointed out a key, monumental truth of our faith." 

7. "This video confirms that the decision was correct. I hate to think of my daughter being in that poor boy’s situation."

8. "That document says that there is no need to get parental consent because they are not teaching human sexuality, but instead teaching about discrimination. Let that sink in."

9. "[A]nother coworker who is one of the most outgoing people I’ve met and who can’t stay focused at the office, who constantly has her ears up for any stray conversation to join, seems to be thriving at home."

10. "The consiglieres of two warring dynasties unite and plot together after years of conflict to hold on to their waning power as they age and die."

11. "You are correct to not open comments on this one. It would be a bloodbath. No one likes a bloodbath in the morning."

Where's Kamala?!

This is a big front page article in the NYT: "Young Migrants Crowd Shelters, Posing Test for Biden/The administration is under intensifying pressure to expand its capacity to care for as many as 35,000 unaccompanied minors, part of a wave of people crossing the border." 

For Biden? I thought he palmed this off on Kamala Harris. The first thing I did when I saw the headline was search the page for "Harris." Then: "Kamala." Then: "Vice." Nothing!

But I agree. It's Biden's responsibility, whether he performs the theater of delegation or not. And yet, I don't appreciate shielding Harris. Or making her invisible. It's either diminishing her or protecting her, and I don't accept that. 

Okay. Now I'll read. Excerpt:

The desperate plea landed this week in the email inboxes of employees in government agencies like the Department of Homeland Security and NASA: Will you consider taking a four-month paid leave from your job to help care for migrant children in government-run shelters packed with new arrivals at the border?...

Wow!

Robert Moses is trending on Twitter.

I'll just give you one tweet to explain why:

Guys: pick up a book about Robert Moses and get back to us. https://t.co/IZHLXC7Igj

— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) April 11, 2021

Pick up "a" book means pick up the book — "The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York" by Robert A. Caro. 

There's also this: "Robert Moses and His Racist Parkway, Explained/The story: Robert Moses ordered engineers to build the Southern State Parkway’s bridges extra-low, to prevent poor people in buses from using the highway. The truth? It’s a little more complex" (Bloomberg, 2017). 

(To comment, email me here.)

"I'm trying to make it into something playful — It shocked me at first," said Jordan Peterson, about seeing himself adapted into a super villain, Red Skull.

 

"I've been called a Nazi before. It's not pleasant.  This is one step beyond that. Nazi, apparently, isn't enough. I have to be a magical super-Nazi." 

The video is from April 8th. Here are tweets from April 6th, showing the way the Ta-Nehisi Coates comic book satirizes Peterson:

"I think this is a good dialogue...."

 

Oh, wouldn't you just love to pile into an unmoderated comments section right now? I've abolished the comments section, because the tragedy of the commons was just too damned heart-rending. But I could turn it on for an individual post, just to see what happens. That's an option I've considered and that a few people have mentioned in email. (You can email me here.) 

Why not turn it on for this post? Actually, I considered it, because I think there's a lot in the video to talk about, and I'm not personally in the mood to comment about it, other than to have selected that one quote for the post title. And isn't it interesting that the quote expresses appreciation for "good dialogue"?

But if the comments were open, the beginning of the comments section would be filled with comments from people who hadn't watched the video. And there'd be comments saying things that have already been said about "Saturday Night Live" — that's it's never been funny or hasn't been funny since [whenever]. How long would it take before somebody would say something trenchant about the actual substance of the video?

"I think this is a good dialogue...." is a funny line because the referenced dialogue is not good. And yet we cling to the notion that dialogue is good. I love dialogue. 

Here ends my monologue.

FROM THE EMAIL: Temujin writes: 

I've wondered if you've considered randomly opening up comments at some point for posts only you want to hear comments on. There were one or two in the past couple of days I would have loved to have commented on. But not on this one. You are correct to not open comments on this one. It would be a bloodbath. No one likes a bloodbath in the morning.

Yeah, bloodbath is more of an evening luxury. 

"There may be a new genre: liberals expressing 'buyers remorse' over the culture they have created."

"Here's a talk between Bill Kristol and James Carville on the 2020 election and what came after. You'd think the two would be ecstatic, exultant. Trump is gone. The Dems are spraying money on citizens like cheap perfume on a whore. White men make up 14% of the class at the many Ivy League colleges. Good times. But these two are somber.. Bill Kristol keeps begging Carville to tell him where the Democrats are going and Carville seems to think the Democrats have a flimsy, rickety coalition that will fall apart if the Dems keep saying 'people of color' and 'Latinix' and keep canceling people of whom the Amherst College English department disapproves. Carville seems to regard Biden as the man standing between the Dems and the deluge. Perhaps 'buyers remorse' isn't quite the term I'm looking for - maybe 'Belshazzar's Feast.'"

Writes Wild Swan in the email. I tried watching the video.... 

 

... but the video and audio on Carville's side is horrible. Unwatchable. Is he filming from a laptop on his lap? What a ridiculous place for a laptop! I don't know why the audio is also herky-jerky, and bad audio with his idiosyncratic manner of speaking is unintelligible. And that's quite aside from whether he's making good points (and good sense).

But — lo and behold — there's a transcript! I can skim, and I can cut and paste: