Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, September 24, 2018

OTP 2018 September 24: Baseball and the presidency

He tells us that Theodore Roosevelt, for all his heroics and man of action persona, detested baseball. For TR, the game was too slow, too staid, too devoid of the rough and tumble he loved – even though as a good pol he sang its praises as it grew in popularity.

His daughter, Alice Roosevelt Longworth: “Father and all of us regard[ed] baseball as a mollycoddle game. Tennis, football, lacrosse, boxing, polo, yes. They are violent, which appealed to us. But baseball? Father wouldn’t watch it, not even at Harvard!”

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 08:48 AM | 3291 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 33 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 09:52 AM (#5750453)
Trump Says Midterms Are Referendum on His Presidency

President Trump cast the midterm elections as a referendum on him and his agenda, arguing on Friday that a vote for any Democrat would empower “dangerous” and “crazy” people and sap the Republican Party’s fragile congressional majorities, the New York Times reports.

Said Trump: “Get out in 2018, because you’re voting for me in 2018. They aren’t just extreme. They are frankly dangerous, and they are crazy.”


I have to admit, I agree with much of what he is saying. The midterms will be a referendum on his presidency, and they are no just extreme, but also dangerous and maybe crazy. We just differ on who "they" is.
   2. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 09:57 AM (#5750455)
Trump Says Midterms Are Referendum on His Presidency


It's almost like the heady days of sprint 2016 - when people openly wondered if Trump was a Democratic plant to make the GOP look stupid.
   3. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 24, 2018 at 09:59 AM (#5750459)
Deadspin of all places has a really good article ”Brett Kavanaugh Is A Man The Right Can Get Behind” that explains this better than anything else I’ve seen. Kavanaugh being a rapist, a perjurer, a drunk, in debt to the mob, etc and still getting through to SCOTUS—it’s all a demonstration of GOP power:

The important thing to note is: Nobody, nobody, believes a single one of these defenses, most likely not even the people offering them. Believing any of them would defeat the point of the exercise, which is to demonstrate that it doesn’t matter, to put this son of a ##### across with a completely unhidden sneer, to say all but explicitly We know he did this, you know he did this, everyone knows he did this, and you couldn’t stop us anyway. The wild variety and complete inconsistency of all these defenses aren’t bugs; they’re features.

It’s a bit late for anyone not to have figured this out yet, but the skeleton key to understanding American conservatism is this: At bottom, it lacks absolutely any moral or ideological underpinning beyond the reactionary protection of moneyed white men—of their station, their wealth and power, and their egos. Its supposed ideas and abstractions are just a framework for spasmodic lashing-out against anything that can be interpreted as a threat to rich white dudes. It likes supply-side economics because the supply side is made of rich white dudes. It likes tax cuts because the taxes are mostly cut for rich white dudes. It likes cops and soldiers because cops and soldiers uphold a social order with rich white dudes at the top. It likes “traditional family values” because social, economic, and sexual dominion over women are the most traditional family values of all. It likes “Make America Great Again” because rich white dudes used to roll through society and over everyone else with even greater impunity than they do now. All of these things are just proxies for reiterating, over and over and over, forever, the power and security and primacy of rich white dudes.

Once upon a time, yeah, some American president might have performed the empty noblesse oblige–ass theater of withdrawing a judicial nominee who’d become as toxic and controversial as Brett Kavanaugh, whose nomination had turned into a referendum on the political parties’ respective views on something as grave and awful as sexual assault. So it’s fine to point out that things are different, now, if only on their surface; it’s fine to chart out, if you wish, the moral and intellectual decay whereby the American right eventually dropped all its pretenses and became, straight out, the Neener Neener Neener You Can’t Stop Us movement; it’s fine to observe that this happening subsequent to America’s first non-white president and first non-male major-party presidential nominee is no coincidence at all, but very specifically a vengeful tantrum by a shrinking class of wounded bullies eager to reassert by force and at all costs their hold on society’s controls.

But first, the thing to do is to describe it accurately. When they eventually ram Kavanaugh through, and they will, it won’t be despite all of this. It will be because of it.

   4. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:00 AM (#5750460)
I haven't really dived into it, but same was said about "Nice Guys" back in the day, by people who were trying to attack them, with a modicum of writings/whatnot by guys who'd say "I used to be a Nice Guy, but I learned I have to be a Jerk" - many of whom did indeed get pretty awful, but where indeed now being "Jerks". And Rickey (for instance) has the same look, spouting feminist jargon, but taking the extremely pro-Patriarchy position "Guys who can't get laid because they're trying really hard to respect women's boundaries are ugly unpleasant cucks", so it's pretty easy to be skeptical of that. Fundamentally, you can't be involuntarily celibate unless you take it as a given that women have the absolute right to decide who they want to mate with. So, one can mull over where the hate for that comes from.

Do guys who can't get laid, and because they're trying to be moral, sometimes get angry or otherwise nasty? No doubt. Is this the fundamental, underlying bit? It's hard to see.

From the previous thread. But this is not at all an accurate description of the incel community, nor would I ascribe the extremely pro-Patriarchy position to Ricky, that you do. I think you are very very fundamentally misreading him.

The reason the incel community is so toxic, is not because they are trying to be moral, and respect women's boundaries. They are toxic because they objectify women to an extreme degree, and treat them in a way that betrays the fact that they think they are entitled to owning them. And the fact that they do not own a woman (not simply not have a girlfriend), is a great injustice perpetrated against them by an unjust society.
   5. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:00 AM (#5750461)
The Whole World Thinks Donald Trump Is a Flake

They took a look at how often countries voted with the U.S. in the United Nations and used that as a proxy for being an ally. Then they compared that to global Pew survey data asking about confidence in the U.S. president to “do the right thing.” During Barack Obama’s presidency, the results are about what you’d expect:


Go look at the pretty chart ...

You probably already know what’s coming next. Here’s the same chart for Donald Trump in 2017:


Yeah, you can guess the chart as well.

Everything has plummeted. Practically everyone has low confidence in Donald Trump, and the very few with confidence above 40 percent are countries like Russia, Vietnam, and South Africa, which haven’t traditionally been close allies. Even the Israeli public has slightly less confidence in Trump than they did in Obama.

Under Obama, three-quarters of the world had at least 50 percent confidence that he’d do the right thing. Under Trump, less than one quarter of the world trusts him to do the right thing. The big outlier (surprise!) is Russia, which likes Trump a lot more than Obama. I wonder why?
   6. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:02 AM (#5750463)
transferred from previous thread:



He hasn't said anything of the sort.



He absolutely did.

2359. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 23, 2018 at 10:43 PM (#5750282)

So, Justice DMN, explain again why this would not constitute assault?

You shove me away from you because you feel uncomfortable with how close I am standing, and you think that constitutes me assaulting you?


That was a response to this:

2353. Srul Itza At Home Posted: September 23, 2018 at 10:30 PM (#5750273)

caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away


So, Justice DMN, explain again why this would not constitute assault?

Assuming you really are a lawyer.



Which was a response to this:

2318. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 23, 2018 at 09:33 PM (#5750232)

This is just insane. "Yeah, some dude shoved his dick in my daughter's face, but that was decades ago! Who cares?"

My daughter's nine, so I'm not quite sure how those logistics would work. Now, if decades from now I find out that someone did that to my daughter when she was nine, I would indeed be quite upset. But if in 39 years I find out that it happened when she was 18 and he was 18 and they were playing a drinking game in college, yeah, who cares.

Have people completely lost any sense of perspective? Holding grudges over 30-year old drunken horseplay in college? Especially that involved nobody getting hurt? You think that would be sane?


Basically, David pushed back on the allegation that Kavs once whipped it out and stuck it in a woman's face during a drinking game, causing her to shove it and him away, calling it drunken horseplay that out to be forgotten. Several posters pushed back on that, he last one being Srul, calling it assault or asking David why it wasn't assault, which prompted 2359.

So yes, read in context, he most certainly did something of the sort.
   7. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:03 AM (#5750465)
He hasn't said anything of the sort. His position has consistently been that an accusation absent independent corroborating evidence shouldn't be enough to overthrow the presumption of innocence, even outside the legal context.

Or, at least that's been my interpretation of what he's written on this topic.


Well, yes, that bit from 2302 is some classic Kneepants kneepantsing. It's deeply stupid and dumb. But it's a far cry from the (re?)formulation I originally asked about. If that's someone's idea of paraphrasing David's point from this post, they're doing it very, very wrong.

In case anybody missed it. I was not talking about #2302. And I stand by my post #2467 and the quotes I cited there, as proof that I accurately described DMN's argument.

ETA: Which I posted before Miserlou in #2474, but was essentially the same thing.
   8. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:03 AM (#5750466)
From the previous thread. But this is not at all an accurate description of the incel community,


Yeah, Brianson doesn't know what he's talking about here.
   9. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:03 AM (#5750467)
But this is not at all an accurate description of the incel community


Correct. I would suggest he look at the incel community, but then again ... ick. No one should journey into those depths. Seriously, it is the most toxic community on the internet I have ever had the misfortune to have any sort of drive by knowledge of, and I regularly write horror role-playing scenarios, which leads me down some dark and ugly paths.
   10. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:03 AM (#5750468)
nor would I ascribe the extremely pro-Patriarchy position to Ricky


Yeah, I have no idea what he's talking about here, either.
   11. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:06 AM (#5750469)
Thanks for that Deadspin piece, Davo. Good ####.
   12. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:10 AM (#5750472)
Generally speaking, in the classic model sense, an assault is the threat to do harm. It does not require touching or contact. The touching or contact is a battery. If I make a gesture to strike you, that is an assault. If I succeed, that is the battery. Of course, being law, it can get tricky, not to mention sophistical and even specious, and jurisdictions have leeway in defining particular crimes.
   13. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:11 AM (#5750473)
from 'zop:
The whole incel thing drives me nuts. I didn't get laid that much in college but that's because I was an ####### and not attractive enough to get away with it. There's nothing harder than coming to terms that you're not getting laid because women are (correctly!) not interested in you: no one wants to admit they're not that good looking, or charming, or nice, or any of the other sort of characteristics that make you attractive to women. But rather than be like "hey, women not wanting to sleep with me is probably a canary in the coal mine for my being a #### more generally", people want to say that they're fine and society is at fault. OK, whatever.


Actually, incels know that they're unattractive. They do think that "charming, or nice" is irrelevant, you're right about that. The incel belief is that:

1. Women are extraordinarily superficial and are only attracted to strong men with chiseled jaws, because evolution
2. Incels got unfair genetics, lack those features
3. Therefore incels will never get sex, end of story

But it's all much worse than that because they also think that women are whores, that they are all amoral, but also that men deserve virgins, etc. Basically they fantasize about some sort of Orwellian sharia law where virgin girls are assigned to men regardless of chin sculptedness, and ordered to be subservient to them. I'm not even doing this justice, it's such a conflicted and hellishly unhealthy view of the world that it's beyond the abilities of a normal person to really understand.
   14. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:19 AM (#5750476)
3

In the old thread, -- (SBB?), I think it was, linked the Andrew Sullivan's article, "Land of Brutal Binaries," which makes the same point. Although it conscientiously notes that the extreme wing of the Left does the exact same thing.
   15. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:19 AM (#5750477)
@therickwilson:
GOP pollster to me:

"Your tweet about the trade war is deeper than you know. GOPers kept telling us in [focus groups] that they trusted Trump had a "secret plan to make these deals" because he's a master negotiator etc. Now reality is setting in."
   16. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:21 AM (#5750478)

From the previous thread. But this is not at all an accurate description of the incel community, nor would I ascribe the extremely pro-Patriarchy position to Ricky, that you do. I think you are very very fundamentally misreading him.

The reason the incel community is so toxic, is not because they are trying to be moral, and respect women's boundaries. They are toxic because they objectify women to an extreme degree, and treat them in a way that betrays the fact that they think they are entitled to owning them. And the fact that they do not own a woman (not simply not have a girlfriend), is a great injustice perpetrated against them by an unjust society.


Right.

Even setting aside the merger of "incel" and "nice guys", I don't buy the latter either... I.e., if you're the "nice guy" being nice in order to score, I'd argue that you're not a 'nice guy', you're a manipulative guy capable of acting nice.

It's like gift giving in my mind - a gift is something you give freely, without expectation of anything in return. If that's not how you look at giving someone a gift, it's not a gift, it's a complicated or otherwise strings-attached transaction.
   17. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:26 AM (#5750479)
I don't buy the latter either... I.e., if you're the "nice guy" being nice in order to score, I'd argue that you're not a 'nice guy', you're a manipulative guy capable of acting nice.


One is hesitant to take at face value the label "nice guy" when it is applied to the guy in question, by the guy in question. From my experience, most "nice guys" are so deemed by themselves, and rarely bother to ask the women that have "put them in the friend zone" if they concur with that assessment.
   18. . . . . . . Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:27 AM (#5750480)
Actually, incels know that they're unattractive. They do think that "charming, or nice" is irrelevant, you're right about that. The incel belief is that:

1. Women are extraordinarily superficial and are only attracted to strong men with chiseled jaws, because evolution
2. Incels got unfair genetics, lack those features
3. Therefore incels will never get sex, end of story


That's my point. They (and I think everyone else) agrees that if you're good looking enough, you can basically get away with murder and still get laid. Whoopee, life is unfair.

But, you know, plenty of mediocre looking people get laid too because they're strong on one of the other elements of attractiveness - most of which is, do you seem like a good partner?

If you're in, say, the bottom quartile of getting laid, that's not just because you're an average looking guy, though you probably are. You're also failing at some other interpersonal element. You're not likeable. That's on you, not on the world. But it requires a lot of tough introspection.
   19. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:32 AM (#5750481)
nor would I ascribe the extremely pro-Patriarchy position to Ricky

Yeah, I have no idea what he's talking about here, either.

Well I see no need to mischaracterize anyone's position.

Speaking of, you are free to respond to either Mierlou's or my own response to your request for a cite regarding DMN's position on shoving a person away who shoves their #### in your face during a party. Which I believe you called "morally horrendous" if true.
   20. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:32 AM (#5750482)
GOPers kept telling us in [focus groups] that they trusted Trump had a "secret plan to make these deals"


How did people that gullible survive to adulthood?
   21. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:32 AM (#5750483)
I don't know much about Incel specifically, but what Post 13 sets forth kind of falls in line with Darwin-type concepts. May even go toward explaining why throughout history 80% of females have reproduced while only 40% of males have. I believe Steven Pinker over 20 years ago (in the old New Yorker, I think, the pretext being the Bill Clinton promiscuity/yaddayadda brouhaha) explained that if Johnny Carson could monopolize the best years (ahem) of five women, then some men, a good many men, were going to be left high and dry. And they were going to be pissed, even if they didn't consciously relate to that. Now, they are, it seems.
   22. BDC Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:34 AM (#5750485)
I had imagined incels as also thinking that they were entitled to sex because women mate with achievers, and incels earn enough at whatever job they can do at 3am in their pajamas on a laptop to merit such mating (but no, somehow women always want something else). Is that part of the rhetoric? Like the Mouse, I do not want to do much direct research here :-D

The basic theme seems to be females as a bulk commodity. I think again of the millionaire commencement speaker who decided at age 33 to "get a wife." He didn't indicate that he'd met any specific person he'd like to spend time with, it was just an order to fill. Now, he seemed to be a pleasant enough guy, along with good-looking and a millionaire, so no incel he. But that initial attitude can't be a sure-fire recipe for happiness.
   23. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:35 AM (#5750487)
Reddit's Nice Guys forum is an amusing way to pass the time.
   24. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:39 AM (#5750491)
The basic theme seems to be females as a bulk commodity.


ka-ching
   25. JJ1986 Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM (#5750493)
I believe Steven Pinker over 20 years ago (in the old New Yorker, I think, the pretext being the Bill Clinton promiscuity/yaddayadda brouhaha) explained that if Johnny Carson could monopolize the best years (ahem) of five women, then some men, a good many men, were going to be left high and dry. And they were going to be pissed, even if they didn't consciously relate to that. Now, they are, it seems.
As if women shouldn't have any agency.
   26. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:42 AM (#5750494)
23- their incels forum is a very scary way to pass the time.
   27. BrianBrianson Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:42 AM (#5750495)
There's nothing harder than coming to terms that you're not getting laid because women are (correctly!) not interested in you: no one wants to admit they're not that good looking, or charming, or nice, or any of the other sort of characteristics that make you attractive to women.


Again, all of the narratives that're being pushed here are coming from other people attacking "Nice Guys", not their own narrative. I know what my problem was - I pretty much refused to ever express interest in a woman, lest I risk it being unwanted, and I scrupulously discounted anything they did along the lines of flirting or whatever as my own imagination, lest I risk making unwanted advances. The data is pretty clear - if my memory holds, I've asked out twelve women, eleven of whom agreed to it, and eight of whom I made at least a variant of the beast with two backs on on numerous occasions. And while I'd say I've never seen a woman express unsolicited interest in me, none of my friends would agree with that. So it's not lack of interest that's really the problem - it's a poor social skills trap, that's strongly socially re-enforced. You really just need an "It's okay to express some interest/ask her out", with perhaps a "if she's not interested, drop it. It's not nice to be pushy and you wouldn't want to be with someone who ain't interested anyways" in so much as in my experience as a Nice Guy that's actually so baked in as a given it's the fundamental underlying assumption behind the whole phenomenon. But in context you'll get savaged for suggesting (some) men might be more forward, because there's also the introducing yourself with a surprise #### in the face crowd who might get empowered or whatnot.

Somehow, it's more credible to look at my own experience than people claiming to be feminists chanting "Look at these guys who can't get laid, and are therefor ugly, worthless people". And finding that point maybe not in line with the ideals they claim to support.
   28. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:42 AM (#5750496)
You just may have a brain that was groomed and contoured to equate sex, reproduction, and family with happiness. (What a concept!) But, have faith that some Gulag or other will beat such inclinations out of you.
   29. SteveF Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:43 AM (#5750497)
He absolutely did.

I don't agree, obviously.

In fact, the only person who did anything wrong, was the person who shoved a man away, simply for hanging his dick an inch in front of her face! That's practically assault!

I don't actually think David's point here is that Ramirez (allegedly) assaulted Kavanaugh. He was making a legalistic point about what constitutes assault. Namely, how can the person who initiated contact be the victim of assault?

I'm not sure about the legal point since you could argue sticking your dick in someone's face causing them to push it away is 'making them' touch your genitals. It's not really all that interesting to me either way, but it's a (legalistic) argument that can be made, and David loves those kinds of discussions.

I also don't think you can make the argument Kavanaugh (allegedly) did nothing wrong. Generally speaking, one shouldn't expose ones genitals in public. And even if we got over the hang up on public nudity, it's certainly inappropriate to locate your genitals within inches of someone's face absent their consent -- morally and otherwise.

I will concede that characterizing what Kavanaugh did as drunken horseplay is evincing an incorrect understanding of gender dynamics and the social context. If Kavanaugh teabagged a male friend (or maybe even a female friend), we can dismiss that as drunken horseplay. Shoving your genitals in the face of a woman you don't know particularly well goes beyond drunken horseplay.

Accept this as a partial concession. I'm not really comfortable continuing this discussion beyond this point given it's not really my place to defend David, and I'm sure he can do a better job of it than I can. If I've said anything you're interested in having clarified, I'll be happy to clarify, however.
   30. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:44 AM (#5750499)
GOPers kept telling us in [focus groups] that they trusted Trump had a "secret plan to make these deals"

How did people that gullible survive to adulthood?


I'm guessing the welfare state's support has a lot to do with it, not unlike how the success of vaccines made their efficacy so ubiquitous as to be invisible and prompted the rise of anti-vaxers like, HEY, Donald Trump.
   31. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM (#5750500)
25

I don't see how that denies their "agency". They chose Carson, didn't they? That still leaves some, many, with the short end. And, for some unfathomable reason, these pathetic deplorables may feel deprived.
   32. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:49 AM (#5750504)
23- their incels forum is a very scary way to pass the time.


Probably a good target for troll-generated lulz but I don't want to go through the trouble of creating new Reddit accounts.
   33. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5750505)
But it's all much worse than that because they also think that women are whores, that they are all amoral, but also that men deserve virgins, etc. Basically they fantasize about some sort of Orwellian sharia law where virgin girls are assigned to men regardless of chin sculptedness, and ordered to be subservient to them. I'm not even doing this justice, it's such a conflicted and hellishly unhealthy view of the world that it's beyond the abilities of a normal person to really understand.
from 'zop:

The whole incel thing drives me nuts. I didn't get laid that much in college but that's because I was an ####### and not attractive enough to get away with it. There's nothing harder than coming to terms that you're not getting laid because women are (correctly!) not interested in you: no one wants to admit they're not that good looking, or charming, or nice, or any of the other sort of characteristics that make you attractive to women. But rather than be like "hey, women not wanting to sleep with me is probably a canary in the coal mine for my being a #### more generally", people want to say that they're fine and society is at fault. OK, whatever.




Actually, incels know that they're unattractive. They do think that "charming, or nice" is irrelevant, you're right about that. The incel belief is that:

1. Women are extraordinarily superficial and are only attracted to strong men with chiseled jaws, because evolution
2. Incels got unfair genetics, lack those features
3. Therefore incels will never get sex, end of story

But it's all much worse than that because they also think that women are whores, that they are all amoral, but also that men deserve virgins, etc. Basically they fantasize about some sort of Orwellian sharia law where virgin girls are assigned to men regardless of chin sculptedness, and ordered to be subservient to them. I'm not even doing this justice, it's such a conflicted and hellishly unhealthy view of the world that it's beyond the abilities of a normal person to really understand.


Much as I agree - can I blame media, too?

I mean, how many bazillion movies and sitcom plot lines have revolved the hot cheerleader manipulating the nerdy guy to do her homework for her? Followed by a resolution - depending on the film/show - where she either gets her comeuppance or realizes the nerdy guy is The One?

I graduated near the top of my class in HS - and never got approach to write any papers for hot cheerleaders or even a "what did you put for #5?" on a test.

Indeed, the closest I ever got anything that all-too common trope was somewhat inverted - a mutual friend asked me to talk her prototypical 'hot cheerleader' friend out of dropping out of HS senior year... which led to some tutoring - as in, real tutoring, not doing her homework for her... which led to - mostly influenced by her parents, I think - some uncomfortable 'thank you' dinners at her place. To be honest, I might well have let my lower head do the thinking if she hadn't had a Wooderson-style 20something boyfriend - though I suppose I like to tell myself it was because there was no real emotional attraction and no amount of physical attraction can bridge that gap.
   34. Traderdave Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:51 AM (#5750506)
Rosenstein out.
   35. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:54 AM (#5750508)
The peahen gets to choose. The peacock has to perform so as to get chosen, and if that leaves him vulnerable in ways, biology says, tough ####. Carson's discards got nice compensatory salve. Other, lesser ornaments, got their Social Security/pension-beneficiary widow's mite.
   36. BDC Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:55 AM (#5750509)
a very scary way to pass the time


Ha, along those lines, I am preparing John Millington Synge's play Riders to the Sea for class tomorrow. There's a phrase in the play, "cock for the kelp," and I basically knew what it meant – the equivalent of a hay-cock or turf-cock, only stacked up out of seaweed. But always eager for knowledge, I did an image search for "kelp cock." Oh dear God, never do an image search for "kelp cock."
   37. BDC Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:55 AM (#5750510)
I was so horrified I apparently posted twice.
   38. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:56 AM (#5750513)
Rosenstein out.


The Democrats should never have put him in a position of power.
   39. BrianBrianson Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:57 AM (#5750517)
Even setting aside the merger of "incel" and "nice guys", I don't buy the latter either... I.e., if you're the "nice guy" being nice in order to score, I'd argue that you're not a 'nice guy', you're a manipulative guy capable of acting nice.


You can characterise anyone with any agenda as manipulative, but this is fundamentally "If you can't just take a woman without regard, you're a loser who deserves celibacy" dressed up in feminist garb. (Nevermind that the assumption you're being a "Nice Guy" in order to score is not really correct.) If someone is shy, and asks about making friends, we're perfectly happy to talk about meeting people with similar interests, how to make small talk, approach people, whatnot. But ask about how to get a date and you're an entitled misogynist who thinks of women as a mass of undifferentiated vending machines for sex.

Yeah, if I had to hold myself to the "Never express interest in a woman if it could be unwanted, you'll have to just wait until one who you've never indicated you're at all interested in shows up at your door demanding you get busy and freaky, in that order" standard, I'd never have a relationship. I'm not "Holywood Chris" or "Canadian Ryan" hot, I guess. But when I push my "Nice Guy"-ish self to be enough of a "Jerk" to think \"#### it, she signed up for OKCupid, she voluntarily undertook the risk of unwanted attention", I get married. So, it's probably for the best.

(And yes, of course the jargon of "Nice Guy"/"Jerk", "Incel", "Alpha/Beta" or whatever it is at the moment carries baggage, but in context I think we have to use it).
   40. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:58 AM (#5750518)
Ha, along those lines, I am preparing John Millington Synge's play Riders to the Sea for class tomorrow. There's a phrase in the play, \"#### for the kelp," and I basically knew what it meant – the equivalent of a hay-#### or turf-####, only stacked up out of seaweed. But always eager for knowledge, I did an image search for "kelp ####." Oh dear God, never do an image search for "kelp ####."

No letter is as important in a Google search, as the 'l' in 'Grandfather Clock'.
   41. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 10:59 AM (#5750519)
Now Fat Donnie should hold a televised reality show to choose Rosenstein's successor. That way Rudy has to give the appearance of earning it.
   42. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:00 AM (#5750520)
Much as I agree - can I blame media, too?

I mean, how many bazillion movies and sitcom plot lines have revolved the hot cheerleader manipulating the nerdy guy to do her homework for her? Followed by a resolution - depending on the film/show - where she either gets her comeuppance or realizes the nerdy guy is The One?


I don't think this has much to do with it. Are incels unusually intelligent? I doubt it. And nerds are hip now, didn't you hear? Not to mention I don't think that high school outcasts consume much traditional media these days.

Incels are what happens when ugly boys that are both profoundly depressed and enraged at the world get to find each other over the internet. In previous generations they were just ostracized and lonely. Now they have e-friends.
   43. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:00 AM (#5750522)
One thing the incels get right is their belief that “ass-holes” have more sexual partners than (legitimately) nice guys. They do! But the reason this is true isn’t because women are stupid whores; it’s because a lot of the sex that ####### guys have is bad sex that actual nice guys would never want. There are many examples:

* ######## will cheat on their girlfriends; nice guys will not.
* ######## will lie to a one-night stand by promising to be in a monogamous relationship with them.
* ######## will pressure their date into sex before she’s ready
* ######## will urge a girl to get drunk to reduce her inhibitions and have sex with them
* ######## will lie to a girl, tell them they’re actually a celebrity, to trick them into sex.
* ######## will have sex with women they know are in relationships.
* ######## will just full-on rape women.

But nice guys don’t see this, they just see the ####### getting a different woman every night and attribute the cause to “women are stupid” and whaddayaknow they’ve switched from nice guy to misogynist.
   44. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:00 AM (#5750524)
John Millington Synge's play Riders to the Sea


I just read his book on the Aran Islands. Nice little read.
   45. SteveF Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:01 AM (#5750525)
Oh dear God, never do an image search for "kelp ####."

The closest I got to an obscene image was someone selling pink soap in the shape of a penis on etsy. I'm secure enough in my sexuality to admit I was disappointed, but also insecure enough to assert my security.
   46. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:03 AM (#5750527)
Oh dear God, never do an image search for "kelp ####."


Huh, I forgot that movie won the Oscar.
   47. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:05 AM (#5750528)

That's my point. They (and I think everyone else) agrees that if you're good looking enough, you can basically get away with murder and still get laid. Whoopee, life is unfair.

But, you know, plenty of mediocre looking people get laid too because they're strong on one of the other elements of attractiveness - most of which is, do you seem like a good partner?

If you're in, say, the bottom quartile of getting laid, that's not just because you're an average looking guy, though you probably are. You're also failing at some other interpersonal element. You're not likeable. That's on you, not on the world. But it requires a lot of tough introspection.


Mostly agree - though, I lean more on your last paragraph.

There are women - just like there are men - who do seem to have this attraction to "fixer uppers"; i.e., but in many cases - I think people confuse 'confidence' with 'ah-ha! I should be a jerk!'

I think the majority of men and women are not looking for a project upon which they can play amateur therapist - as you say, a partner. Certainly, there are elements of mutual confidence building and support that go with that... but the 'nice guy' stuff curdles quickly - and often in odd ways (often to the point that it ceases to be "nice").

I've been through dating dry spells - and without exception, those dry spells occurred when my own self-worth was at various low points. Unless you stumble upon someone looking to take a fixer upper project, you've got to undertake your own improvements.

Tough introspection is right... one has to develop confidence in oneself - both your positives and the areas where you come up short and find that balance between improving on the latter while not clinging to (and potentially over-estimating) the former.
   48. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:08 AM (#5750531)
Oh dear God, never do an image search for "kelp ####."


Years ago I was trying to remember who did the song Rubberband Man. Google led me down a path I wouldn't recommend (unless that is your thing, of course).

Note: It was The Spinners.
   49. Lassus Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:09 AM (#5750532)
One thing the incels get right is their belief that “ass-holes” have more sexual partners than (legitimately) nice guys. They do!

I find this to be inaccurate, and a tad misogynist as well. YMMV, I suppose.
   50. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:09 AM (#5750534)
Prior to my getting saved, I spent most of my early 20s in a kinda frat-style atmosphere, going to clubs with a group of friends who were the prototypical ass-holes mentioned above. And I witnessed basically all those scenarios.

(My “what the #### is wrong with me?” moment came when we were swapping stories the morning after one particularly raucous night at a house party, and one of those friends bragged about what was unambiguously rape. That was the “Ive gotta get outta here” sign—I still regret my moral failings.)
   51. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:10 AM (#5750535)
Everyone has their self-interest, and they are only willing to accommodate an other to a limited extent. Mostly, they seek to protect and firm-up their interest. It's human. Yet, we're indoctrinated to believe it's about being kind and considerate and good. Well, maybe, maybe not.
   52. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:11 AM (#5750536)
Years ago I was trying to remember who did the song Rubberband Man.


I haven't heard nor though about that song for about 20 years. Then twice in less than 24 hours. I watched "Ininity War" last night for the first time, and "Rubberband Man" came on as the Guardians make their initial appearance.
   53. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:11 AM (#5750538)
I've been through dating dry spells - and without exception, those dry spells occurred when my own self-worth was at various low points. Unless you stumble upon someone looking to take a fixer upper project, you've got to undertake your own improvements.


In my late 20s I actually turned down a proposition because I was in a bad place emotionally (out of work, living in a crap apartment in a slum) and I knew it was a terrible idea to get involved right then. Of course I later dated and then married them and even had two kids with them.
   54. AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:12 AM (#5750539)
Jane Mayer told NBC's today show:



The story broke overnight. But it dates back 35 years ... She didn't come forward with it. What happened was, the classmates at Yale were talking to each other about it, they were emailing about it. We've seen the emails, back in July before Christine Blasey Ford came forward, and eventually the word of it spread. It spread to the Senate. It spread to the media. And we reached out to her.


You can get this on Vox or DailyCaller.
   55. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:12 AM (#5750540)
42

Incels are what happens when ugly boys that are both profoundly depressed and enraged at the world get to find each other over the internet. In previous generations they were just ostracized and lonely.


To harken back to the Stephen King discussion on the old thread, Harold Lauder would be an incel. Look what happened to him...
   56. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:13 AM (#5750541)
You can characterise anyone with any agenda as manipulative, but this is fundamentally "If you can't just take a woman without regard, you're a loser who deserves celibacy" dressed up in feminist garb. (Nevermind that the assumption you're being a "Nice Guy" in order to score is not really correct.) If someone is shy, and asks about making friends, we're perfectly happy to talk about meeting people with similar interests, how to make small talk, approach people, whatnot. But ask about how to get a date and you're an entitled misogynist who thinks of women as a mass of undifferentiated vending machines for sex.

Yeah, if I had to hold myself to the "Never express interest in a woman if it could be unwanted, you'll have to just wait until one who you've never indicated you're at all interested in shows up at your door demanding you get busy and freaky, in that order" standard, I'd never have a relationship. I'm not "Holywood Chris" or "Canadian Ryan" hot, I guess. But when I push my "Nice Guy"-ish self to be enough of a "Jerk" to think \"#### it, she signed up for OKCupid, she voluntarily undertook the risk of unwanted attention", I get married. So, it's probably for the best.


Who's saying guys shouldn't express interest?

I'm just saying this: You express interest by saying "Would you like to have dinner/go for a drink/coffee/etc"... and you accept that she may very well say No.

You don't express interest by building up a cache of "but I did x, listened to y, and never z with you!"

EDIT: And to be clear - I'm quite familiar with shyness... In hindsight, I think I've been too shy in situations where I should have popped a question - at least, I've been told as much in a couple of instances where years on/later, I confessed a crush I never acted on.
   57. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:16 AM (#5750544)
Prepare to march, Patriots! James Woods has been blocked from Twitter!
   58. Mike A Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:16 AM (#5750545)
More smoke:

"Montgomery County investigators confirmed Monday they’re aware of a potential second sexual assault complaint in the county against former Georgetown Prep student and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

While investigators weren’t specific and spoke on background, they said they are looking at allegations against Kavanaugh during his senior year in high school after an anonymous witness came forward this weekend."
   59. Dan The Mediocre is one of "the rest" Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:19 AM (#5750548)
You don't express interest by building up a cache of "but I did x, listened to y, and never z with you!"


There is a LOT of this in the "incel" community. Basically, the idea is that if you're nice to them they should eventually either reward you by trying to date you or just reward you with sex. And it can be hard to shake people out of it when they've invested a ton of time and emotional energy into a person because they're attracted to them. The vast majority of guys who think that are emotionally stunted in some way, and unless/until they work through it, they aren't going to change.
   60. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:22 AM (#5750549)
Apologies if these questions have been discussed already, I'm way behind in the thread.

From the New Yorker piece:

Ramirez said that, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale, she was invited by a friend on the women’s soccer team to a dorm-room party. She recalled that the party took place in a suite at Lawrance Hall, in the part of Yale known as Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together. “We were sitting in a circle,” she said. “People would pick who drank.” Ramirez was chosen repeatedly, she said, and quickly became inebriated.


Is this a drinking game anyone is familiar with? Seems sort of random. Usually there's a mechanism to the game which decides who drinks, not people just randomly picking someone to drink.

A third male student then exposed himself to her. “I remember a penis being in front of my face,” she said. “I knew that’s not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.” She recalled remarking, “That’s not a real penis,” and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to “kiss it.” She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process. Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic, in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. “I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” she said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.”


Is this what devout Catholic women believe, that they should not even "touch" a penis until they are married? I understood that the line was intercourse.

She remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.” She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. “Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”


This doesn't ring true, but regardless this level of detail is problematic in light of the fact that the article begins with the notion that she was not certain about Kavanaugh's role in this incident:

In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away.
   61. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:22 AM (#5750550)
There is a LOT of this in the "incel" community. Basically, the idea is that if you're nice to them they should eventually either reward you by trying to date you or just reward you with sex. And it can be hard to shake people out of it when they've invested a ton of time and emotional energy into a person because they're attracted to them.


Again, I think this is "Nice Guy" behavior. The incels are the guys that have already given up on this. They're done being nice to women. They've embraced their hopelessness. Hopelessness is their credo.

There's an opinion in the incel community that anyone that ever has sex was never truly an incel to begin with. Incels will never have sex unless it's at gunpoint. Incels are the guys that can do everything perfectly - exercise, dress well, clean up, be charming - and they'll still never have sex, because it's their genetic fate to be unfuckable.

Now, that's what they say out loud. I'm sure many incels secretly long for a sweetheart and do engage in "nice guy" behavior in the hope of getting laid. But there's a difference between the guys that are saying "I'm so nice to chicks, why won't they #### me?" and the guys saying "I want to burn the world because I'm unfuckable."
   62. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:23 AM (#5750551)
Incels are what happens when ugly boys that are both profoundly depressed and enraged at the world get to find each other over the internet. In previous generations they were just ostracized and lonely.


That doesn't really explain anything. In fact, it presumes that it doesn't have to be explained in any but the superficial sense--that there is no cause for the psychology that came into being. That this was conjured out of some dank recesses that are solely the creation of he who has that mind, and is only he who is solely responsible for rising above that psychology and getting beyond it. This sort of callous dismissal to hurt and pain can be used against other groups, too, you know.
   63. homerwannabee Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:24 AM (#5750552)
It's not that jerks get more women in my opinion. It's that Alpha males can get more women. I feel there are two types of Alpha males. The good ones. These are the Alpha males that get married in their early 20s to their highschool sweetheart, and just settle down. What's left are jerks of the world who are Alpha Males, and women are drawn to them because women like guys who have leadership personalities. Heck people in general like guys who are natural born leaders.
But having said that, it goes the other way for guys. Guys are drawn to beautiful women, and they will be drawn to them even if they have horrible personalities, and are out just for their money. So you have two types of beautiful women. The first type is the ones the settle down in their early 20s. The others are probably just really mean or just really picky on who they date.
In the end too many males and females go for things that aren't truly that important in the long run. What matters most is that they are nice, and that you get along really well with that person. It's not about how beautiful or Alpha someone is, it's all about the character of a person.
   64. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:26 AM (#5750553)
I haven't really dived into it, but same was said about "Nice Guys" back in the day, by people who were trying to attack them, with a modicum of writings/whatnot by guys who'd say "I used to be a Nice Guy, but I learned I have to be a Jerk" - many of whom did indeed get pretty awful, but where indeed now being "Jerks". And Rickey (for instance) has the same look, spouting feminist jargon, but taking the extremely pro-Patriarchy position "Guys who can't get laid because they're trying really hard to respect women's boundaries are ugly unpleasant cucks", so it's pretty easy to be skeptical of that. Fundamentally, you can't be involuntarily celibate unless you take it as a given that women have the absolute right to decide who they want to mate with. So, one can mull over where the hate for that comes from.
Brian, I appreciate (and I say this completely nonironically) the attempt at contrarianism, but you're misidentifying the self-proclaimed incels. Yes, the "nice guy" thing sometimes led to bitterness over the fact that women seemed to actually like men who weren't so nice. But that's not incels. They are not the "I can't get laid because I just respect women too much" crowd. They are the "Women shouldn't have any right to turn me down and this society is ###### up because it lets women say no" crowd.
   65. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:29 AM (#5750554)
That doesn't really explain anything. In fact, it presumes that it doesn't have to be explained in any but the superficial sense--that there is no cause for the psychology that came into being. That this was conjured out of some dank recesses that are solely the creation of he who has that mind, and is only he who is solely responsible for rising above that psychology and getting beyond it. This sort of callous dismissal to hurt and pain can be used against other groups, too, you know.


I didn't say any of that. I glossed over it, because I'm not prepared to speculate on the psychology that brings these pitiable young men to this state. I can sympathize with anyone in such pain, but at some point such a disgusting worldview kind of demands dismissal.
   66. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:29 AM (#5750555)
Is this a drinking game anyone is familiar with? Seems sort of random. Usually there's a mechanism to the game which decides who drinks, not people just randomly picking someone to drink.


Sounds like a variant of anchorman/quarters to me... there's also a 'pass the pitcher' - also popular with the 'boots' of beer at german halls - where one can essentially manipulate the game to make sure one person gets most of the beer.

Lots of drinking games involved 'piling on' someone -- our version of beer pong likewise involved targeting rather than random chance.

EDIT: There's also a card game called ####### - something in between gin and Uno - which involves rampant cheating and inevitably involves piling on someone.
   67. BDC Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:30 AM (#5750556)
Is this a drinking game anyone is familiar with?

Such games exist, as Zonk notes. Though they were probably not thinking of passatella, it's a game from the south of Italy, where somebody arbitrarily decides who will drink and who won't, described by Carlo Levi in Christ Stopped at Eboli:

The King holds sway over the wine, for
which all the players have paid their share, and he fills the
glasses or leaves them empty according to his fancy. His
assistant holds the glasses out to be filled and has veto powers,
that is, he can prevent the would-be drinker from downing
his wine. … Sometimes the game has
an innocent character and does not extend beyond the pleas-
antry of piling up all the drinks on one man who is notori-
ously unable to hold them, or denying them to the keenest
drinker at the table. But more often the arguments proffered
by the King and his assistant reflect the feuds and conflicting
interests of the players … Cards and bottles of wine al-
ternate for hours on end, until tempers boil from the effect of
drink and heat and the rekindling of smouldering passions,
which are in turn sharpened by vindictive words and yet
lulled by drunkenness.
   68. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:30 AM (#5750557)

I have to admit, I agree with much of what he is saying. The midterms will be a referendum on his presidency,
Yep. Which is why I want Democrats to win. (Well, I want Libertarians to win. But I hope Republicans lose.)
   69. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:33 AM (#5750559)
One of the ways the Ramirez allegation is distinguishable from Ford's is the following. At least with Ford, Ford claims that X happened, and she always knew that Kavanaugh did X. But with Ramirez, Ramirez claims that X happened, and she didn't always know Kavanaugh did X. At first she wasn't certain what Kavanaugh's role was. Then after reconsidering the incident 35 years later she felt confident in what Kavanaugh's role was.

This means that the only reason Ramirez has now come to be certain that Kavanaugh did X is that Kavanaugh was nominated for the Supreme Court. Had Kavanaugh not been nominated for the Supreme Court, Ramirez would not now be certain that Kavanaugh had done X.

That to me means that it would be a reasonable decision for one to dismiss Ramirez's allegations out of hand in considering Kavanaugh's nomination.

Also: What are the journalistic standards for writing such a piece where the accuser concedes she wasn't sure what the role of the accused was in the incident, but after carefully assessing her memories for six days 35 years later she is now certain it was Kavanaugh -- to the point where she recalls the incident in such a level of detail that she could not have been at all *un*certain at any point that it was Kavanaugh? It diminishes Ronan Farrow that he wrote this piece.
   70. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:38 AM (#5750563)
It’s important to remember that none of the conservatives defending Kavanaugh actually believe a single thing they are saying.
   71. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:43 AM (#5750566)
Sam Alito breezed through. John Roberts breezed through. Neil Gorsuch breezed through.

Senate Democrats attempted to filibuster Sam Alito, with 42 Democrats eventually voting against his nomination. Same for Neil Gorsuch, with all but 3 Democrats voting against his nomination. John Roberts had a tour de force hearing that made his critics look silly, but still had almost twice as many Democrats voting against him (22) as Republican votes against Ginsburg & Breyer combined (12), and the votes against Roberts included such prominent Democrats as Obama, Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Kennedy, Reid, Schumer, Feinstein & Durbin. Collectively, the current Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have cast but one vote for a Supreme Court nominee of a GOP President, Pat Leahy for Roberts.
   72. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM (#5750567)
Though they were probably not thinking of passatella, it's a game from the south of Italy, where somebody arbitrarily decides who will drink and who won't, described by Carlo Levi in Christ Stopped at Eboli:


Ah yes - this does sound like #######! Likely the genesis of the card game I loved so well as a drunken frat boy.

I mostly remember the cheating - as I said, it was expected. The head of the table was the President, though - Americanized :-) - not the King... the low person in the game was the ####### (players arranged themselves in order from the previous hand's results).

Everybody had power over the people to below them in the stack order - except the #######, who, IIRC, had to deal the cards - and had solely this brief moment of power while shuffling and dealing.

The cheating usually took the form of the President and ####### surreptitiously cooperating to retain their respective positions.
   73. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:46 AM (#5750568)
It’s important to remember that none of the conservatives defending Kavanaugh actually believe a single thing they are saying.


I hear it's a tactic Nazis use to try to suppress opposing views by attacking the character of the people expressing the opposing views rather than by addressing the arguments themselves.
   74. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM (#5750569)
You hear lots of foolish things, and worse, you believe them.
   75. Zonk is One Individual Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:48 AM (#5750570)
Also: What are the journalistic standards for writing such a piece where the accuser concedes she wasn't sure what the role of the accused was in the incident, but after carefully assessing her memories for six days 35 years later she is now certain it was Kavanaugh -- to the point where she recalls the incident in such a level of detail that she could not have been at all *un*certain at any point that it was Kavanaugh? It diminishes Ronan Farrow that he wrote this piece.


According to Mayer - it was not Rameriz who came forward, but other Yale classmates...

“She didn’t come forward with it,” Mayer said Monday on NBC’s “Today.” “What happened was, the classmates at Yale were talking to each other about it, they were emailing about it. We’ve seen the emails, back in July before Christine Blasey Ford came forward, and eventually the word of it spread.”

“It spread to the Senate. It spread to the media,” she continued. “And [we] reached out to her. After giving it really careful consideration for six days, she decided to talk to [Ronan Farrow].”
   76. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:50 AM (#5750572)
I mostly remember the cheating - as I said, it was expected. The head of the table was the President, though - Americanized :-) - not the King... the low person in the game was the ####### (players arranged themselves in order from the previous hand's results).
That would be this, or a ripoff thereof...
   77. Morty Causa Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:53 AM (#5750574)
I didn't say any of that. I glossed over it, because I'm not prepared to speculate on the psychology that brings these pitiable young men to this state. I can sympathize with anyone in such pain, but at some point such a disgusting worldview kind of demands dismissal.

That's your prerogative. Keep in mind that the opposition, any adversary really, feels it has the same prerogative when it comes to those they view as extreme (Antifa, me too, BLM, for example). And where does that leave us? Hitting the ground running, I guess.
   78. BrianBrianson Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:53 AM (#5750575)
Who's saying guys shouldn't express interest?

I'm just saying this: You express interest by saying "Would you like to have dinner/go for a drink/coffee/etc"... and you accept that she may very well say No.


There's a strong vein in society/popular dialogue/whatever about not making unwanted advances. Like, the world. And saying "Would you like to have dinner/go for a drink/coffee/etc"... is definitely potentially that - no one calling themselves a "Nice Guy" would ever do that.

And if you refuse to make the first move for fear it'll be unwanted, what's left? Hanging around them and being friendly and nonsexual. And if you complain that you can't find a relationship doing that (and if you're a guy who isn't a flat 10, you won't), you get slagged as saying you think you're entitled to sex - in anything else, if you can't make friends, if you can't find a job, whatever, you can ask what you're doing wrong. But ask here, and this thread is full of guy who'll villify you for it.

Brian, I appreciate (and I say this completely nonironically) the attempt at contrarianism, but you're misidentifying the self-proclaimed incels.


I'm not being contrarian. Self-proclaimed incels get labelled and described exactly the same way self proclaimed Nice Guys (tm) were a decade ago, and there I'm just speaking from self-experience. I had a horrific case of Nice Guy-ism, and only got out of it (and then, only marginally), by really understanding it.
   79. Lassus Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:53 AM (#5750576)
I hear it's a tactic Nazis use to try to suppress opposing views by attacking the character of the people expressing the opposing views rather than by addressing the arguments themselves.

Hard to tell if this is serious or sarcasm; but if the former it is the same kind of insight that Adams felt was revolutionary when he said people vote with their heart and not their brains. In other words, this was invented by Agg, Ogg, and Frogg, not Rudolf Hess.
   80. BDC Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:55 AM (#5750577)
Senate Democrats attempted to filibuster Sam Alito, with 42 Democrats eventually voting against his nomination. Same for Neil Gorsuch, with all but 3 Democrats voting against his nomination. John Roberts had a tour de force hearing that made his critics look silly, but still had almost twice as many Democrats voting against him (22)


But none of those three experienced any Kavanaugh-like trouble with accusations from women. (And whatever the precise dawn of #MeToo, all were after Clarence Thomas and all were after Bill Clinton, for that matter; it's not like women complaining about bad behavior was invented in the fall of 2017.)

IOW it's just not true that any conservative man will be pelted with accusations from women. The contrast between Trump and Pence ought to show this. Granted, Pence crosses the street if a woman is approaching on his side, but it seems to have kept him out of the sights of #MeToo.
   81. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:56 AM (#5750578)
More men than women care about the opposite sex's physical appearance. You see far more "ugly man / good looking woman" pairings than vice versa.

More women than men care about the opposite sex's social status. This is now changing because of the noted phenomenon of Ivies marrying Ivies**, but you still see far more men than women "marrying down".

Other than that, pretty much all gender relations are now in a state of flux. My only advice would be to keep listening.

** "Ivies" being shorthand for "upper or upper middle class professionals"
   82. Lassus Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:58 AM (#5750579)
This discussion about the way men and women see and treat each other seems not-very-oddly one-sided.
   83. homerwannabee Posted: September 24, 2018 at 11:59 AM (#5750580)
So now it looks like Rosenstein is about to be fired, or maybe he quit. It depends on the sources. But still, it looks like after today Rosenstein will no longer be Deputy Attorney General. This is very big news. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/24/deputy-ag-rosenstein-heading-to-white-house-expecting-to-be-fired-sources-say.html And the CNN article
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/rod-rosenstein-fired-resigns-dle/h_547cb0aa5bdbeb64206bda39e2b8fecb
   84. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:06 PM (#5750582)
I'm trying to figure out who Brian Brianson is talking to, and about what, but failing, although I did enjoy his own personal history of Nice Guyism.
   85. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:07 PM (#5750583)
Senate Democrats attempted to filibuster Sam Alito, with 42 Democrats eventually voting against his nomination. Same for Neil Gorsuch, with all but 3 Democrats voting against his nomination. John Roberts had a tour de force hearing that made his critics look silly, but still had almost twice as many Democrats voting against him (22)

But none of those three experienced any Kavanaugh-like trouble with accusations from women. (And whatever the precise dawn of #MeToo, all were after Clarence Thomas and all were after Bill Clinton, for that matter; it's not like women complaining about bad behavior was invented in the fall of 2017.)

IOW it's just not true that any conservative man will be pelted with accusations from women. The contrast between Trump and Pence ought to show this. Granted, Pence crosses the street if a woman is approaching on his side, but it seems to have kept him out of the sights of #MeToo.


Clapper's apparent philosophy is that all Supreme Court nominees without actual criminal records should be confirmed unanimously, regardless of their known ideology and regardless of how their confirmation would shift the balance of the Court.

It's not the most indefensible position, but it'd hold a lot more water if the Federalist Society, NARAL, and about 500 other outside groups weren't vetting every prospective nominee for ideological purity.

I also wonder just how long Clapper would hold to his position if we had a "Warren Court" in place today, and a newly elected Democratic president nominated two certifiably pro-choice, anti-NRA, and anti-Dark Money liberals to expand the Court's liberal majority from (say) 5-4 to 7-2. I wonder if he'd be saying "Well, the people have chosen" and simply leave it at that.
   86. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5750584)
I am gratified that I am so important that people feel the need to discuss what I think. But if people are going to do that, they should not do it based on drawing inferences based on splicing together pieces of different exchanges. My position on Kavanaugh is simple:

1) If he lied about any of these incidents, he's out.

Setting aside the issue of lying,

2) If he did what Ford claims, he's out. (It would be a tougher call if his defense were, "Ford misinterpreted things. We were fooling around and I never was going to try to have sex with her," or "I misinterpreted what Ford wanted," or the like. Fortunately, his defense of "It never happened at all" allows us to avoid having to confront any such ambiguities.)

3) If he did what Ramirez claims but not what Ford claims, I couldn't care less. That does not mean that I approve. It means that I think it's trivial. (And no, not a crime.) If that makes me a monster, then I guess you'll just have to get out the pitchforks. But to be clear, that assessment is based on the alleged context. He did not do it in the workplace. He did not do it as a 50 year old. He did not sneak into a woman's dorm room one night and do it to her while she was sleeping. He did not do it recently. A bunch of freshmen were engaged in drinking games, and it was a non-violent prank. Thirty-five years ago.


EDIT: And, no, I was not saying that she assaulted him in the alleged scenario. I was saying that what he supposedly did didn't remotely constitute assault, and noting the irony that she's the one who initiated contact.

As to the question of whether he did these things:

4) The evidence that we know of for the Ramirez claim is a joke. Every single person purportedly present denies it except a woman who was too drunk to remember and even now admits that she wasn't certain until she talked to a lawyer this week. One person who wasn't there claims to have heard about it, but of course has no firsthand knowledge.

5) The evidence that we know of for the Ford claim is not a joke in the same way, but it is certainly not substantial enough to judge Kavanaugh on. Again, we have one accuser, no corroboration of any sort, and indeed everyone who might have been present other than her denies it. Ed Whelan notwithstanding, her claims simply cannot be meaningfully verified.

Given #4 and #5, my view that Kavanaugh's confirmation is appropriate hasn't changed. Of course, if Avenatti (snicker) comes forward with his mystery witnesses, that would be a game changer.
   87. Lassus Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:11 PM (#5750585)
Avenatti should go away.
   88. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:12 PM (#5750586)
If Rosenstein is fired, or is forced to resign under pressure, I'm looking forward to seeing how those Republicans who've warned Trump to lay off the Mueller investigation will react to a replacement nominee who's widely seen as a Trump apparatchik. That might make for a confirmation hearing almost as interesting as Kavanaugh's.
   89. RoyalFlush Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:12 PM (#5750588)
There's a strong vein in society/popular dialogue/whatever about not making unwanted advances. Like, the world. And saying "Would you like to have dinner/go for a drink/coffee/etc"... is definitely potentially that - no one calling themselves a "Nice Guy" would ever do that.


I've probably been single here longer than most. Asking someone out once and not being creepy about it will not get any reasonable person in trouble. Work situations can be tricky and should be avoided, but outside of that, I don't see it.

I guess if someone says "no", it can - by definition - be called "an unwanted advance". But it's silly to think there's a ton of men being ostracized, attacked, or otherwise called-out for asking someone on a date once.
   90. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:14 PM (#5750591)
I don't know what Avenatti has been doing over the past few months but "practicing law" seems to be low on the list.
   91. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5750593)
3) If he did what Ramirez claims but not what Ford claims, I couldn't care less. That does not mean that I approve. It means that I think it's trivial. (And no, not a crime.) If that makes me a monster, then I guess you'll just have to get out the pitchforks. But to be clear, that assessment is based on the alleged context. He did not do it in the workplace. He did not do it as a 50 year old. He did not sneak into a woman's dorm room one night and do it to her while she was sleeping. He did not do it recently. A bunch of freshmen were engaged in drinking games, and it was a non-violent prank. Thirty-five years ago.

That doesn't make you a monster, but when you consider the specifics of the accusation, I doubt if you'd find more than a dozen Republican Senators who'd take that position.

(Well, maybe more than a dozen. Maybe 40. After all, this is the Trump party we're talking about, not Mitt Romney's or John McCain's. But not enough to get him confirmed.)
   92. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5750594)
87

Avenatti should go away.


I can't agree strongly enough.

Though I do enjoy him breaking Tucker Carlson's stones.
   93. perros Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:38 PM (#5750603)
But I'm out of step with the frothy glee of all the liberals here who are cheering on every paltry half-rumor that shows up in the media. I understand the desire to get Kavanaugh - he's certainly not the type of judge I want on the big court - but it seems like most people here feel they somehow know that he's a bad egg. I feel like we don't actually know that.


Now that you've hopped in bed with Kavs and Nieps, don't be shocked when you awake to a grand ol' butting.
   94. perros Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:40 PM (#5750604)
Brett Kavanaugh Is A Man The Right Can Get Behind


See above. But yeah, it's all about being a #### with impunity.
   95. Mike A Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:41 PM (#5750605)
Washington Examiner reporting Montgomery County Police are not investigating a new allegation in regards to Kavanaugh. Police are apparently readying a statement.
   96. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:43 PM (#5750606)
91- Really? Huh. I’d guess the majority of male senators have abused women at least as much as Kavanaugh is accused of.

Morality and power are orthogonal; the people drawn to one are repelled by the other.
   97. Jay Z Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:46 PM (#5750608)
Some of the complaints of men can have merit. The average age of first marriage is creeping up year by year. Pretty sure that is at the behest of women. A lot of decent guys, let's get away from the "nice guy" bit, are going into their first marriage with a woman who's already had a kid by another man, or had several semi-serious relationships. From personal experience, I don't think that's a good thing.

We need to face the facts that the genders are not really equal in the sexual market place. I'm not really worried about the average girl losing her virginity. She will have her choice of men. The average man has to do some work to do that.

Maybe that's why the social restrictions were in place in the past, maybe it just doesn't work to have completely free sexuality because of the imbalances. Maybe imposed rules are the best way to go. We certainly do it in other realms, don't rely completely upon nature.

That being said, a lot of the men inhabiting that "community" are one note. The imbalance is part of life, but it isn't everything.

Personally, I never laid anything at the feet of women as a group. Just figured I had to take different approaches. I was an am something of a loner. That didn't help. Wouldn't even use nice as a leading adjective. I was kind to my ex wife, she said so. But that was in a relationship. Never understood why a guy would fall for the whole orbiter bit. That crap I could figure out. Like I said, I will cop to not always being nice.

I will also note that I have gotten awful treatment from particular women in particular scenarios, including my ex wife. You take your chances.
   98. perros Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:51 PM (#5750612)
their incels forum is a very scary way to pass the time.


Kinda like YR hanging out with Nazis. That #### rubs off on you. James Bridle explores the comsequences of too much internet in New Dark Age: The End of the Future, but I'm not sure we can even separate cause and effect anymore. Civilizational breakdown is upon us.
   99. RoyalFlush Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:52 PM (#5750613)
We need to face the facts that the genders are not really equal in the sexual market place. I'm not really worried about the average girl losing her virginity. She will have her choice of men. The average man has to do some work to do that.


Who ever said the sexual market place was supposed to be equal?
   100. PreservedFish Posted: September 24, 2018 at 12:53 PM (#5750614)
That comment is hella creepy.
Page 1 of 33 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogChicago Cubs manager Joe Maddon reveals the book he says is helping him manage millennial players
(104 - 3:08pm, Dec 18)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogTaking Back the Ballparks - Braves voting thread
(3 - 3:07pm, Dec 18)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (December 2018)
(695 - 3:07pm, Dec 18)
Last: Davo and his Moose Tacos

Gonfalon CubsNow what?
(363 - 3:07pm, Dec 18)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 12-18-2018
(25 - 3:01pm, Dec 18)
Last: stig-tossled, hornswoggled gef the typing mongoose

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(3774 - 2:53pm, Dec 18)
Last: spivey

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (The Berhalter Thread?)
(246 - 2:49pm, Dec 18)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogThibs' Hall of Fame Tracker
(519 - 2:33pm, Dec 18)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(403 - 1:51pm, Dec 18)
Last: Kiko Sakata

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2320 - 1:47pm, Dec 18)
Last: aberg

NewsblogTHE HALL OF FAME VALUE STANDARD (Bill James rank 25 worst players in HOF & 25 best not in the HOF)
(115 - 11:32am, Dec 18)
Last: Rally

NewsblogOT Gaming: October 2015
(918 - 11:16am, Dec 18)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network)

NewsblogUPDATE: WEEI denies it will change Red Sox broadcasts to a talk show format – HardballTalk
(21 - 11:08am, Dec 18)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogRed Sox owe $12 million in luxury tax, showing why they'd want to shed payroll
(18 - 11:06am, Dec 18)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogMLB: Mets to sign catcher Wilson Ramos
(58 - 11:01am, Dec 18)
Last: PreservedFish

Page rendered in 0.8505 seconds
46 querie(s) executed