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

Why do we accept their premises?

by Crowhill on 25 January 2016

“Diversity is our strength,” they say, and I say “says who?” Where is the evidence?

“We need more X in the Y,” they say, and I say, “no we don’t.” There is no evidence that will improve things.

We need more women in the boardroom, they say? Why? Do such companies do better? Actually, no. It’s all based on an unproven assertion that is inconsistent with what we know about human nature.

Someone has to rock the cradle. Someone has to love, care for and discipline the children. Someone has to go to Target, do the laundry, pick up the dry cleaning and take the children to the doctor. Someone has to get the kids where they need to go after school. Someone has to go the grocery store and get food on the table.

There’s no glass ceiling. There’s just children and food.

But … but … why can’t men and women share these tasks equally?

Because neither men nor women want that.

8 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-25  ::  Crowhill

“Otherwise rational people”?

by Crowhill on 25 January 2016

Thomas Sowell is always worth reading, but who are these “otherwise rational people” he’s talking about?

Do emotions Trump facts?

Today’s big puzzle is how so many otherwise rational people have become enamored of Donald Trump, projecting onto him virtues and principles that he clearly does not have, and ignoring gross defects that are all too blatant.


2 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-25  ::  Crowhill

What would the world be like if there had been a genuine “feminism”?

by Crowhill on 25 January 2016

IMO it’s beyond dispute that we never had a “feminist” movement. Putting the best possible face on it (and ignoring some of the uglier elements), what we had was a Henry Higgins movement. “Why can’t a woman be more like a man?”

A genuine “feminist” movement would have promoted femininity. Rather than competing with men, or trying to be like men, it would have looked for those things that women are particularly good at, that are appealing to men, and that help strengthen society. It would have helped women to perfect the art. (Think of the training Bene Gesserit women get, minus the manipulation.)

What would that have looked like?

Rather than rejecting motherhood, it would have embraced and promoted it and taught mothers how to be better at it. Try to imagine some combination of (the best of) Lamaze classes, the La Leche league, basic medical training and child rearing.

Rather than bristling at the idea of helping a man, it would have focused on how to be more effective. (Isn’t it funny that it’s perfectly okay in modern society to instruct men on how to be better husbands and to help their wives in their voyage of self-discovery, but it’s not okay to instruct women on how to be better wives and help their husbands?)

A genuine “feminism” would have helped women to be attractive to their husbands, rather than teaching them to resent the very idea.

Rather than making fun of bravery, strength and courage, women would do their part in cultivating those virtues.

By coincidence, while I was working on a draft of this post Dave sent me a list of questions, inspired by #snOMG.

  • are women as good at shoveling snow as their husbands?
  • in a modern family, who is responsible for shoveling?
  • what percentage of DC area snow shovelers (of their own private homes) are women?
  • do modern men feel less responsibility for “manly” tasks like snow shoveling?
  • do the “new rules,” whatever they are, work better?
  • would it be “fair” for a Dad to rest from childraising / household tasks during snowstorms?
  • will anyone study / investigate / report on this?

It would be easy to add things, like who drives and who pushes when the car is stuck, etc.

The questions are amusing, but they illustrate how stupid our society has become. Men have more upper body strength and are better equipped to shovel snow or push cars. That’s just a fact. Of course there’s nothing wrong with men and women both shoveling (my wife did a lot of the work), but there’s also nothing wrong with women realizing that the men are better at it and spending more of their time helping — like making a sandwich and a pot of coffee, and offering a cheerful thank you. (Men are such chumps, that’s pretty much all they require.)

But modern women are taught that such behavior is degrading.

A genuine feminism would have made the world a far more delightful place — for both men and women. In case you didn’t know, despite (or rather, because of) faux feminism’s relentless efforts, women have become less and less happy over the years.

Related post: Eight reasons I despise feminism.

4 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-25  ::  Crowhill

You can’t cure dumb

by Crowhill on 24 January 2016

There are folks trying to drive out of my neighborhood, which is a disaster. I used up my “Yes you’re stupid but I’ll help anyway” muscles yesterday. Today I’m just going to sit on the couch and drink a beer.

My only concern is that they might run into one of my cars while they’re slip-sliding through the mess.

 ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-24  ::  Crowhill

Fat pride

by Crowhill on 23 January 2016

It’s very sad when people get picked on. I’ve never been that kind of guy myself, and I don’t like it when other people do it. There’s even a level of “friendly ribbing” that crosses a line for me. I don’t like “gotcha” kind of stuff. I’m not perfect or anything, and I’ve picked on people too, but generally speaking that kind of stuff bugs me.

I have a lot of sympathy for people who are fat or awkward or ugly or … whatever. Often I think I can see the pain in their eyes. And I think it’s important to go out of your way to be kind and friendly to people that the rest of the world is unkind to.

But “fat pride” has taken this thing way too far, and Louder with Crowder takes it on in this video.

It’s one thing to come to terms with the fact that you’re not as tall or beautiful or clever or hairy or thin as the world would like. That can be a healthy thing to do (unless all it would take is a little work to fix it, in which case what the heck is wrong with you?). But it’s another thing entirely to turn that around and accuse the rest of the world of being wrong. It’s an incredibly childish thing to do. But that’s the spirit of the age these days.

4 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-23  ::  Crowhill

We are *so* solicitous towards women …

by Crowhill on 22 January 2016

… that we don’t even bother to check facts when there’s a claim that they’ve been abused.

There are claims, for example, that the Internet is particularly dangerous to women. Some have even proposed Draconian controls on Internet speech to counter it. And this isn’t just crackpots. The U.N. has proposed this stuff. (“But you said it wasn’t just crackpots!”)

We all know the Internet is full of jerks with keyboards who can get abusive and say awful things, but is there any evidence that women get more of it than men?

Christina Hoff Summers fact checks that claim here, and the Pew Research Center shows that it’s quite a mixed bag. Another study says male celebrities receive more abuse on Twitter than females. (But … again … it’s a mixed bag. “Journalism is the only category where women received more abuse than men, with female journalists and TV news presenters receiving roughly three times as much abuse as their male counterparts.”)

You’ve probably seen this same phenomenon other places. For example, people intervene when a woman is being attacked, but not a man.

And you know what. That’s how it should be. We are supposed to protect women. That’s what societies do, because eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap.

Unfortunately, we have some troublemakers out there who abuse that natural (and correct) tendency to protect women and use it as a weapon against anyone they disagree with. They want the speech police to protect them when their feelings are hurt, and they want those bad, mean men put in jail where they belong.

Sometimes we forget that the internet isn’t only populated by awful men, but by awful women as well. Look up what some women tried to do to Tim Hunt, or that genius of a rocket scientist who landed a probe on a comet.

The thing is, we should be protective of women and we should treat them well. And yes, that means the dreaded double standard. We should treat women more delicately than we treat men. “Equality” is a dangerous, silly myth.

But at the same time we have to be careful not to be snookered by women of both sexes who use this to take away free speech or destroy men because of hurt feelings.

4 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-22  ::  Crowhill

Bad move by National Review

by Crowhill on 22 January 2016

I like National Review. I follow them on Facebook and I read their articles from time to time. It’s a decent source of conservative opinion.

But they’re not very smart.

They’ve decided to start a campaign to derail Donald Trump’s attempt to get the Republican nomination, and all it’s going to do is show how ineffectual and irrelevant they are.

The people who are flocking to Donald Trump don’t read National Review or care what it says.

This is yet another example of how the soft crowd simply doesn’t understand Donald Trump or why he’s doing so well.

15 comments  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-22  ::  Crowhill

Liberals and the constitution

by Crowhill on 21 January 2016

Sometimes it seems that what’s important to the Democrats is doing the right thing (as they see it). Having the authority to do it is just an annoying detail, and only bothersome troublemakers talk about that stuff.

Liberal Senator Says She Wants To Avoid ‘Constitutional Arguments’ During Hearing On Obama’s Executive Gun Action

Remember when Pelosi was asked where the constitution authorizes Congress to enact the health care law, and she replied, “Are you serious?”

The Constitution isn’t perfect, and there are some ways that I think it should be amended. But the point is that the rule of law has to mean something. The agenda of the moment can’t trump the constitution.

 ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-21  ::  Crowhill

Will a “Draft Biden” campaign start soon?

by Crowhill on 20 January 2016

Hillary is a disaster, and while Bernie is very exciting, I think the establishment types don’t think he has a chance. O’Malley is a big nothing. Biden is the fall-back.

1 comment  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-20  ::  Crowhill

Did public pensions doom Flint, MI?

by Crowhill on 20 January 2016

You’ve heard about the awful situation in Flint, where the city tried to save some money by using a different water supply that turned out to be an absolute disaster. What doesn’t get as much attention is what brought them to this situation in the first place. Why were they so pressed for money?

It might have been generous public pensions.

From what I’ve heard — and I’ve mentioned this before — this is a very serious, looming problem all across the country. States and localities have committed themselves to public pensions that only made sense — if they ever made sense — with a growing population and economy. The liabilities are likely to bankrupt many local governments, and possibly some states.

The legal questions about a state declaring bankruptcy are completely unsettled. It’s new territory.

People are incredibly short-sighted. Programmers didn’t expect to have to deal with YY=00, and politicians didn’t expect to deal with the possibility of an aging population. I fear the fix for the latter will be far more trouble than the fix for the former ever was.

1 comment  ::  Add your comment  ::  2016-01-20  ::  Crowhill

2016-01-15 :: Crowhill // General
Sorry for the down time
2016-01-14 :: Crowhill // General
Those angry Trump supporters