Category: social issues

Bears and Trump

I’ve seen some ads for Trump and I thought a couple of them might be effective. No, I did not think to save them.

But here is the gist: they admit that Trump is flawed and they admit that some conservatives might not be able to stand him. But they get right to the point: “LIBERALS WILL DESTROY OUR COUNTRY” and tout judges, business deregulation and rampant wokeness and breakdown of traditional norms (the bad way..they mean)

They more or less concede that Trump is a horrible human being but he is what they have.

This election is a toss up; uncomfortably close.

And what does the other side offer: leftist students occupying college campuses, blocking roadways in some locations and…Bears?

About the bear thing:

“

A question floating around social media asks: Picture yourself alone and unarmed in the woods. Would you rather encounter a bear or a man? Nearly all women (and I truly have not been able to find one woman who disagrees, but let’s just say nearly all) choose the bear.

Wait, I need more. What’s the background here?

It’s unclear where exactly this debate originated, though some are crediting the viral TikTok news account Screenshot HQ, which posted a video of two hosts debating the topic last week. However, they seem to reference a conversation already in progress, so the first to posit this question is still a mystery.

“

Now of course, none of this is scientific and many of the women I know in my life find this ridiculous. And, of course, it is. True: men have raped and assaulted women, but, only a tiny percentage of men have. Nearly all bears would prove lethal.

But that isn’t really the point. What I think is going on: feminists like to conflate all ills done to women by men, from sexual harassment at the workplace to stranger rape. And they appear to argue that if men would only live by the script that feminists give them, the evil patriarchy would no longer exist and all of those ills would be gone.

Many men counter with the fact that stranger rape is done by sociopaths and they are hardly representative and they are NOT the fault of “all men” or even “most men.”

My opinion: yes, some things like sexual harassment or “hostile work environment” can be improved by a combination of training and peer pressure. There is research that appears to show that training can help reduce certain kinds of rape (sex with a woman too drunk to consent ..yes, I know..double standard but that’s unavoidable given the nature of human copulation )

But I doubt that the other kinds of rape and sexual assault can be improved. You can report him to the police and you can ostracize him. But you can’t do much more than that, realistically.

But when it comes to being angry that she chooses the bear, why?

Now in terms of politics: the D’s are over a barrel. Thank goodness the student protesters don’t like Biden. But you have the feminists (fired up about abortion but anti-male), racial and religious minorities, labor, etc…all with separate but conflicting agendas..everyone feeling as if they are taken for granted and each wanting to take their ball and go home.

Neo-toddlerism

This observation struck me as interesting:

And this is part of it; You can act up to your heart’s content! You are merely expressing yourself! And how DARE you be subject to consequences!

This is one of the January 6’th rioters…hey, can’t you just storm the Capitol if you want to?

And we are seeing this in some of the current protests.

These wankers are not drawing attention to their cause; they are drawing attention to THEMSELVES, just like a toddler. Here: Humphreys talks about voting, but mentions protests.

Another aspect of toddler-ism, at least in my opinion, is the idea that other people are merely props for one’s existence and entertainment.

Here some idiotic prankster (someone who hassles others just for laughs) gets shot..and the shooter was let go! My feeling is that people are just sick of these idiots.

And lately, at least in gym communities, there has been pushback against those who film in gyms…and expect everyone else to clear out for them.

I don’t know if such incidents of self absorption are more frequent nowdays (due to the “influencer culture”) or that we just hear more about them.

Oh yes, I film myself while working out, but mostly that is to check myself for form errors or to see if I am damaging my back further. I have very poor body awareness. I doubt that my sorry performances awe anyone.

Human variation: COVID and acting one’s age (“you’re too old for that”)

Covid: it is hard to discuss this at times, because there is such a great variance in experiences.

Here is my experience with my age peers.

2 of my good friends got it, but only found out they had it via a test. It wasn’t even a cold for them.

2 of my other friends got it and ended up hospitalized; one of them had their oxygen levels drop into the 80’s. He was hospitalized for a month and almost died. He has recovered since. Mind you, he was an accomplished ultramarathon runner.

The other also was hospitalized and, 3 years later, has not recovered. She went from being an ultra marathon runner to barely being able to walk.

I knew of someone else who ended up wheelchair bound and lost a limb!

Me: sick for 2 weeks (worse than any flu I had) and it took me another month to get up to speed, physically. But I did recover at home.

My point: people’s experiences are all over the map, so it is hard to generalize.

Age: So, are you really “too old for that?”

It depends. Most of us have chronic conditions of some sort. My right knee now precludes my trying to run; the last time I tried I could feel the pounding on the top of my shin bone. My back precludes squatting and going for max deadlifts, and it makes open water swimming all but impossible (the “sighting” motion where one lifts their head to look puts the back into extension).

But others do not have this set of difficulties, and still others have the body awareness to know how NOT to put their respective condition into a painful position.

So, the answer to the question is “it depends.”

I do know that my days of jogging to the pool, swimming, lifting, jogging home and then going to work are pretty much over. I have to be selective and I have an “energy” and a “back” budget.

Thoughts about this and that…

Middle East: I am so glad that I don’t live there. It is indeed tough. And there ARE no “totally good guys/totally bad guys”. Barack Obama weighs in in an article in the New York Times:

“

Yet he urged his former aides to “take in the whole truth,” seemingly attempting to strike a balance between the killings on both sides.

“What Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it,” Mr. Obama said. “And what is also true is that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable.”

He continued: “And what is also true is that there is a history of the Jewish people that may be dismissed unless your grandparents or your great-grandparents, or your uncle or your aunt tell you stories about the madness of antisemitism. And what is true is that there are people right now who are dying, who have nothing to do with what Hamas did.”

Still, Mr. Obama appeared to acknowledge the limits of his musings about bridging divides and embracing complexity.

“Even what I just said, which sounds very persuasive, still doesn’t answer the fact of, all right, how do we prevent kids from being killed today?” he said. “But the problem is that if you are dug in on that, well, the other side is dug in remembering the videos that Hamas took or what they did on the 7th, and they’re dug in, too, which means we will not stop those kids from dying.””

And yes, the US tends to get the Israeli point of view. But, well, no one’s hands are clean, from the very start:

Terrible stuff, all around.

Life: I honestly think there is a GREAT deal of truth here:

To see what society actually values: look at online “cat-fishing” attempts. The female bots are usually attractive women with bikini photos; the male bots are “surgeons”, “generals”, CEOs, etc.

No one attempts to catfish women by saying “hey, I am on Social Security and I have 50K in my retirement account and a 900 square foot house.” This is a theme similar to the one stated here.

I saw this meme:

Well, guess what: it won’t be. This is my guess as to why: love is hard, it is draining and it is expensive. The person/people you love will have needs, they will have short comings, and they might engage in self destructive behavior. At times, your life would be easier without them.

Hate, on the other hand, is cheap. It makes no demands of you but it gives you the “sugar high” of feeling superior. You don’t have to actively try to hurt the person/group; you can merely “tut-tut” at their failures and compare the best in you (or your “tribe”) to the worst in theirs. And it can be intoxicating.

Why does someone as dreadful as Trump have a chance?

Going to politics: I saw an Instagram discussion of a scene in which a very angry woman is not allowed to leave a store with her grocery cart full of groceries. She is yelling at the store staff.

The caption says that she tried “to leave without paying” but I saw no proof of that. What actually happened could have been a lot of things: maybe her card (credit, debit or Link) was declined. Maybe it was a cashless store? Maybe she tried to pay with a check? It could have been a number of things, and I have no desire to label her a “thief” without evidence.

But what I am choosing to focus on was the conversation, which centered around her trying to steal the food: on one side was “stealing is wrong” but on the other “but she NEEDED it..”

And yes, I have some who are on my social media lists who ask people to look the other way when some steal. Still others would respond “what about unethical corporate practice X”, etc.

Too many liberals can’t bring themselves to say “stealing is wrong.” (or honestly don’t believe it) and expect others to willingly bail others out for their repeated bad decisions.

Conservatives are more likely to say “it is wrong”; to assign at least some agency to people.

Of course, Trump is the very opposite of ethical, but I suppose he calls such people “losers” …and well, their folk hero is “above the law”; kind of like a Robin Hood that robs from the woke and gives to the average (ok, he doesn’t but…)

Cruelty vs Ignorance

From here. Yes, I believe in enforcing ordinances for the public good, such as no stopping, regulation of markets, etc. And I would be irritated if people just set up shop on walkways, especially next to busy roads.

But there is cruelty too: destroying someone’s property; and the individual in question has been charged.

Convincing others That which makes your “tribe” cheer may well not convince anyone outside of your own tribe. I doubt that this would flip anyone to the pro-choice side.

Workout notes I felt a bit tired; still dealing with a sore throat (which appears to be getting better, slowly. No cough drops today; no cough in a while.

So, I did a 7 mile walk; 2 Cornstalk loops for about 5.5 then added 1.5 around campus and Rebecca just a bit. Pace was 14:28 though the final 2 miles were sub 14. Weight after the cool weather walk was 187.5. All is well, save the throat.

not fitting in

I vote Democratic, but, in some ways, I don’t fit in with many Democratic voters.

Reason: I grew up playing team sports and then spent a stint in the Navy; my father was career Air Force.

And in such circles, you were part of a team, and you were EXPECTED to do your part. Otherwise, you were a liability.

But, well, I have social media friends who state that they are OWED sustenance by society for merely existing. Some really resent that they have to work for a living. (yes, we all complain about our jobs, etc)

Some pine for a socialist society but seem to not know any socialist countries that appeal to them (yes, the Scandinavian countries are capitalist ..they just have a robust safety net).

I think that my attitude affects my political views as well. No, I am not a Republican: I believe that the most effective economic stimulus comes at the bottom of the economy, not at the top.

But…when it comes to certain issues, well, it seems that the activists seem to play the “feel sorry for me” or “I am entitled to X” card..and it fails to persuade.

I believe that humans are transactional, and if you want society to either give something up OR to make some sort of effort to change, you have to convince others that THEY will be better off with said change.

Workout notes: PT, upper body, walk.

Upper body: 10 crunch pull ups, 10 singles, set of 10, 2 sets of 5 chins, 5 pause singles, 5 chin singles with slight pause.

Swiss bar bench: 5 x 134, 3 sets of 5 x 145, 3 x 150

high incline: 10 x 75, 10 x 85, 9 x 96 and 1 pin press of a failed rep.

10 sets of 10 push ups while doing monster walks

Then the walk: round the neighborhood.

Trying to win trust

Suppose you are discussing an issue of the day with a friend, and they send you…a Newsmax or Fox News link to support their position.

How seriously do you take their source?

Even if you trust the source not to lie, do you trust the source to give an accurate, fair view? (omit crucial details)

Now reverse that.

Or…even if the article is reasonably complete and accurate… consider this:

“the New York Times headline “Nebraska Teen Who Used Pills to End Pregnancy Gets 90 Days in Jail””

Yes, she did use pills to end pregnancy (in the 3’rd trimester) and she was prosecuted BEFORE the new 12 week restriction…BUT….as the article itself eventually states:

“Prosecutors did not charge Celeste Burgess under Nebraska’s abortion law. She pleaded guilty in May to removing or concealing human skeletal remains, a felony. Prosecutors agreed to drop two misdemeanor charges against her: concealing a death and false reporting.”

And that is the issue. It is difficult to trust the media to even make a good faith attempt to get it right; after all, outrage is what drives clicks.

And..that is one reason I am in favor of academic departments (at a university) keeping their mission statements about their subjects.

I want students to trust what we are teaching. Yes, I teach math, and I want students to understand that my mission is to teach them math, AS IT IS.

I feel as is academia often shoots itself in the foot with the creeping of “social justice” stuff into the disciplines. YES, we should have codes of conduct and THAT is the place for social justice stuff. One can talk about affirmative action, but the current debate is mostly about the elite universities.

Social media

I think this is a great take on the social media wars, especially with the new site “Threads” and “Twitter.” Threads disappoints me; at first I was excited about it. But, well, as the article states, there has to be at least a little bit of tension to be interesting.

Now, I have changed; even on Twitter I just scroll past posts/tweets that I find silly. Most are of the “we, as a society, MUST do X and I am NOT ASKING…”, sort of the Angela Davis “I will change what I cannot accept”, as if they have the power to change things.

It seems to me that some think: “I REALLY want this, and I’ve made the moral and logical case for it” and that is enough. It isn’t even close.

And so..Twitter allows for me to silently laugh at such nonsense.

And to think of some of the stuff I’ve read: the country appears to be turning against affirmative action (and DEI programs) and yet some think that there will be “reparations”, at least on a natinal scale.
Reproductive freedom is under attack in many states, and yet some think they can DEMAND that the ERA amendment be added to the constitution (38 states have signed on at one time or another, but some have rescinded the support and the time given in the bill has expired; a new bill needs 2/3 majority in each chamber and 38 states….good luck with that).


Before..

Workout notes at the end.

Academia: it is comical when the well meaning come up with solutions to a problem. Two professors: one at Cal-Irvine and one at Stanford note that affirmative action only benefited a few would be students at elite universities. They then said that what we really need to do is to make the universities where minority students actually go…better.

Now I am with them about the funding part, but…I’ve got news for anyone that thinks that raising academic standards at non-elite universities will be well received….

Getting angry at unimportant stuff:

I know that normal people take exaggeration in stride. But personally, I get irritated when someone boasts about doing something that they have not done or are not capable of doing. Example: someone says they walk 5 miles an hour (LOL) or unathletic older people claiming to walk, say, at the pace that I sometimes walk. Or..someone claiming that they lifted an outrageous amount of weight. In one case, I restrict-listed a very average person for claiming that they deadlifted 700 lbs..which is above the world record for this person’s weight class at the time.

It is a sort of a stolen-valor sort of thing. And yes, I am including politicians.

Workout notes it was warm; 87 F, 59 percent humidity. I wanted to go 4 miles but ended up with just over 5 due to construction and a water main break.

Mile 1 was a bit lazy but I was able to pick it up some, and no ache? I ache a bit less when it is warm. Weird.

But then the weights were challenging. I was tired.

Pull ups: sets of 10 singles, pull, chin, pull, chin, then 5 pull ups, 5 chins.

I sometimes get snarky comments; evidently some think that I think this is outstanding. It isn’t, and I AM declining with age.

then downstairs: 10 x 134, then 3 sets of 5 x 145 (went ok)

shrugs: 3 sets of 10. Curls: 3 sets of 10: drag, dumbbell, regular (15 drag)

high incline: 2 sets of 10 x 94 “mostly” touching the chest, then 2/2 of 105 (done by this point)

Supreme Court and Politics

The US Supreme Court issued some interesting rulings.

First, they limited the ability of state legislatures to overturn, say, a Presidential vote, though they did leave state legislatures with plenty of power to conduct said votes. So, I breathed a sigh of relief.

Then came the big three rulings.

Affirmative action: they ruled that North Carolina and Harvard could not use race as a factor in college admissions. In terms of the educational impact: well, some of the potential work-arounds might also face court scrutiny. Reactions to the ruling were mixed.

I think it is important to keep in mind that this really only affects a statistical handful of schools (Ivy league, Stanford, MIT, Chicago, flagship public universities). And the public seems to support the ruling.

If I were a Democrat politician running a national race, I might back off of this issue.

Gay rights: this one was weird. This ruling came from a hypothetical situation: would a maker of websites be compelled to make a website for a gay marriage if they were to make marriage websites? This was in Colorado, where they have sexual orientation as a protected characteristic.

The bottom line appears to be: the right to not be compelled to make certain types of speech won out over the right for a protected class not to be discriminated against.

This is a tricky line to walk. Sure, under Colorado law, a gay customer could not be refused service because he was gay, provided, say, the customer wanted a math website.

But here is my hypothetical: what if it was a interracial couple’s wedding and the website maker had a religious objection to mixed marriages?

Hmmm

Student loan program The Supreme Court ruled that President Biden needed Congressional approval to forgive student loans. I don’t know enough about the law to comment, but, politically, I note that 36 percent of the public are college graduates and wonder how much of an issue this would be politically.

My summary of SCOTUS rulings:

  1. This shows that elections matter. Those howling about these decisions who did NOT vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 have no sympathy from me.
  2. I think that the overturing of Roe v. Wade was a big deal and the Democrats can make political hay out of that. But these decisions: one was good news, and I am somewhat ambivalent the other 3. I wonder how far reaching they are.

I just wish that the campaign people would ignore many of the so-called “activists” here. Much of the discussion I’ve seen on social media is dreadfully bad.

Billionaires: commentary.

Billionaires can buy Supreme Court justices. They can buy sports teams. They can buy politicians and buy universities.

But they cannot buy exemptions to the laws of nature.

BUT…there is a saying…”those who pay the bills make the rules” and the “rich benefactor” (here courted by Mr. Love, the Nutty Professor’s alter ego) will always be catered to. (yes, I am well aware the technical terms in this clip are nonsense and the gluteus minimus is one of the 3 glute muscles..I known because mine frequently aches.

Hubris is not bravery

I admit that I spent too much time following the submersible story. Nutshell: a private company sent visitors to view the Titanic wreck and the submersible imploded; it isn’t clear if they imploded on the way down, or if they had aborted the dive and were on the way up.

What is clear is that the CEO of the company thumbed his nose at standard “good engineering practice“:

There were so many things wrong with this.

Among them: unproven design, possibly second hand parts (purchased from Boeing), failure to account for the fact that prior deep dives weakened the materials in the hull, etc.

This especially irks me because I served on submarines. It was serious stuff. Parts exposed to sea pressure had an extra certification Parts were individually tested, labeled, traced, and work on such systems had to be signed off by multiple, highly qualified people. Fraudulent sign-offs had jail time attached.

And the training: of course the systems experts were trained, but, as the saying went: “there are no passengers on a submarine.” Everyone who rode one, even “mission specialists” had to get basic qualification (e. g. know where the damage control, life saving, and fire gear were located).

This was serious stuff for serious people.

Evidently, this was not the case here.

But then I saw this:

No, Mr. Johnson, these people were NOT heroes. Thumbing your nose at engineering practice derived from experts and prior mishaps is not bravery. It is hubris and stupidity.

The laws of nature do not care how highly you think of yourself or about how much money you have.

I admit that I see less spectacular displays of such hubris.

Tourists are told to stay away from wild animals. But she wanted a selfie with a bison calf:

And yes, I see it on my timeline. Every once in a while, someone has to take a photo behind a sign that says “keep out” or “keep on the other side”, or “stay off of the rocks”, all the while giving a smug, self satisfied smile.

Everyone, ok, many, wants to think of themselves as the “exception to the rule.”

And sometimes, they find out.

“

“This family took another trail, closed to tourists, even if there was a small gate and ‘no access’ signs,” Cappelli said.

When the family reached the top of the over 4,000-feet-high volcano, Carroll stopped to take a selfie and his phone fell into the crater. 

“He tried to recover it, but slipped and slid a few meters into the crater. He managed to stop his fall, but at that point he was stuck,” Cappelli said.

“He was very lucky. If he kept going, he would have plunged 300 meters into the crater,” he added.”

There are many examples.

You see this attitude glorified in some movies.

Seriously: the laws of nature do not make exceptions for you, and you are probably not an outlier.