We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Thursday, May 19. 2022
Is Sex Addiction a Real Thing? The problem with defining “excessive” sexual behavior.
The Male Trait That Best Predicts Men's Mating Success
He Was a World-Renowned Cancer Researcher. Now's He's Collecting Unemployment. Behind the fall of David Sabatini, 'one of the greatest scientists' of his generation.
University drops sonnets because they are ‘products of white western culture’
More about the rage for certainty
Doocy to Jean-Pierre After Jankowicz Resigns: “The Disinformation Board is Being Shut Down Because of Disinformation?”
The one-two of Elon Musk and Project Veritas might end Twitter
NY Times Editorial Board Decides To Blame Most Republicans For Buffalo Shooting
Biden's 'Disinfo' Board Paused As 'Scary Poppins' Resigns
" There’s nothing inherently wrong with grace-and-favor jobs, and you can’t help it if you live in an incestuous cesspool of government hacks and grifters. "
Biden plainly wants the border crisis to keep getting worse
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
The Men's mating article was all about physical features. I was figuring confidence and an indifference to birth control would be the two prime factors in # of kids a man has.
Try to imagine what catnip it is to a woman if a man shows an interest in building a nest: settle down with me, let me show you what I'll contribute to paying for it, furnishing it, maintaining it, and protecting it. Or if a man shows that he will never, ever lose interest in his wife because she's pregnant or showing signs of wear and tear in the early years of baby-tending, and will either help or step up the pace in other areas to make sure all the burdens are shouldered as fully as possible. If his reaction to pregnancy is reverent happiness, even if necessarily mixed with some trepidation. If he establishes with every part of his behavior that he would not dream of abandoning his wife or children no matter how tough the relationship gets or how much they "grow apart" or the like.
Such a man, whatever his other characteristics, will likely find a willing partner in producing lots of children even if his wife is struggling with questions like whether she should be watching out for her own earning potential and building her own nest egg in case he wanders off--especially if he makes it clear he's not indifferent to those things and wants to honor them at the same time that he fully, genuinely, enthusiastically welcomes children into the home.
Border crisis? It's an opportunity! Just as high oil prices are an opportunity to make us a pre-Industrial society and high food prices are an opportunity to return us to a hunter/gatherer society, unrestricted immigration is an opportunity to make us a borderless, one-world society. And once 90% of the human population has died off, things will be just right.
I'm on my fourth day of Covid despite a vaccine and two boosters.
It's hard for me to believe it would have been worse otherwise.
Prayers for your quick recovery, feeble!
Please stop getting boosters!
I hate to hear this--but if you stay out of the hospital, it could have been worse. I sure hope it turns around for you soon. Nasty, nasty bug.
"Hard for me to believe" is not remotely a scientific answer. Your feelings about science have no value. I know that is harsh, but it's not my job to make you feel good.
Without the vaccines, more people would have died. Listen to the people who have skin in the game, who have patients die or lose their jobs and never get rehired on these matters, not the people (like me, heh heh) who can spend their time trying to look smarter than other people without having to do any actual research, only the imitation kind where you go to the same websites every day and read the people who tell you what you want to hear. Your PCP, your local ER, your ICU, your local Urgent Care, are not lying to you. If you think a million professionals are lying or inaccurate but some retired nutritionist selling crap or a cute gal with a chip on her shoulder are Real Authorities then you and your family are at increasing risk. The knuckleheads on puffed-up websites and podcasts have much less accountability. If you die, no one blames them. They don't even notice.
Skin in the game. Accountability. Pay attention to those.
I have a fun idea. Then people who want to contradict me on this? Pay really close attention to creating a logically airtight argument rather than a merely insulting accusation. Did you know that has not actually happened at Maggie's Farm yet? Insults bother liberals, but I've been conservative for decades and am immune. Try harder this time, to see if you can develop something Feebs can sink his teeth into.
Note that the DHS will still be doing the work of the Ministry of Truth, it just will no longer have an easily recognizable lunatic as the face of the operation. It will go back underground, behind the scenes. It has to be the one of the most un-American things created by the democrats (this century)…so far. Evil never sleeps.
Yes, and one of the first stealthy steps is Hochul's plan to surveil the social media accounts of New Yorkers. Coming soon to a neighborhood near us.
Re University of Salford (who?) Drops Sonnets: They might as well just shut the doors then, because the notion of a "University" is also a product of white Western culture.
What Joe said, in spades. Any Brit university that doesn't immediately dispand itself hasn't got a hair on its...head.
World renowned researcher...Yea, the females have been allowed and encouraged to take scalps to get ahead or get even. The university system is being encouraged to go back to using sexual encounters to deny basic rights to men. Guilty until proven innocent.
I suspect some of Sabatini's fellow researchers saw a way to grab his multi-million dollar grants and keep him from defending them.
Follow the money. It's insane to think that a lot researchers don't come up with the answers their donors want. Since their donors are primarily the federal government, is it any wonder there seems to be a broad consensus among "scientists" on touchy subjects?
It reads like a Kafka-esque tale, and for him no doubt it is. But I wonder if there is more to the story besides a bat-sh*t crazy, spiteful younger woman. I wonder if Amber Heard will play her in the movie.
Well, there are several things that look wrong with the whole picture, even in an article sympathetic to Sabatini.
Any relationship that either partner wants to keep secret is not a good idea. Doubly true if both of you feel that way.
There is no such thing as an 'open' or casual relationship that does involve the exchange of body fluids and doesn't involve the exchange of cash.
While I don't know that he would have been guaranteed a fair hearing when the intra-office relationship policy was changed, he is probably 100% correct that he should have immediately and publicly confessed, and then broken off. Not doing so just gave her additional leverage.
Related to point number 1, 'ghosting' is also not a good idea unless you're willing to pack up and leave town in the dead of night, too.
Please respect yourselves and your readers and do not cite Psychology Today.
A while back their (gay) "relationships" columnist assured readers that "married" gay couples can continue their ripsnorting promiscuity as long as the carousel of hookups doesn't keep them from "maintaining emotional fidelity".
Did not even have to click through... You have to be deeply invested in Progressive doublethink to doubt that our society has a porn problem...
I was raised agnostic and came of age in the post-contraceptive pre-AIDS world, totally convinced that a free-love culture could work. Decades later, I won't say it's impossible to maintain emotional fidelity in a sexually promiscuous relationship, but I've never met anyone who could pull it off. With both men and women, we seem to have our choice between people who can maintain emotional distance with a sexual partner and people who can maintain emotional intimacy with a sexual partner. It doesn't look common to be able to maintain distance with one partner and intimacy with another, all at one time. I call that capacity a unicorn, not a basis for a widespread social construct.
If such a unicorn exists, he or she must find another unicorn in the form of a sexual partner who doesn't see sexual infidelity as a threat to the emotional fidelity. Don't meet many of those, either.
Somehow we imagine that maintaining intimacy is either unimportant or quite easy. Then we wonder why marriage can be difficult. I read somewhere recently (here?) that it's not love that sustains marriage but marriage that sustains love. You can perhaps substitute "a realistic attitude toward the value of a trustworthy commitment" for "marriage" and "successful intimacy" for "love."