Greg Krehbiel's Crowhill Weblog - Content

Thoughts on life — News, culture, politics, beer, art, science, education, religion and ethics

Other Crowhill sites:
Crowhill PublishingGreg's Book Publishing blog
Greg's Marketing blogHome Brewing blog

Why are men turning to prostitutes?

by Greg Krehbiel on 26 November 2014

More men — even young men — are using prostitutes.

I don’t think there’s any mystery here.

Traditional society very wisely created a situation where men had to jump through a bunch of hoops to get sex. Laws against fornication, adultery and prostitution pushed men towards marriage, which benefited everybody, and social norms pushed both men and women towards a code of behavior that made married life fairly nice. It was a relatively fair trade for all parties.

Modern society is systematically changing the terms of the deal, both in the law and in what behavior we expect out of people, but the people who advocate these changes naively believe they can pull all the blocks out of the Jenga tower and avoid a collapse. It’s absolute madness.

My male readers have probably seen the little note that often appears on walls in public bathrooms (which I have amended here to be more family friendly).

No matter how cute she is, there’s somebody, somewhere, who’s sick of her drama.

It wasn’t okay in my mother’s day for little girls to be drama queens or expect to be treated like princesses. (Unless they were very rich, of course.) It wasn’t okay for them to sleep around and expect men to be okay with that. They couldn’t just up and leave a marriage and expect the man to pay for it. But nowadays you see below average women with too much experience expecting to be affirmed in all their life choices and treated like royalty. The law and the courts and Hollywood help them out.

Here’s the ugly reality. Many men only put up with marriage because they were pretty much forced into it by their sex drive, and the terms weren’t completely unacceptable. If we create a world where men can get sex without the drama — without commitment and romance and all the accompanying baggage — many of them are gonna do just that.

Modern women think they are being liberated by relaxed social norms on sex. Nothing could be further from the truth. Modern sexual morality is going to create a barbaric world where women are only desirable when they’re young and good-looking, and disposable once they get out of their 20s. I sincerely hope we learn that before things go too far. If they haven’t already.


-- 9 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-26  ::  Greg Krehbiel

The first to present his case …

by Greg Krehbiel on 26 November 2014

A proverb I have tried to live by is 18:17 — “The first to plead his case seems right, Until another comes and examines him.”

I think I drive my family a little nuts with this because if they take one side, I’m always pushing them to consider the other side. It doesn’t matter much what the issue is. You can’t pretend to know an issue until you’ve heard more than one opinion and I want to make sure they develop that kind of self-suspicion.

This morning a professional colleague and I were interviewed at the metro by a Finnish reporter about the Ferguson situation. This is what I remember saying.

  • Looting and rioting is completely inappropriate and self-destructive (what business is going to want to build in Ferguson?)
  • It’s odd to call for justice and then reject what the jury says without compelling evidence something was wrong.
  • To some extent the black community seems to be living in the past. Older blacks certainly lived through ugly times, and we should be reminded of that, but the evidence for current racism isn’t convincing.
  • However, the prosecutor should have recused himself. His father was a cop who was killed by a black man. That was a clear conflict of interest.
  • There is way too much attention on the rare incidence of a cop killing a black man and way too little attention to the daily occurrence of black men killing black men.

Then when I got back to the office I saw the column below. I have to say that I’ve never thought much of this columnist, but I do want to hear other perspectives on things, and he adds some interesting details.

Bob McCulloch’s pathetic prosecution of Darren Wilson

I don’t know if he’s right or wrong, but it’s easy to see why some people have doubts about the result from the grand jury.

Given the national attention on this case, and given the emotionally charged atmosphere, more care should have been taken to ensure that everyone could trust the result. Now we’re faced with yet another circus as the case will probably go into a civil phase. (Personally I think that’s double jeopardy and shouldn’t be allowed, but I know the lawyers disagree.)

-- 1 comment  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-26  ::  Greg Krehbiel

Actual data is a good thing

by Greg Krehbiel on 25 November 2014

For all the claims and accusations and back and forth about Antarctic sea ice (and its relevance to global warming), you might suppose that we have a good way to measure it. You’d be wrong.

We’re only now starting to get a handle on it. See Underwater Robot Measures Thickness of Antarctic Sea Ice

“Sea ice thickness and its variability in the Antarctic remains one of the great unknowns in the climate system,” said sea ice expert Ted Maksym of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts.

Unlike in the Arctic region, where large declines in thickness have been measured in recent decades, scientists do not really have a good handle on the average Antarctic sea ice thickness or on any possible trends there, Maksym said.

So despite the fact that it was a big unknown the partisans knew for absolute certain that it’s been shrinking. (Or increasing.)

It’s important to listen to what people say about an issue when they are not in the middle of a heated debate. That’s when you tend to get the more honest assessment of what’s going on.

-- 2 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-25  ::  Greg Krehbiel

How slippery is that slope?

by Greg Krehbiel on 25 November 2014

I tend not to take slippery slope arguments all that seriously. The fact that one thing leads to another logically does not mean it will do so practically. People have gag reflexes and instincts and taboos built into their psychology, and I usually hold out the hope that they will save us from too deep of a descent into madness.

The trouble is that western liberalism seems to have found a way around those restraints, and slippery slopes are indeed becoming quite slippery. The speed with which same-sex marriage has become accepted is an example.

Jonathan Haidt has discovered that “educated” people, and people near universities, even if they aren’t educated, are far more able / willing to dispense with their moral sentiments and approach a question “rationally” — that is, according to the modern, western, distorted view of what a rational morality would look like.

Now this: Is it now OK to have sex with animals?

It’s a disturbing article.

Why, then, is [this story] a big deal? Because it’s perhaps the most vivid sign yet that, in effect, the United States (and indeed the entire Western world) is running an experiment — one with very few, if any, antecedents in human history. The experiment will test what happens when a culture systematically purges all publicly affirmed notions of human flourishing, virtue and vice, elevation and degradation.

Or, in other words, what happens when you ignore human moral sentiments and try to build a morality based on a naive, Google-like sentiment. “Don’t be evil.” Or, “Who am I to judge?”

The author attributes the problem to “an absolute ethic of niceness.” Because judging isn’t nice.

[T]here has never been a human society built exclusively on a morality of rights (individual consent) and an ethic of niceness, with no overarching vision of a higher human good to override or compete with it.

That doesn’t frighten the “educated,” because they’re stardust. They’re golden. Everything is different this time, which is the time of man. The Age of Aquarius. Get on the right side of history, man, or get left behind!

It’s a huge and very dangerous experiment. Nobody knows where it will lead or end. We are flying down a dark tunnel with no clue whether it opens up into a beautiful mountain vista or ends in a stone wall. But the odds have to favor the stone wall.

Why is this cultural experiment a big deal?

Because it stands as a stunning testament to our ignorance about ourselves. Roughly 2,500 years since Socrates first raised the question of how we should live, several centuries since the Enlightenment encouraged us to seek and promulgate scientific knowledge about the universe and human nature, Western humanity seems to have come to the conclusion that we haven’t got a clue about an answer. There is no consensus whatsoever about what ways of life are intrinsically good or bad for human beings.

This is why I am a conservative and not a libertarian (even though I’m registered politically with the Libertarian Party). I believe in the wisdom of the past, and I completely do not trust the Westons, Withers, Frosts and Filostratos of the world.

-- 2 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-25  ::  Greg Krehbiel

It’s not a lack of courage, it’s a wrong-headed view of the world

by Greg Krehbiel on 25 November 2014

Bret Stephens’ article on the prospects of Iran getting a nuclear weapon is worth reading, but I think he comes to the wrong conclusion. He says Obama is whitewashing the reality in Iran out of cowardice. I don’t think that’s it at all.

I think Obama came into office with the intent of making the U.S. a less dominant power on the world stage. He said as much in his campaign.

Obama distrusts U.S. and western power in the world and, like many liberals, is ashamed of the “arrogance of U.S. power.” That’s why he dismisses American exceptionalism and started off his presidency apologizing for everything. He wants a more equitable sharing of power between the nations, and that means, among other things, a nuclear Iran.

It’s not so much that he wants a nuclear Iran as that he doesn’t want an America strong enough to stop it. When you look at how and where Obama was raised, listen to what he said in his campaign speeches, and then compare those things with what he actually does in foreign policy, it seems to paint a fairly clear picture.

I’m not claiming to be an expert on foreign policy or on Obama’s mind, I’m just a guy offering an opinion. And my opinion is that “take the U.S. down a notch” is the key to understanding Obama’s foreign policy.

--  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-25  ::  Greg Krehbiel

Ban suitcases with wheels?

by Greg Krehbiel on 25 November 2014

This is a silly story, but somewhat near to my heart.

Venice wants to ban suitcases with wheels.

Their concern is the noise of the wheels on cobblestones, which, honestly, probably would make a horrible racket.

I realize the wheels are incredibly convenient, especially when you’re going through an airport, but I hate those suitcases because of the mess they make of my daily commute. They’re a hazard to the movement of a crowd of people.

When everyone piles off the commuter train and we walk, drone-like, towards the subway, we all give one another an appropriate amount of room — a foot or two. Then somebody drops the wheeled suitcase and lets it dangle a yard behind them and it makes a mess.

The obvious solution is for people to have some manners and not extend their suitcases without checking to make sure it’s safe. But the intersection between “people with manners” and “D.C. commuters” is not a large enough set.

-- 2 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-25  ::  Greg Krehbiel

Looters, human life and property

by Greg Krehbiel on 25 November 2014

I grew up with a pretty heavy “law and order” inclination, and when it came to things like riots and looting I always thought the ring leaders should be shot. E.g., anybody setting a fire, breaking a window or inciting violence would be shot on sight, no questions asked. I’d start with rubber bullets, then move to lethal force if required. In my opinion, a governor who didn’t apply enough force to stop a riot was unfit for the office.

I still feel that way, but I’ve also come to appreciate the value of restraint. A human life is worth more than a TV set, or a building, so I can understand why some people take a more passive approach.

Still, it’s a hard line to draw. Even though human life is more valuable than property in an abstract sense, it is morally legit to shoot a man who breaks into your house, and it would be reasonable to use deadly force to protect your livelihood — e.g., to prevent people from burning down your store.

There comes a point where the rioters aren’t only damaging property, but are endangering lives. At that point the government has to intervene with whatever force is necessary to stop it.

In any event, the police should be recording it all and the prosecutors should be busy for months identifying people and pressing charges. I never understand why people get away with rioting. The people who rioted last August should be in jail.

If I was the governor of Missouri I would have warned people ahead of time that rioters would be shot on sight, and I would have imposed a curfew as soon as any riots began.

Maybe it’s a good thing I’m not a governor.

--  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-25  ::  Greg Krehbiel

Greatest catch of all time?

by Greg Krehbiel on 24 November 2014

I don’t often comment on sports on this blog, but I had to post this. If you haven’t seen it you really need to, even if you don’t like football.

Odell Beckham hopes it’s not greatest catch of all time

It’s an astonishing catch.

-- 3 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-24  ::  Greg Krehbiel

Boehner on Congressional inaction

by Greg Krehbiel on 24 November 2014

Maybe I’m reading / listening to the wrong stuff, or maybe I’m missing some important details, but Rep. Boehner has consistently said that the reason he’s been unable to pass an immigration law is that the Republican conference doesn’t trust Obama to enforce any law they might pass.

That makes sense. What’s the point in working out all the details of a law if Obama is simply going to do what he wants to do? They point to his implementation of Obamacare as an example of his willingness to go outside the letter of the law.

I haven’t heard that side of the issue come up very often, which seems odd to me. It’s not as if it’s some crazy comment by a back bencher.

It’s possible that it has been discussed and I’ve missed it. It’s possible that people simply don’t believe Boehner’s explanation, or that people who know more about Washington than I do simply discount that explanation as nonsense. E.g., Obama has deported more people, etc. etc., so all this stuff about not trusting him to implement the law is just smoke.

Maybe, but it seems to me the dominant story line is “Republicans caused this by their inaction.”

-- 7 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-24  ::  Greg Krehbiel

SNL mocks Obama on amnesty

by Greg Krehbiel on 23 November 2014

You’ve probably seen this, but it’s pretty funny.

HT: Dave.

-- 4 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2014-11-23  ::  Greg Krehbiel

2014-11-22 :: Greg Krehbiel // General
Lies that disqualify
2014-11-20 :: Greg Krehbiel // General
Throwing down the gauntlet
2014-11-19 :: Greg Krehbiel // General
You can’t make this stuff up
2014-11-19 :: Greg Krehbiel // General
What blogs do you read?
2014-11-19 :: Greg Krehbiel // General
First, burn all the schools