Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Thursday, June 22. 2017
Image is a c. 1850 ad, via Betsy .
The guy didn't need to mention that he was a pretty good writer too.
I Was Bullied As A Kid. It Almost Ruined My Adult Life.
Nobody told him to man-up
When A Pet Owner Is Rich, It's No Dog's Life
Government Can't Mandate Family Life
Government one-size-fits-all never works
Married Teacher Traumatized Male Teen With Sex Romps
How will that lucky SOB ever recover?
Why ‘Better Call Saul’ Is the Best – and Most Morally Sound—Show on Television
A Harvard study examining income, work, and marital stability suggests that male 'bread-winning' remains a central component of marital contracts
Must be fun to have him as a teacher. I'd bet he doesn't teach Chemistry.
It's Now A "Human Right" To Not Be Offended
Still ok to mock Newfies tho. But let's all try to offend those Canadian government morons.
Basically, utopians hate people
The Important Work Of International Agencies: Keeping The Poor Poor
Saying ‘Gender Plays No Part in Whom We Hire’ Is a ‘Microaggression
Students Hold Free Speech Events, Get Denounced as 'White Supremacists'
"Indigenous Dentistry" in Canadian universities
University Pres: All students do is just read stuff
Politics and medical care do not mix
Overpopulation Scaremongering Never Gets Old - Neo-Malthusianism in the Sunday New York Times
I have no doubt that the earth would be better with fewer humans. I just don't feel like being removed at the present time.
Let's Stop Treating the Young As If They're Political Sages
Funniest Fallout From Georgia Special Election: Democrats Live With Their Parents
Ossoff's campaign spent $22.5 million, compared to Handel's $3.2 million, according to reports
Dems refused help with their hacking issue while it was happening
Mueller’s Empire: Legions of Lawyers, Bottomless Budget, Limitless Jurisdiction
Beria: Show me the man and I'll find you the crime
Study Supports President Trump: 5.7 Million Noncitizens May Have Cast Illegal Votes
NYT’s Patrick S. Tomlinson, ‘There Is Not A Single Good Person Who Voted For Trump’
We all know people who feel that way
Real Scandals The Trump-Obsessed Media Are Ignoring
Trashing Trump and the 'I'm a Genius' Press
0-4 and an About-Face: Democrats Suddenly Believe Ossoff No Longer Matters
Father Henri Boulad Calls a Spade a Spade on Islam
TERROR IN MICHIGAN: Muslims SHOUTED ALLAHU AKBAR while stabbing cop in the neck at Flint airport
Motive remains a mystery
In Europe, the press edits out the Allah Akbar parts
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
"Gowdy: Maybe DNC Did Not Cooperate With DHS Because There Was Something Else On That Server"
And consider that most federal employees are good DNC party members or sympathetic to the DNC. So that something else must have been something that would shake the foundations of the faithful.
"Students Hold Free Speech Events, Get Denounced as 'White Supremacists'"
Liberal Arts colleges and departments are failures. It has been said that their purpose to emancipate the minds of the students from provincialism. Yet, today, the professors are out right alongside the students demanding no challenging ideas be tolerated.
Not all students or professors support the affirmation of provincialism, but that the colleges tolerate the suppression of free speech publishes the obituary of the Liberal Arts college
Not a few members of the staffs of liberal-arts colleges, it is true, resent being told that theirs is a conservative mission of any sort. When once I was invited to give a series of lectures on conservative thought at a long-established college, a certain professor objected indignantly, "Why, we can't have that sort of thing here: this is a liberal arts college!" He thought, doubtless sincerely, that the word "liberal" implied allegiance to some dim political orthodoxy, related somehow to the New Deal and its succeeding programs. Such was the extend of his liberal education.
Any public gathering of two or more "white guys" is by definition a "white supremacy" meeting and thus should be made illegal. This sounds like the Soviet Union in the 50's.
White supremacy = free speech = WE GET TO DISAGREE WITH YOU.
RE I Was Bullied As A Kid. It Almost Ruined My Adult Life.
However, I always thought I was never good enough, never smart enough, never able to measure up.
All of which is true.
I don't see the issue. Victims rarely fought back, and if they did, we'd run them up the flag pole by their belt loops. Bullying was never a problem.
I Was Bullied As A Kid. It Almost Ruined My Adult Life.
Bird Dog reply: Nobody told him to man-up
Maybe things aren't as simple as you would like to believe. From the link:
anytime a professor offered me any feedback other than praise I felt like I was being attacked again.That rang a bell with me. Because of my mother's verbal abuse during my childhood, I am hyper-sensitive to criticism from a female- especially when it comes in a harsh tone. Not that simple to fix.
In the context of verbal abuse from a parent, "man-up" isn't appropriate advice. A subconscious reason that an adolescent male doesn't respond to verbal abuse from his mother is that he realizes that long-suppressed anger, when released, could lead to violent consequences. Matricide is frowned upon, they tell me.
We don't know the details of the situation described in the link. Perhaps "man-up" would have worked- bullies usually stop when confronted. Perhaps it could have made things worse.
1. man up. mommy isn't yelling at you anymore.
2. no, we don't stop. obviously.
In law school, I was unfortunate/fortunate enough to have a property professor who was rumored to be the model for the fictional Professor Kingsfield in Paper Chase. He was known for being a terror, and had been so for 40 years or more at that point.
The first day of class he had a woman in tears because she didn't know the difference between a fee simple determinable, a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, and a fee simple subject to an executory limitation. Of course, she hadn't paid attention to the notice as to what we had to have prepared for the first day of class. (And none of the rest of us were prepared either, so we were all shocked. I guess if more of us had read the book or seen the movie and drawn the connection, we would know what we were in for.)
This was in 1978, the same time as the TV show came out (the movie was already out as I remember). At the start of class one day he brought in a copy of a newspaper and slammed it on the lectern. The paper had written an article speculating whether he was the real Kingsfield and saying they had interviewed some of his students anonymously (that is, us) and had been told how tough and inhumane he was.
"They say I have been cruel to you," he began. "Do you not understand, I am doing this because when you begin practicing law, it is going to be like this every day? And that when you graduate from a school like this, you will be expected to know the law? I am not going to let you graduate from this school without knowing the law."
As terrifying as it was at the time, down through the years, whenever I have met lawyers who have had him as a professor, he is the one they remember and the things he taught are what they remember from law school. And we all remember his sayings such as "you have mush for brains," and "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you." He's the professor we remember most fondly.
I knew law professors like that, and some partners in mostly large firms. Practicing attorneys are rarely that kind of asshole because it is very easy repay that kind of behavior in kind, which ultimately costs clients time and money. Because you have to give a little to get a little, and because ethical practice demands that as well.
That kind of professor would get bitchslapped stupid in real practice. A law professor can terrorize a student only because the student can't, as a attorney would, tell the opposition to go fuck himself. That is why practice, even when hard fought, stays on the civil side.
I think the professor's point was that you are going to be challenged every day when you practice law, and you had better be able to respond intelligently and with knowledge. And the other point I would say, having practiced law all these years, is that the advice you give has real consequences, and if you mess up it can haunt you the rest of your life.
My thought on this is: we all had something negative happen in childhood who shaped who we are as adults. That is LIFE. Could've been parents, bullies, illness, divorce, death, repeated failures, humiliation, poverty, etc. None of us escape negative things in life as we grow up. We never will. And to blame who we are on someone else is really pretty sad. You are who you are. Own it. Don't try to find an excuse for it. Accept that we all have shortcomings and limitations and move on with your life. Reflecting on the bad thing that 'ruined your life' is the thing that will ruin your life.
I could point to my sorrows. I did not live a perfectly happy childhood. But why? I accept that we all have burdens we must carry in life and no one's burden can be judged to be worse or better, as we never will know what it is like to be someone else.
Please dude, man up. Mom probably had her own issues. Get over it.
Did any of you "man up" types actually read the original article? Have any of you experienced anything like this boy did while growing up? If you have never known anyone who was damaged whether by bullies, cruel parents, siblings or others, you ought not to throw out such cavalier remarks.
Sure, some people have something negative happen in their childhood. Don't we all? But we have other positive input in our lives to help balance the bad. However, when there are no deposits in the bank of significance, security, or love in a child's life, the ongoing abuse of any form is extremely damaging. The effects can be lifelong, even though with help some learn to function and experience recovery.
The lack of compassion here is not only not funny, it is very disturbing.
"In Europe, the press edits out the Allah Akbar parts..."
For all you "Islam is just like Christianity" types, here's why::
Is he giving this presentation to his cat? He should at least close the door to his bedroom closet. And that wallpaper is hideous.
I barely trust 22 year-olds to change the oil in my car. I'm certainly not going to trust one to rewrite my constitution.
Agree. But I'd let that 18 year-old who wrote the Chance for a Spinster ad take a crack at it. I'd say his head is screwed on straighter than most all post-boomer college grads around today.
"The new dark age: EU court..."
If you peruse the internet you will find many people who believe all vaccines are toxic and cause our problems and also believe that simple good hygiene can prevent all of those diseases. Where does this simple mindedness come from?
"Married Teacher Traumatized Male Teen With Sex Romps" I worked with a man who was the biggest pervert I've ever seen and according to him it all started when an older woman seduced him.
Please don't think boys aren't damaged by by this because the end result can be very bad and long lasting.
I agree with this. I think a teenage boy, even one who seeks the experience of having sex with a teacher or another woman and finds some pleasure in it can turn out, in the end, to be a victim. He finds she does not actually love him and has no place for a relationship - and his feelings in the matter count for nothing. He has been used. This is far less likely with a girl his own age, and he is at least on even footing there. Such things can feel terrible for adult men as well, but again, it is less common and they are at least more equal.
With boys as with girls, physical maturity does not confer emotional maturity. There are differences in how all this is perceived by men vs women, gay or straight, but in all instances an adult having sex with a child is an imbalance and an exploitation.
The problem is first that it is a teacher, i.e. someone who holds power over the student. The second problem is the legal one of statutory rape. IMHO, that's it! No horrible experience because it was a sex romp with a 'boy'. No life changing event simply because it was sex. or because one partner was older than the other, etc.
Oddly, utopia is only a utopia to those who have the freedom to define their own life and sadly direct the lives of others. For those others, that utopia is a hell.
So far, the closest we've come to utopia is to give all the liberty to pursue their own dreams and plans, short of using violence to interfere with the dreams and plans of another. Sadly, too many just aren't happy if with others being equally free as they themselves are.
Most pietists took the following view: Since we can't gauge an individual's morality by his following rituals or even by his professed adherence to creed, we must watch his actions and see if he is really moral.
From there the pietists concluded that it was everyone's moral duty to his own salvation to see to it that his fellow men as well as himself are kept out of temptation's path. That is, it was supposed to be the State's business to enforce compulsory morality, to create the proper moral climate for maximizing salvation. In short, instead of an individualist, the pietist now tended to become a pest, a busybody, a moral watchdog for his fellow man, and a compulsory moralist using the State to outlaw "vice" as well as crime
Not all pietists are Christian or even of an organized religion. The worst pietists are those secular Marxists who not only want to use the State to maximize salvation, but who also worship the State.
"Still ok to mock Newfies tho."
Q: Why are Newfie jokes so simple?
A: So's Mainlanders can understand 'em.
"Overpopulation Scaremongering Never Gets Old"
Or as P.J. O'Rourke once put it:
"Just enough of me, way too much of you."
Makin' fun of Newfies?
You do that, it's gonna be hard to chew your canned lettuce with no teeth, eh?
Oh, wait. No it won't. Sorry.