 | septrose14 on Reddit layoffs |
 | shelldigger on Thought of the day |
 | The Sauciest Duck on Chauvin and Rittenhouse |
 | Michael on Chauvin and Rittenhouse |
| Stephen Moreton on Chauvin and Rittenhouse | |
 | Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Merry Christmas |
| Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Mele Kalikimaka |
 | somdeblahiriyahoocoi… on Thought of the day |
| Michael on Wuhan virus and one last… |
| Quick correction | F… on The A-Unicornist, Bernie Bro… |
If you’ve ever wondered if feminism is for you, ask yourself one simple question: Can a woman ever be sexist towards a man? If your answer is yes, then feminism is not for you.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Feminism, Thought of the day | Leave a comment »
That may have been the worst Super Bowl I’ve ever seen.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Super Bowl, Thought of the day | 3 Comments »
The argument against the notion that corporations are people is so simple: A corporation is a government-defined, sanctioned, licensed, and registered organization. It exists as a legal concept and will cease to exist as it stands should there be no government. An actual human being, on the other hand, may have a legal definition of sorts, but a human will continue to exist without government.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Corporations are not people, Thought of the day | 9 Comments »
The reason I don’t find the anti-cosmetic argument of anti-circumcisionists convincing is that these people usually aren’t arguing from any solid principle they’re willing to consistently hold. That is, the anti-circumcisionist argument states that a person’s bodily autonomy is important and should not be violated against his or her will except when medically necessary. That means if your baby has a potentially fatal or life-altering heart defect, for example, surgery is an okay thing to demand. Having foreskin, on the other hand, is not fatal or life-altering, and so circumcision is unjustified. But here’s the problem: vaccines cause the body to create antibodies that otherwise would not be there. This is a change to the body which, depending on the vaccine, may last forever. It isn’t an outward change like circumcision, but that is neither here nor there. If the anti-circumcisionists want to premise their argument on bodily autonomy, then any permanent change to the body is fair game.
Let’s review. Circumcision is not necessary for a quality life, nor is a lack of circumcision inherently fatal or life-altering. Vaccines, too, are not necessary for a quality life, nor is a lack of vaccination inherently fatal or life-altering. The differences that exist between these two examples are plenty, but when we’re talking purely about bodily autonomy? There isn’t a bit of difference. Circumcision permanently changes a part of the bodily. Vaccines permanently change the body’s antibodies. Each example, strictly speaking, can be argued to be a violation of a person’s bodily autonomy. Yet, except for the kooks and quacks, we never hear of any anti-circumcisionists wailing on about vaccines. Funny that. It’s almost as if their primary argument is a lie that isn’t based upon any principle at all.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Circumcision, Thought of the day | 5 Comments »
What I’ve learned from the Internet:
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Internet, Thought of the day | 4 Comments »
If you’re a parent who hears, “Yeah, I’ll turn off the game in a minute. I have to find a save point”, yet you still decide to turn off the game yourself sans any save point being found, then when your kid is searching for a bookmark, you should be perfectly content randomly slamming shut his novel.
(It’s actually worse to randomly shut off a game since that will cause the kid to re-play what he lost whereas if he loses his place in a book, it’s simply a matter of finding where he was. In other words, being ignorant of how video games work can result in more video game playing which, though that is not a bad thing in and of itself, is exactly the opposite of the goal of such a parent.)
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Consistency, Thought of the day | Leave a comment »
For those who believe sexism is defined by power asymmetry, let me present two scenarios:
You’re going for a job. You have 10 years relevant experience and the appropriate education and degrees. The field is relatively gender neutral with approximately a 50-50 split between men and women. You are competing against one other candidate; your competition has the same experience and education as you. Would you prefer to be treated as a man or a woman?
I doubt very many people are going to opt to be treated as a woman in this scenario. It is clearly an advantage to be treated as a man, all else being equal. But now let me present the second scenario:
You’ve been accused of a serious crime. You’re innocent but there’s some evidence implicating you. (Maybe you were even dumb enough to actually talk to the police.) Since you refuse a plea deal, you’re going to trial. Would you prefer to be treated as a man or a woman?
This scenario perhaps works even better in family court matters, but it’s overwhelmingly clear in either case which is better: To be treated as a woman in court is a massive advantage. Clearly sexism is a two-way street, even if more traffic flows in one direction than the other.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Sexism, Thought of the day | Leave a comment »
While I’m happy the Patriots won last night, I hate how they did it. The overtime rules for the NFL are awful and illogical. Football is fundamentally a timed game. That’s why timeouts and clock management are so important. Making the game into sudden death (or whatever one wishes to call the convoluted field goal rule) is a disservice to fans. Hockey lends itself to sudden death. Soccer, though terrible, is appropriately sudden death. Football? Not even close. Play the full 15 minutes.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: NFL, Thought of the day | Leave a comment »
Why don’t we allow 16 year olds to vote? We allow them to work and pay taxes, so why don’t they get a say in their representation? Why can’t they cast a vote against a politician who is spending their money yet not working in their interests? Are we so naive as to think the parents/guardians of a 16 is working in his best political interests? Why should we expect a 45 year old parent to cast a vote related to, say, social security spending which is in the 60 year interest of the program as opposed to the 30-40 year interest of the program that is relevant to the parent?
It seems utterly clear to me that if we’re going to allow 16 year olds the right to work – that is, unlike with people 15 years and younger, a 16 year old needs not his school’s or parent’s legal permission to get a job – then we must either refuse to tax them or we must allow them the right to vote. The latter option, though, would only work if we were consistent in it: since 16 year olds are unrepresented in the government and given the right to work, we must exclude them from all forms of taxation, including income taxes, excise taxes, inheritance taxes, every day taxes on purchased items, and any other tax one might imagine. This is hardly workable. Thus, we’re left with only a few solutions: 1) raise the age of legal employment to 18, 2) make employment under 18 contingent upon a parent’s approval, or 3) allow 16 year olds to vote. The third option seems to be the best to me.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Representation, Thought of the day | 7 Comments »
Here are a few things which would go a long way towards fixing the U.S. legislative process:
Age restrictions (25 for House, 30 for Senate, 35 for President) should also be lifted, but that’s more a matter of their inanity than in actually changing much about the legislative process.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Legislative Process, Thought of the day | 5 Comments »
For the Sake of Science 