The Crowhill Weblog - Content

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

Sites endorsed by Crowhill:
Crowhill Publishing
The Krehbiel Report on Publishing

Mr. Khan, exactly what part of the constitution is Trump supposed to read?

by Crowhill on 2 August 2016

Khizr Khan famously shook a copy of the constitution and taunted Donald Trump about it, asking if Trump had even read it. Which, IMO, is a good question, given his general ignorance of political issues.

But I have to wonder, precisely what was Mr. Khan talking about?

Don’t misunderstand this post as a defense of Trump. Trump is a boorish bully who has to beat down anyone who challenges him, and his response to the Khans was way out of line. He needs to learn to be gracious, but … I’m told that old dogs don’t learn much.

Anyway, I still have to wonder. The context of Mr. Khan’s taunt seems to be Trump’s desire to limit Muslim immigration, which is certainly a controversial position, but the constitution has absolutely nothing to say about that.

Often I get the feeling that for many Democrats the word “unconstitutional” means nothing more than “I don’t like that.”

 ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-08-02  ::  Crowhill

The new vampires

by Crowhill on 1 August 2016

You may have head of “parabiosis” — which is the treatment of old age with the blood of younger people.

Some Silicon Valley folk are allegedly using this to extend their lives. See Why Peter Thiel Believes Young People’s Blood Is the Ultimate Medicine The contrarian venture capitalist believes transfusions may hold the key to his dream of living forever.

Remember those silly stories about people waking up in a hotel bathtub filled with ice with a note explaining that their kidney had been stolen? This seems far easier. You just pay young folk to donate blood.

1 comment  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-08-01  ::  Crowhill

The Hippie Pope is at it again

by Crowhill on 1 August 2016

Pope Francis denies that Islam is violent

Islam has spread by violence. That is a historical fact.

This pope is a crackpot. He can’t make the moral distinction between run of the mill murder committed by Catholics and the violence committed by Muslims.

4 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-08-01  ::  Crowhill

A modest proposal for restructuring dating, courtship, marriage prep and career expectations

by Crowhill on 29 July 2016

The problem: Several trends are progressively eroding marriage and family, which is the fundamental building block of a stable society.

One of these trends is that the gap between when young people reach physical maturity and when they are capable of marrying and supporting a family is getting larger and larger. Puberty is coming earlier because of better nutrition and healthcare, and jobs and marriage are coming later, for a variety of reasons.

This creates long periods where young people are sexually active (or have to restrain themselves for a long time), but not married. That’s not healthy for a variety of reasons. Just to name one, a woman who has multiple sex partners before marriage is more likely to have a failed marriage.

It’s in the best interest of the mother and the child for a woman to marry relatively early and have her kids at a young age. It’s not so crucial for the man to be quite as young, but he should be relatively young so he has the physical and emotional energy to deal with kids.

But if a woman marries young, she becomes economically dependent on her husband, which makes it all the more important to make sure marriages remain stable.

A modest proposal: As a general rule, our social expectations should point in the direction I will outline, allowing for the fact that there will be exceptions.

Women’s education should focus on preparing them for marriage and motherhood by 18. Women who adopt the mommy track should marry about that age and should regard a career and educational attainment as something for later in their life, once their kids are grown. Women who wish to pursue a career early should not plan on having kids.

Men’s education should focus on preparing them for a career and economic stability by age 25. Before marriage, the man should have no debt, a stable job, and a half-year’s salary to put away in the woman’s name as insurance (against his death, a divorce, etc.).

It should be difficult to get a divorce.

You’ll notice this means the men will still have to wait to marry until they’re 25, which doesn’t solve the problem of the Big Delay after puberty. To solve that, we need a big investment in sexbots.

Porn should be outlawed, but it should be considered socially acceptable for men to use sexbots until they get married. They will have to be programmed to be below average so the men continue to look forward to a real woman.

Obviously I’m not entirely serious about all of this (hence the use of the term “modest proposal”), but I do think it’s a problem that deserves far more attention than it’s getting. Perhaps you can improve on my idea in the comments.

12 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-07-29  ::  Crowhill

Dick Morris says Bill Clinton lied in his speech about Hillary

by Crowhill on 28 July 2016

What a cast of characters we have this time, eh?

Bill Clinton Lied in Democrat National Convention speech, says…

7 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-07-28  ::  Crowhill

Comparing two offensive turds

by Crowhill on 28 July 2016

As most people in the country know, we have two truly awful candidates and we’re stuck with a choice between a “lesser of two evils” vote or just not participating. (I include voting for a third party candidate in that latter category.)

But to dig into one narrow issue a little deeper, I offer these thoughts about the crude language from Trump and Clinton. I’ve been having a discussion about it over on Facebook, so I thought I’d summarize my thoughts here.

Public vs. Private. Trump is crude and rude in public, in front of the camera. Clinton’s alleged outbursts — throwing lamps, cussing out Secret Service people, etc. — are all in relatively private settings, which shows that she can keep her inner jerk in check. Advantage Hillary.

Hate vs. Rudeness. This one is harder to measure, since I can’t peer into their souls, but it seems to me that Trump’s rudeness is a tactic to win and dominate. The Donald goes after anyone who stands in his way. Camile Paglia said that winning is the highest virtue for Trump, and that he’ll do whatever it takes to win. (That in itself is a very ugly quality that deserves discussion, but right now I’m only talking about language.) Trump doesn’t seem to harbor any animosity against the people he criticizes. I can’t say that about Hillary. The stories of her nasty comments to servants and people in uniform seem to indicate a character problem. Advantage Donald.

(I have to mention that one of the reasons Donald doesn’t seem to harbor personal animosity is that he’s only interested in winning and in deals and has few underlying principles. That is not a good thing. Hillary does seem to have some underlying principles, but she seems to change as needed to suit her goals. That is not a good thing. But in this post I’m not talking about that stuff.)

Double Standards. I have to get this one out of the way. Some people believe that we should apply the same standards to men and women. If it’s okay for a man to be crude, it’s okay for a woman to be crude, etc. I categorically reject that assumption with all my being. There are different rules for men and women on many things. However, as Captain Kirk told the Dohlman of Elas, courtesy is for everyone. Trump and Clinton both fail on this point. Trump seems to lack courtesy for one reason and Clinton for another, but they both lack courtesy. Advantage Nobody.

Significance for the Office. We have had rude presidents before. President Jackson was not a nice guy, and President Johnson did some astonishingly rude things. Rudeness is not a disqualification, but it is certainly an issue, since the president has to function as a diplomat. On that score, Advantage Hillary. She seems like the drunk who can pull it together when she needs to. And maybe Trump can as well — in fact, I’m pretty confident he can — but we haven’t seen that, so it’s not fair to give him credit for it.

But I am troubled by the people Clinton is rude to — which is mainly men in uniform. She seems to have a dismissive, nasty, “you’re beneath me” attitude towards law enforcement and the military, and we absolutely cannot have that in a commander in chief. So on that score, Advantage Donald.

5 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-07-28  ::  Crowhill

Mary King’s Plague, and other stories

by Crowhill on 26 July 2016


RootCzar, this one might be for you.

I didn’t expect to like Mary King’s Plague and Other Tales of Woe, by Brian Kaufman. I’m not particularly into zombies or horror or ghost stories, and the cover of this book made me think it was going to be over-the-top gross. It wasn’t — by a long stretch. There are definitely some “adult” themes, so don’t come to this book with delicate sensibilities, but if you can get past that, it’s a very good read.

The first story, Mary King’s Plague, is set in 17th century Scotland. Some monstrous, zombie-creating infestation has taken over the slum where the sheriff’s sweetheart lives. To stop the plague, the city managers wall off the slum, leaving everyone inside to die. A deputy goes in to rescue the sheriff’s girlfriend before it’s too late. Interesting characters, good conflicts and tension keep the story moving.

The Wretched Walls is about a haunted house, but it’s far more than that. It’s about obsession, self deception and the slow descent into madness. And, of course, there’s a lot of mystery about the house and what in the heck is going on. In this story, as in the previous one, you’re left with lots of riddles to unravel on your own. Kaufman doesn’t answer all your questions.

The Honey Gatherer takes us inside restaurant work in the 70s, with a touch of romance, crime and heart break. It was my favorite of the three, possibly because it touched closest to home. (I grew up in the 70s and worked in a couple restaurants.) But as Lemony Snicket warns his readers, don’t expect a happy ending.

I “met” the author through Brian does editing and story review work, and he does a fabulous job. If you ever need that sort of thing, I highly recommend him.

 ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-07-26  ::  Crowhill

The essentials of the manosphere

by Crowhill on 26 July 2016

Last night I was doing several things I love: drinking craft beer at one of my favorite watering holes, throwing darts with a good friend, and talking about interesting stuff. The “manosphere” came up, and I was trying to give a brief summary. I don’t think I did it justice, so this is an attempt to sketch out (or link to) a few of the essentials.

The manosphere encourages men to “take the red pill” — that is, to quit entertaining delusions about women, society and sex roles and to face up to facts. There is a lot of good, plain sense in what they say, but too often (from my perspective) it seems to lead to despair, loneliness or an intellectual justification for a love ’em and leave ’em lifestyle.

Sorry, but I love civilization and the things that keep it going, the chief of which is marriage. So my Eggs are Expensive, Sperm is Cheap — which Chateau Heartiste calls The Fundamental Premise — is an attempt to take the genuine insights of the manosphere and put a more positive, hopeful spin on things. E.g., despite all the craziness in the world, marriage and family can and should be a wonderful, joyous thing. But you have to go into it eyes wide open.

Our society has been so twisted by feminism that you need to read a fair bit to get a full sense of what red pill thinking actually means. It takes a while for it all to sink in. And don’t think for a minute that just because you’re not a feminist that you are free of the soiled intellectual laundry of the modern delusions. I’m often surprised to find them, even when speaking to people who really ought to know better.

There are some key concepts you should know. I don’t have the time to find the best articles on these topics, but here are some links in case you want to delve into this mindset. (The links on this page are to different blogs where you can dig further.)

One of the main points is that society is against men and that modern women are corrupt. Then there is the female imperative and hypergamy, and lots of other useful insights into male and female psychology, which you should read and absorb … provided you don’t take it all too seriously.

Red pill men like to make fun of the phrase not all women are like that. (That post also addresses female solipsism.) If somebody points out that women claim to like nice guys but fall for the jerks, someone will reply, “Okay, but not all women are like that.”

There is an important distinction to make here, and some of the manosphere misses it. It’s this — even if it’s true (I’m not sure how anyone could know this) that all women have the same devious incentives, desires and motivations floating around in their brains, that doesn’t mean they all act on them.

That’s too much like the feminist claim that all men are rapists. Even if I were to believe that all men have some hidden, primitive desire to rape, that does not lead to the conclusion that all men do rape, or even that all men want to rape. We can, to some extent, overcome our nature. That’s what civilization is all about.

But red pill thinking helps you to see a little more clearly what that underlying nature is, and it illuminates a lot of what is going on in the world around you.

2 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-07-26  ::  Crowhill

Check your privilege, Asians

by Crowhill on 26 July 2016

Showing once again that disproportionality does not prove discrimination.

The Chart The Racial Grievance Industry Won’t Talk About

2 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-07-26  ::  Crowhill

Has Google given up on search?

by Crowhill on 25 July 2016

When Google first started, it was about making the best search engine on the planet. I don’t know if they’d already adopted their current mission statement about organizing the world’s information, but they were definitely zeroed in on search.

It doesn’t seem that way any more. All the innovations I’ve seen in Google search have more to do with ads and commerce than with search.

For example, let’s say you’re looking for information about a problem with your car. It would be nice to distinguish between stuff from amateurs and stuff from actual auto mechanics. But Google doesn’t seem to make that sort of distinction.

One possible barrier to this sort of filtering is that while there are some subjects where you can distinguish an expert from an amateur, there are others where you can’t, and it might be tough to justify applying the rules to some things and not others.

 ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-07-25  ::  Crowhill