Ghouling

Urban Dictionary has a definition of “Ghouling”

The act of an individual, mostly persons involved in the media, who exploit a tragedy to further their own gain. In the case of the media, persons often indulge in inappropriate acts to ‘flesh out’ a story.

…which sufficed before Michael Hiltzik at the LA Times said, “Hold my beer!”

Post Hiltzik, we need a new definition. Perhaps: “An exclusively hateful form of trolling exemplified by the publicly expressed desire for, or celebration of, the death of others on a political basis. Thought to originate in the many images and fantasies celebrating the slow, humiliating, and painful demise of Donald Trump. (See Kathy Griffin)

Or we find a new word. The contest is open in the comments section.

(The following link deliberately broken. Can be easily fixed, if you must.)
Given the headline: Mocking anti-vaxxers’ COVID deaths is ghoulish, yes — but may be necessary

It may be not a little ghoulish to celebrate or exult in the deaths of vaccine opponents. And it may be proper to express sympathy and solicitude to those they leave behind.

But mockery is not necessarily the wrong reaction to those who publicly mocked anti-COVID measures and encouraged others to follow suit, before they perished of the disease the dangers of which they belittled.

Nor is it wrong to deny them our sympathy and solicitude, or to make sure it’s known when their deaths are marked that they had stood fast against measures that might have protected themselves and others from the fate they succumbed to.

One wonders why a healthy 46 year old female should be posthumously mocked because she conducted a rational risk analysis. Do you think saying “I told you so,” after that makes her feel stupid? No. Spitting on her grave is click bait posing as Hiltzik’s edgy righteousness.

Another wonder is the LA Times headline writer’s evident islamaophobia and cultural appropriation.

The earliest stories of the ghouls emerge from Arabic legend. The myth of the ghoul predates Islam, but because the ghoul is mentioned in the Koran the creature is still a source of terror in Arabic culture today.

The headline person had better click bait in the original title. The URL originally pointed to something titled “why-shouldnt-we-dance-on-the-graves-of-anti-vaxxers.” This is almost certainly the author’s working title, which tends to belie his weaseling double negatives and “may be propers”. Whatever, it’s a clumsy attempted cover up of somebody’s macabre delight in the death of people who contract a disease they had little reason to fear.

(Next link is broken deliberately, also.)
In other words, The unvaccinated cherish their freedom to harm others. How can we ever forgive them?
Heather Mallick, Toronto Star

Will we ever forgive the deliberately unvaccinated for having helped spread a disease that killed and disabled so many, devastating the economy, leaving many of us jobless and wretched?

Will we ever look on them gently when their casual choices left us unable to hold a loved one as she died? When a young woman with stage 4 colon cancer had her surgery postponed for the third time because hospitals are packed with unvaccinated COVID-19 patients at death’s door? Death has an open-door policy, never more so than now.

And will your children forgive you?…

Can a little girl tell people that her unvaccinated dad died of COVID-19?

For each unvaccinated American death, Kuper says, about nine people lose a grandparent, parent, sibling, spouse or child. But a child’s suffering is greatest. Children come first with all of us. Don’t they?

I’m sure you can think of several objections to Ms. Mallick’s treacly whining. I’ll give you some.

1- Economic devastation can be laid primarily on the ongoing authoritarian incompetence of politicians and bureaucrats.

2- That little girl can simply say, “My Dad died from the CCP virus.” And, if asked whether her Dad was vaccinated she should be diligently coached to respond, “None of your f*cking business, ghoul!”

3- For each American death from any cause (including vaccination) about nine people lose a grandparent, parent, sibling, spouse or child. (I’m taking her word for the number.)

4- Where’s the question about forgiving the people who kicked off vaccination hesitancy, and are presently holding up momo-clonal antibody distribution – Joe and Kamala? Or about those who stuffed elder care facilities full of active cases – Mario and Gretchen?

Record Maintenance

There’s no reason for this post except my surprise that lawfare guru, enemy of free speech, drug kingpin, murder suspect, and convicted terrorist bomber Brett Kimberlin is still skulking around outside of a prison and clogging up our already sclerotic legal system.

He gave us a preview of Antifa in 1978. But even more arrogant and less principled.

TOC noted this sleazebag 3 times in 2012. It’s nice to see psychopathic fools getting what they deserve. Over and over. We can celebrate his defeats.

Brett Kimberlin (Speedway Bomber) Loses Attempt to Vacate Long-Past Convictions, Including First Amendment Challenge to Impersonating-Federal-Official Conviction

I think today he’d skate on the “federal officer impersonation.” The FBI is now arguably worse.

Just in case…

…conversation around the Christmas dinner table peters out, here’s something to get it going again.

-Mark J. Perry, Venn Master. Carpe Diem

If that isn’t enough to generate polite dialog (for example, if any of your fellow diners don’t immediately grasp why situational enforcement of mutually exclusive authoritarian diktat is intellectually bankrupt and morally deplorable), just propose a debate with the proposition: Venn diagrams show math is racist.

Still no chit-chat? Point out that while they need not be binary, a majority of Venn diagrams are. So aren’t they also transphobic?

As I think about it there are problems with a Venn diagram displaying however many genders may be momentarily asserted. I’ve never seen a Venn diagram with nearly a hundred circles.

I have no idea what the label in the intersection should be. I can think of nothing charitable.
————-
I notice I used the word “fellow”. Haven’t seen that attacked yet, but it’s obvious why it will be. Or has been, outside my notice.

Substitute “comrade”.

I also apologize in advance for “peters”, “diktat”, “Master”, “debate” (two sides), And I’m abjectly sorry for using the word “think”.

Oceanic problems

Oceania, of course, was Winston Smith’s home country in George Orwell’s 1984. Problems in Oceania aren’t expressible in Newspeak.

Newspeak isn’t just a set of buzzwords, but the deliberate replacement of one set of words in the language with another. Or their removal entirely. The transition is still in progress in Orwell’s novel, but is expected to be completed “by about the year 2050.”

The Canadian Broadcarping Castration is advancing the schedule. Think NPR/PBS, but more to the left. CBC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Canada’s far left government. They are proposing a new political philosophy. It’s early days in the development of this theory, and it is as yet unnamed. I have a suggestion later.

So far, we have only this to go on:
Eighteen ‘Offensive’ Words You Can’t Say in Canada This is the list:

“Ghetto; sell someone down the river; blackmail; brainstorm; savage; gypped; pow wow; tribe; spooky; black sheep; blind spot; blindsided; first world problem; spirit animal; tone deaf; lame; grandfathered in; crippled.”

You might wonder why they would bother with such a feeble effort. There are surely many more worthy words which the crippled minds of the lame SJW tribes might brainstorm, in their virtual pow pows, to create offenses with which to blackmail the rest of us: Black sheep (our spirit animal) all.

You can see where some of their angst comes from, but “first world problem?”

The term ‘first world problem’ began as meaning a trivial problem experienced by people in affluent societies. CBC’s list is an example of a first world problem. Progressives have come not to like ‘first world problem’ because it mocks stupid ideas like subjecting a list of 18 words to Newspeak.

A first world problem is running out of characters on Twitter. Or somebody else using all the hot water. But, these get uncomfortably close to having your pussy hat laughed at. Then, who knows? You go bonkers over a sign supporting the police on somebody’s lawn. From there, we might have people who hear the wrong pronoun, or get punished for committing a hate crime hoax. Jussie Smollett would not have been lionized by Vladimir Putin, but he was by Joe Biden.

Just around the first-world-problem corner from that, is some ‘Nazi’ claiming you shouldn’t live your life as if speech is violence.

Of course, CBC’s innuendo is that speech is violence. Or ought to be if you say the wrong word.

In the interests of fairly presenting the case for removing the phrase from our language, here’s an unintentionally hilarious article at Medium:
Seriously, Stop Saying “First World Problems”

[B]eing poor doesn’t mean you don’t experience similar inconveniences…

Right. Someone has ALWAYS used all the hot water. Because there never is any. Then it isn’t an inconvenience. It’s just life.

The term first world problem entered public consciousness back around 2005 as a way to shame trivial complaints. Shortly after catching on as a meme, it morphed into a way to justify those grievances by at least acknowledging some people, somewhere might see it as silly. I acknowledged it, now please sympathize with me with a like or a retweet…

We are so clueless to the real world that we imagine one where there [sic] only troubles in another country must be exhaustive in scale. Beyond the reach of our imagination to picture a day in the life…

It is past time to retire first world problems. Now is an age when we need to be highlighting our connections, our humanity. Let’s leave behind our instinct to create fake divisions.

Not getting likes and retweets, of course, is a first world problem. It doesn’t mean nobody in non-first world countries ever has that problem. When you say it without irony, as demonstrated by the last two paragraphs in that quote, it means you’re a narcissistic, virtue beaconing idiot. Or a TV network full of them.

It means you have no perspective about the problems you DO NOT have. That you are a fatuous ingrate. That what is beyond your imagination is the idea that saying ‘first world problem,’ for most if us, is simple embarrassment that we have adults who need coloring books in their safe spaces.

The idea that ‘first world problems’ is yet another example of colonialist racism is merely another way to condemn your own nation and culture. The author can’t see that running out of characters on Twitter for someone without access to clean water is STILL a first world problem. His plea to stop using the term is just a way of one-upmanship in the piety sweepstakes. Which is a first world problem.

On the more serious side, we are overflowing with hate crime hoaxes. That is also a first world problem. Doesn’t happen in Iran or China. Oh, there are hate crimes – committed by the governments – but they aren’t hoaxes.

We argue about whether 7 year old children should be encouraged, by our educators, without parental consultation, to be treated with potent hormones and undergo sterilizing surgery in order to advance the cause of a handful of anti-science activists. That’s a first world problem which would appall the Taliban.

We agonize about psychological damage to young girls from Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. In North Korea watching K-Pop on TikTok gets you a public execution.

Given that CBC’s control over the population is not what we could call absolute, erasing each of these words would end up requiring some word or phrase to take their place. Some euphemism will be cycled in. Then, the screams from those acting as though they’ve been flayed and then forced to wear hair shirts will repeat. Because someone says whatever has come to mean ‘tone deaf.’

How long will it be before ‘inspiration’ is verboten because it’s a synonym for brainstorm? Is ‘problem solving’ long for this world after that? It might be fun to go through CBC’s list and see what the replacements could be, but it probably wouldn’t turn out to be humorous enough to justify the time, though Middle School Trauma Syndrome occurred to me as a first world problems replacement.

Since CBC’s political theorizing appears to be a fusion of kakistocrism and authoritarianism, we should name it malapropism.

A state practicing kakistocrism is a kakistocracy. A state practicing authoritarianism is an autocracy. A state practicing malapropism is a malarky.

Further reading:
THE PRINCIPLES OF NEWSPEAK
-George Orwell, Appendix to 1984

Dominatricks

I remain mystified. How has NCAA women’s basketball avoided a tsunami of Males Pretending to be Females? That’s MPtbF, for short.

NCAA is an organization that moves tournaments and championship games out of states daring to impede the destruction of women’s sports by trans ‘women’. They are fully committed to this phantasmic policy. They have abandoned any defense against MPtbF who want to play basketball against females in NCAA sanctioned contests.

When will MPtbF start seeking some of the billion dollars in NCAA women’s basketball scholarships?

My puzzlement was not reduced by discovering that the first MPtbF to play women’s basketball in the NCAA won’t be the first, by a longshot, to play at a college. Mission College, Santa Clara, CA had a male playing for their women’s basketball team nearly a decade ago. Under the aegis of the California Community College Athletic Association.

He was 50, so his implied lack of speed and/or stamina could have accounted for his less than stellar first season.

In that 2012-2013 season he wasn’t very good. In 18 games Gabrielle Ludwig never started and averaged 5.9 points, 4.4 rebounds, and just under 11 minutes playing time. He got a lot better in his second season: In 26 games Ludwig started in 23 and averaged 18 points, 20 rebounds, and 28.5 minutes playing time. AndIn the 2013-2014 season Gabrielle was voted First Team All-Conference player…

In the 2013-2014 season not only did some female fail to make the team, another sat on the bench. To indulge Gabrielle Ludwig.

Here’s Ludwig compared to ‘her’ ‘peers’:

That physical difference above is not distorted by the perspective:

Alas, the time when you could get away with the sneer quotes around ‘woman’ is past:
50-year-old transsexual ‘woman’ makes college basketball debut

Central Valley Conference, Commissioner Logan McKechnie said, while Luwdig is tall, his state certification as a female is all that matters. “I don’t think, frankly, fairness enters into it,” he said.

Another commissioner, Dale Murray of the Coast Conference, believes Ludwig is evenly matched with his competitors and “just happens to be a bit taller than everyone else.”

Others question whether a player with Ludwig’s attributes belong in an all-female sport.

One of the people Ludwig faced off against in a recent game described his style as “real physical.”

Ya think? He’d be pretty physical just standing there if you were 5’5″ and 115 pounds.

He was 6’8″ and 220 pounds. A foot taller, and twice the weight of most of his opponents. If it was a typical 18 year old of any sex against a typical 12 year old of any sex, they’d call an administrators meeting to decry bullying and hire another diversity officer.

Fairness, indeed, isn’t a word you could employ. Nor ’embarrassment.’ Nor ‘shame.’ Narcissism? Sure.

There’s a sympathetic USA Today story that indicates Ludwig wanted to play because he loved competitive basketball. I don’t know about you but my definition of competitive includes a large dose of ‘fair’.

Playing against women, in front of spectators, was at least as important to him as a love of the game. He could have played in a pickup league.

I don’t care about Ludwig’s perception of his body, it’s his business. I do care that he, and the state of California, felt he had a right to play basketball against shorter, smaller, weaker opponents – by taking the place of another. He is not a woman physiologically, so his mental state was what was made to matter for his opponents, teammates, and CA taxpayers.

Check out Save Women’s Sports for the physiology point. No amount of testosterone deprivation or surgery could make Ludwig a woman.

hOOPS!

I don’t want to give anybody ideas here, but I am sorely puzzled by NCAA women’s basketball.

Last Sunday I surfed TV looking for a summary/highlights of the Michigan Wolverines pasting of the Iowa Hawkeyes in the ‘B1G’ men’s football (that sex qualifier may seem redundant, but I await the demand for a women’s football program under Title IX) conference championship game.

I settled on the Big Fourteen Ten network as a likely intelligence source on the assumption they’d be less likely, immediately post-football championship, to be screening reruns of women’s field hockey or some tour of the conference’s campus restaurants.

I was disappointed to find myself watching Michigan State vs Iowa women’s basketball. It was late in the game so I hung around to see if the men’s football news would appear when it was over.

I don’t know if women’s collegiate basketball is just Title IX messing with me, but “throws like a girl” has to take an insult back seat to “shoots like a girl.” I know women who are pretty good softball players, they could play on men’s teams without embarrassment.

None of the women playing basketball for Michigan State or Iowa could spell ‘jockstrap.’ This paucity of talent seemed unlikely to be concentrated in these two presumedly elite teams, so I went straight to the most elite women’s basketball source. Was WNBA talent any better? This video (5 min), admittedly cherry-picked WNBA lowlights, suggests not so much. But it was like watching MSU/IU.

I was led down a rabbit hole of research, since I haven’t watched a pro basketball game featuring either sex in twenty years.

There are ~144 WNBA players (~450 in the NBA), and the top 10% or so of WNBA players are conceivably good enough for limited play in the NBA. This small number explains the collegiate women’s basketball ineptitude. Females, on average, just aren’t very good at basketball. I sympathize. Neither am I.

For example of a player, here’s Elena Delle Donne, a 6’5″, 187 pound power forward and perennial WNBA star. An NBA equivalent might be Kevin Durant (6′ 10″ 240 lbs).

Comparing the NBA and WNBA is not apples to oranges, these are both apples. However, it’s like a Granny Smith vs. a Golden Delicious. The NBA, for example, has a smaller ball to hoop ratio, shorter shot clock, longer 3-point range, a longer game time, longer season, and longer play-offs. I digress. Back to the actual point of this post.

We know why males pretending to be females are not playing women’s football.

But, I asked myself, why aren’t MPtbF playing women’s basketball? The impact would be huge. I can’t figure out why there is no trans assault on NCAA women’s basketball.

Third rate males could change, read ‘destroy overnight’, female basketball. Where are they? MPtbF are ruining track and field, weight lifting, rugby, Mixed Martial Arts, and swimming for female athletes. Why aren’t they eliminating females from women’s basketball competition?

Can it be that women’s basketball is protected somehow by our Universities?

Well, not because it’s a cash cow. NCAA men’s 2019 basketball revenuewas $933,000,000 vs. women’s $266,000. Women’s revenue does not rise to the level of a rounding error. Still, scholarships for each are a billion dollars. There is an approximate total of 4300 scholarships offered in Division I Basketball for Men. There are 5025 scholarships available across women’s Division I basketball. There’s money on the table for MPtbF.

Maybe because basketball is popular enough to have a higher embarrassment profile? Watching men play basketball against women on national television would create much more negative publicity than swim meets of which very few are even aware.

But why would that stop them, and how would they get away with stopping it?

Can there be some aspect of the sport so repellant to MPtbF as to prevent even one from suing over their exclusion?

Anybody have a suggestion? I got nothin’.

Kwanzaa

This is a public service update.

The first Umoja (Unity) candle was lit by Kwanzaa’s inventor in a lightly attended celebration (family and close comrades) on December 26, 1966.

This time of year there’s always an uptick in searches for information about Kwanzaa. I know this simply from observing the search engine hits on this TOC post: Nguzo Saba The 7 Principles of Blackness

Noting a few of those hits today, I reread that 2008 post. I wasn’t surprised that links have rotted. Most notably the Lansing State Journal article which prompted it, and a reference to The Dartmouth Review. The relevant portions of the LSJ piece are quoted in my post, but the Dartmouth article was the source of much of the Kwanzaa founder’s (Ron Karenga) biographical content.

My Nguzo Saba post hasn’t attracted a comment in a long while, but there are some interesting ones from earlier times should you wish to read it. One of those comments:

So, what the commentor [sic] above me is implying is that, we, as a community or race, need to rely on the white community to survive? You are suggesting that the white community is superior, that they “feed” us, and in todays society that is just wrong, no matter who you are. Nobody is above another just because of the circumstances of their birth.

How times have changed. That commenter had the concept right. But, now it’s a few very vocal, white, snake oil barkers convincing a few black people that unless ‘Black’ is capitalized (and white is NOT) everyone should riot, loot, burn.

And, it should be noted, Ron Karenga thought some people were more admirable than others because of the circumstances of their birth.

IAC there still seems to be Kwanzaa interest, so for latter day internet searchers I unearthed an archive of the Dartmouth article. You should read the whole thing. It’s not long.

I saw a number of things in it that register differently now than they did in 2008. The atavistic tribalism that is BLM has its ‘Roots’ here, and you’ll see predicates for CRT and racialist apologists such as Ibram X. Kendi and Robin D’Angelo.

The 7 Principles, Nguzo Saba, of Ron Karenga’s contrivance are noted in my earlier post. But there are 7 other principles listed in his book The Quotable Karenga. “The sevenfold path of blackness is think black, talk black, act black, create black, buy black, vote black, and live black.”

OK. But define “black.” Right now it’s being done mostly by white people.

That was the challenge to Kendi and, especially, D’Angelo. How can we make more money off this and achieve more privilege than Karenga did?

IAC, here are 2 snippets from that Dartmouth piece:

Initially, Kwanzaa proceeded from Karenga’s hostility toward Western religion, which, he wrote in his 1980 book, Kawaida Theory, “denies and diminishes human worth, capacity, potential and achievement. In Christian and Jewish mythology, humans are born in sin, cursed with mythical ancestors who’ve sinned and brought the wrath of an angry God on every generation’s head.” He similarly opposed belief in God and other “spooks who threaten us if we don’t worship them and demand we turn over our destiny and daily lives.”

In Critical Race Theology, white “humans are born in sin, cursed with mythical ancestors who’ve sinned and brought the wrath of an angry God on every generation’s head.” You might object that the slave owning ancestors are not mythical. Well, for the vast majority of non-black people and at least a large plurality of black people, they are entirely mythical. And those “spooks?” They’re white Progressives.

James Coleman, a former Black Panther, argues, “By only stressing the unity of black people, Kwanzaa separates black people from the rest of Americans. Americans must unify on whatever principles ensure we live in a safe, prosperous, God-loving country, with the race and ethnicity of any American seeking to abide by those principles being of no consequence.”

Yeah. That’s a passé MLK thingy. On his journey to anathema (statue destruction) MLK is now solidly in the objectionable phase. Because to say “All Lives Matter” is racist.

Will Karenga’s fanciful 1960s inventiveness see a revival among the newly faithful? In 2008 it was seen to be in decline.

Does anyone remember that back in the early 1990s, AT&T ran television ads suggesting that blacks call their families during Kwanzaa using their telephone service? That stores stocked Kwanzaa candles and kente clothes? That student unions were festooned with Marcus Garvey’s pan-African flag? In 1995, a local activist triumphantly told The Boston Globe, “We’re at the point now where Kwanzaa has gotten so big that we feel like Santa Claus is really on the way out.”

That short 2008 post from Reason is also worth a read. How has the “culture war is over” prediciton turned out?

I guess we’ll be able to tell based on the number of Kwanzaa candles sold. If anyone can tell.

A Kranzaa resurgence would be a mixed blessing for the black isolationists. By numbers most of the Kwanzaa forelock tuggers to this intensely African theme park are Progressive white women, or Jamaican/East Indian politicians.