This Changes Everything changed nothing.

This Changes Everything is the most important book ever written. Because it changed nothing.

You need to read the book in order to understand my point. And therein lies the problem: people don’t read anymore. Almost half (48.5%) of Americans haven’t read a single book in the past year. And, surprising to me, the U.S. has the highest average (according to the survey I consulted—see below). And so, people are now, by and large, stupid. (And by ‘stupid’ I mean both unintelligent and uninformed.) (Because if one is intelligent, one tends to become informed.)

One typically needs, at a minimum, a long paragraph in order to make an argument (that is, present a claim with evidence and/or reasoning), let alone also consider objections and present replies. What people read now, typically single sentences on social media, cannot therefore be arguments. Single sentences can be only claims. Without the supporting evidence/reasoning, how does one judge which claims to accept and which to reject? Not with any intelligence, that’s for sure. One can accept or reject only according to what one likes, according to what resonates best with whatever one currently believes (for who knows why).

And most people won’t listen to, or will have trouble following, a whole paragraph presented orally. Consider that even on podcasts and interview/discussion programs, on which intelligent people discuss issues, participants present, typically, only one or two sentences at a time.

What Klein does in her book, her 576-page book, is make an airtight argument for leaving the rest of our oil in the ground; burning more from this point on (well, from that point on—2014) will be catastrophic. Fatal to human life on Earth.

This is no exaggeration because we cannot change the molecular structure of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen (to name perhaps the most important three chemicals), and, so, we cannot change their interactions and the consequences of said interactions. Nor can we change the temperature range at which the human organism can survive (or the need for a certain amount of water and food).

That the book changed nothing proves that most humans are either stupid or selfish. Or both. Stupid in that they don’t know what they’re doing when they continue to use fossil fuels, for example. Selfish in that they do know what they’re doing, but choose (let’s say) personal power, wealth, status, and/or employment over the common good (the survival of the species).

Note that I say most humans are either stupid or selfish. Because many people knew, even back in the 1980s (probably the more accurate time after which we should not have burned more oil): David Suzuki, Guy McPherson, Bill McKibben, and many others. And they did act for the common good. But there has never been a critical mass of those neither stupid nor selfish.

And that’s the problem with democracy: it’s government by the masses. Which are stupid. Or selfish. Or both.

What we needed, back in the 1980s, was a ‘benevolent dictator’—more specifically, a knowledgeable dictator motivated by the common good. We needed someone like Klein or Suzuki or McPherson or McKibben to say ‘This has to stop now’ and to fire or even exile (to the tropics, perhaps) everyone who didn’t agree to ‘make it so’.

Now, it doesn’t matter. Predictions about temperature (to name just one indicator of our impending death) for 2050 are ‘coming true’ now, in 2025. Which is to say we’ve already jumped over the cliff and are ‘just’ on the way down.

There have been relatively slow changes, but unless you know better, they are not considered alarming, and so no action is taken, and there have been abrupt changes, but unless you know better, they are dismissed as anomalies, and so no action is taken.

And so everything will be normal until it’s not.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/average-books-read-per-year-by-country

Share

Hacks (feat. Jean Smart) – highly recommended

If you’re not into it, at least watch episode 8 of season 1.

(on Crave TV)

Share

A brilliant observation by Kierkegaard from 1838

“People hardly ever make use of the freedom which they have, for example, freedom of thought; instead they demand freedom of expression as compensation.” Kierkegaard (1838)

Share

from Fraternity Gang Rape, Peggy Reeves Sanday

“Rape [is] rare in 47 percent of the societies studied and common in 18 percent of them. … In the more rape-prone societies there [is] greater sexual segregation, male social dominance, interpersonal violence, and the subordination of women” p4

“… in the United States, which is in all likelihood one of the most rape-prone societies in the world.” p9

“… the attitudes, language, behavior, and literacy levels of these [i.e., American] fraternity members are identical to those of young, underprivileged criminals” p23

“According to a recent study of adolescents, aged fourteen to eighteen, ‘more than half the boys and nearly half the girls thought that it was okay for a male to force (that is, rape) a female if he was sexually aroused by her'” p54

What? What? Parents, teachers, are you fucking clueless? Or just incompetent?

“… compassion for women implies castration” p63

And they say men are the rational ones.

And re “working a ‘yes’ out” … it’s not that women are so weak-willed; it’s that men have the patriarchy behind them because/so they speak with such authority. So ‘You know you want it’ is as convincing as ‘You need to replace the exhaust system’.

And on that note, ‘You know you want it’ suggests that they think consent is important, while at the same time, using alcohol, drugs, and intimidation suggests that they think consent isn’t important.

Again, they say men are the rational ones.

“Only once in these discussions with fraternity brothers, which spanned a two-year period, did any group of brothers mention love in connection with sex.” p143

Women, take note.

“The responsibility always belongs to the woman, never to the brothers [referring to things like ‘she brought it on herself, by the way she was dressed or acting…’] … Such attitudes display an infantile, concrete perception of responsibility [and I’d add one inconsistent with the view of break and enter and theft and vandalism, none of which become suddenly acceptable if someone leaves their door unlocked] … These men are not reflective; they are primarily reactive …” p145

“The price female students pay for their passive acceptance of the inhumanity of casualization [of sex] is an even greater sense of low self-esteem. … [W]hat women students think of as reckless freedom is in reality acceptance of t… gender inequality …” p218

“… she was surprised at the amount of time girls devoted to ‘primping’ starting at 6pm on a Friday night to leave around 10:30pm for a fraternity party” p204

Seriously? How shallow and superficial do you have to be to spend so much time on your appearance?

“Primping four hours before going to a party is flight from authenticity in the expenditure of capital to sell the self through the body.” p218

Okay, it’s that too.

“Verbal consent is neither prudish nor puritanical. it can be highly erotic.” p233
Yes. Yes.

Share

Dear Canada: Please stop your fires; the smoke is ruining our summer.

https://tiffany.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/tiffany.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/canadian_wildfire_smoke_letter.pdf

Are you fucking kidding me?

“With all the technology that we have at our disposal, both in preventing and fighting wildfires, this
worrisome trend can be reversed if proper action is taken.”

Right. Bet you can reverse global warming too. Go ahead. Try it. Please.

“Our constituents have been limited in their ability to go outside and safely breathe due to the
dangerous air quality the wildfire smoke has created. In our neck of the woods, summer months
are the best time of the year to spend time outdoors recreating, enjoying time with family, and
creating new memories, but this wildfire smoke makes it difficult to do all those things.”

Oh poor babies. That’s not the case here in Canada. Nope. Not at all.

And yeah, never mind the loss of trees, the increase in carbon emissions (and, then, further increase in warming, leading to further fires), and the loss of lives. You can’t recreate outdoors, enjoy time with family, and create new memories. That’s what’s important. Got it.

“Canada has been a friendly neighbor of the United States and the states we represent …” Excuse me? What states do you represent? Are you sure?

“We look forward to your response.”

Okay, here it is: You want fewer forest fires? Reduce your fossil fuel emissions. That’s what’s largely causing global warming, which is increasing the number and severity of forest fires.

So why don’t you go ahead with that and in the meantime, we’ll see if we can change the direction of the wind for you.

Share

“Thinking Being Offloaded to AI Even in Elite Medical Programs”

“I can’t remember the last time I asked a medical student in tutorial group a question that was answered without looking at a screen.”

And this:
“We have a 1M master solution, we need to make a 50 mL of buffer that has that component at 10 mM, how much do we need to add?”
Blank stares, followed by reaching for calculators (and in more recent times phones). I stop them immediately and tell them:
“Do it in your head”.
They can’t. I tell them the answer (500 microliters), then we move to the next component, which also has to be at 10 mM, but the master solution is 5M.
“How much do we need to add”?
Blank stares again. Nobody can figure out to just divide the already arrived at answer for the 1M master solution of 500 by 5, no that is too hard. They start doing the calculation from scratch…
That was the already preexisting condition to which AI is being added now…

The takeaway? Always check your prescription dosage labels yourself.

Share

from The Lost Cause, Cory Doctorow – HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

A compassionate and frightening and optimistic near future that’s right here and almost right now.

There are so many whole paragraphs I wanted to copy … p62, p238, p269

“Things are gonna get so much worse in the years to come. More fires. More floods. More trauma, and that means more of this shit, people lashing out, looking for someone else to blame because they can’t punch their ancestors in the face for failing to act a hundred years ago.” p269

“There’s some stuff we can’t change. The heat we’ve sunk into the ocean? it’s gonna melt the ice caps. No one’s gonna repeal the second law of thermodynamics. Habitat loss is going to keep pushing animals into new territories where they have no predators—and hwere no one has any resistance to the diseases they carry. …” p269

The Blue Helmets are just amazing.

Read it. Just …. read it. Boomers to Zoomer. Read it.

Share

aurora linnea’s review of Laura Lecuona’s “Gender Identity: Lies and Dangers

Excellent and clarifying summary and review of Lecona’s book (and gender and sex and why it’s such an issue …).

“…sex is a biological fact while gender is patriarchal fiction; the gender system is a hierarchy, not a binary; persons taking on a “gender identity” affiliate themselves with sexist stereotypes, not any innate bodily reality; it is wrong to perform medical experiments on children in the service of “congruence” with regressive cultural ideals; males are not female and remain members of the dominant sex class regardless of how they “identify,” continuing to pose the very same very real threats to women and girls as do their more straightforward (or less deluded) brothers.”

“Put bluntly, “gender” makes feminism impossible.” [but read that whole paragraph, para 5, to see how that’s the summary sentence]

“To bring on the return to a clear-eyed view of the status quo, Lecuona advises that we as feminists quit talking about “gender.” Instead, we’d do well to reacquaint ourselves with the reality-based terminology of our foresisters: sex and sexism, sex roles and sex class, sexist stereotypes, sexual equality, male supremacy and female subordination.” Yes. YES!!

Share

Men and Women in the 21st Century

None of these quotes (all from The Unmade Bed by Stephen Marche) are representative of what the book’s about, but they do reveal, perhaps unintentionally, Marche’s subtitle, “The messy truth about men and women in the 21st century”.

“Eventually, David Granger, the editor-in-chief of Esquire, read something I’d written for the Toronto Star and called to ask me if I wanted a column in his magazine.” p42

It’s stuff like that that sends me into a rage. Thinking back to the twenty or thirty queries I sent out, each with five to ten pieces … And I didn’t even get a reply. Except for one, in which I was told that one had to work as a reporter for ten years or so before one is offered a column. (Apparently not.) Marche doesn’t recognize that if the Star piece had been written by Stephanie Marche, Granger would most likely not have contacted him. It’s quite possible Granger wouldn’t even have read the piece. Quite possibly because it would never have appeared in the Star in the first place. The ‘Jane/John’ studies go back decades (what ‘John’ writes it taken more seriously and given higher value than what ‘Jane’ writes, even though they’re identical) and was just recently validated by the Martin and Nicole thing (https://www.elle.com.au/culture/news/male-and-female-email-signature-sexism-experiment-8328/).

“Every fourteen-year-old boy with an Internet connection has seen a woman anally penetrated with a baseball bat.” p110

Seriously? Well, no wonder then. There’s no way women are ever going to be taken seriously, for their abilities and aspirations. Not until pornography is illegal (which is, really, a no-brainer, given hate speech laws). Until then, women, don’t waste your time. (And, men, why aren’t you trying to get it illegalized? Do you not see the damage it’s doing to you as well? Y’all can’t even have pleasurable consensual sex with a real woman anymore.) And, women, I guess it’s fair to say that every time you meet a man, assume something like that is going through his mind. And act accordingly. (And men, don’t you even think of complaining about that.)

“Virtually every feminist scholar and female critic of any kind has to endure outright threats of physical harm.” p152

And y’all wonder why we hate you. Get a clue.

“The typical eleventh grade boy writes at the same level as an eighth grade girl.” p164
How is it then that they become our supervisors?? Ah. Because they can’t see any one of without picturing us giving some dick a blowjob. And it’s because they play by different rules, rules whereby it’s okay to exaggerate, to lie, to cheat, to bribe, to threaten.

Share

from Pretending, Holly Bourne – HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

“You are a fucking disgrace. You have RAPED someone you claim you love and now dare to be upset that she’s upset about it. Why are you all such dicks? What’s wrong with you? WHAT The ACTUAL FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU? …” p222

“This is how it feels when someone doesn’t stop, I say to him. You don’t like it, do you? You don’t like it at all, you pathetic piece of shit.” p246

“YES, I KNOW NOT ALL OF YOU DO IT, BUT ALL OF YOU CAN DO IT. THAT’S The POINT; THAT’S The FUCKING POINT.
The fear is always there. The threat is always there. Because, really, unless you are a fucking championship kick-boxer or something, if you are ever alone with a man, all he has to do is decide to do it and he’ll be able to. …
If only they could have a day of feeling as scared as we do. Please just let them have one day. Of not having the power, of us having it instead. …” p247

“I wasn’t crazy … You made me crazy.” p252

“You don’t see a problem with a man who probably hasn’t ever been violated getting to decide what counts as a violation? … ” p272

“It’s the violation that’s the violence, don’t you see? It’s knowing your boundaries mean bugger-all that’s the trauma—that anyone can touch you, that how you feel about it doesn’t count. That’s the trauma. That’s the violence. …” p272

Share