Sunday, September 11, 2022

The Male Monkey Dance

From Rob Henderson (bad LA neighborhoods and foster care to USMC to Yale to Substack) The Male Monkey Dance

“Male-typical traits such as beards and deep voices may be more about intimidating other men than they are about attracting women. In other words, these traits may be deers’ antlers rather than peacocks’ tails. To the extent that this is the case, the fact that women don’t always find them attractive is beside the point: That’s not why they evolved.”

This has been known in some circles for a while, but tends to get underemphasised in discussions of male-female behavior. In primates, male attractiveness to females does not seem to matter much at all, as females mate with the males who have established physical dominance over them by beating them repeatedly.  Yes, even the bonobos, that species beloved by hippie types because they are supposedly less violent and all have sex with each other.  They are less violent than chimps, yes.  They are hugely more sexually violent than humans. 

One wonders how far this extends up into human history. Much was made of the discovery that 1% of the men of the world are descended from Genghis Khan (and maybe a couple of brothers) because of their conquest and rape in a short period of time, but they are pikers compared to the earlier Yamnaya invaders of Europe. The women of the invaded areas were ten times more likely to pass on their genes. That's one definition of genetic success, but it could hardly have seemed like victory to the women involved. The young men did not even settle down and set up harems. They raped and went on.  If ten were impregnated, a greater number must have been raped. This is not that long ago (less than  5,000 years) and became a significant part of European ancestry.

It's worth asking where and when male attractiveness to women began to matter at all, and what the percentage is even now.

The Book of Second Opinions

 My wife put me on to this.  I hate cliches in the faith.



A Touch Grim

 From Noah Garfinkel: This opens up cap space for the royal family to potentially bring in Kevin Durant.

Alex Berenson

If any of you are Alex Berenson fans, Lyman Stone has the takedown. (Topic mRNA vaccines and fertility.) I don't think I've seen Stone, who is quite polite, use the word "horseshit" before.

Saturday, September 10, 2022

Conference

The Inklings conference at the Presbyterian Heritage Center in Montreat did not get off to a good start, and my personal infuriating experience with Enterprise Rental left me in no mood to be generous to the presenters of the first day.  But the second and third days' presenters were quite knowledgeable and original, and I happened up some very interesting folks at the end.  Some detail to follow.

Epigenetics

Grim linked to an article on new research suggesting that some information acquired in the human lifetime is passed on to offspring, what is called epigenetics. I have been suspicious of epidgenetic claims because

1. It is ill-defined, expanding or contracting at need. I think even among those who make their livings in the research, you will get at least slightly different definitions. It can be broad enough to include prenatal influences - which is not insane because chemical/hormonal exposures in the womb at various developmental stages can make some genes more likely to express, and may  even influence what genes are passed on. 

2. It is trotted out as a convenient, hand-waving explanation on certain topics whenever we don't like what the genetic research is telling us.

3. Even when it is not full-blown Lysenkoism, it tends to undermine the idea of evolution in general. If there is too much of environment butting in, favorable or unfavorable genes have less pressure. The old sci-fi story "The Lysenko Maze" claimed that we did not see these acquired characteristics being passed on because they are all about unimportant characteristics with little or no survival value. If we make it a significant survival issue for the mice, THEN we will see the traits passed on. Fun idea for a story, but complete nonsense.  Survival until breeding (or if you want to stretch a point, survival until your progeny successfully breed) is what was usually being measured, even if not explicitly stated. 

4. Some thing else that come to me while I was carmelising onions an hour ago which I can no longer recall.  It was a minor, not a killer point, so likely doesn't affect much.

Yet with all that said, I have never denied that a limited amount might still be compatible with plain ol' genetics and might even be likely. In fact, the 150 out of 20,000 (which they think might be low) genes does strike me as low. That it is targeted in particular regions makes sense and has precursors earlier in our phylogeny also seems plausible. WRT skeletons, we have lots of similarity with other creatures. But back to flies? Really? Whoa. 

Update: Razib also has an epigenetics in specific circumstances study he links to.

Tuesday, September 06, 2022

Political Signs

Those signs's up everywheah just now, with folks tryin' to get other folks to vote for 'em. I know some of those names, because it's a lotta the same ones every time.

This fella Stump Grinding seems pretty popular, but I don't know nothin' about him at all.  I knew a Stump Fernald who lived out by the Seacoast yeahs ago, but I don't know any Grindings whatsoever.  Doesn't sound like a New Hampsha name, and probly not Maine nor Vermont, neither. He doesn't seem too bright, doesn't even mention what office he's running for.

Monday, September 05, 2022

Horse Race Politics

I have said for years that I know nothing about this, enough so that I believe I have become proud of my ignorance, as if some knowledge is beneath me - never a good state. Yet what I do know is not always reliable.  There is regression to the mean, so that if Joe Biden is at historically low levels of popularity, it is likely that he regresses upward for no reason other than people not wanting to kick him quite so hard. Yet it is an open question as to when this regression actually starts happening.  In terms of the binary of elected/not elected, it matters whether this adjustment occurs before or after November.

We remain as closely divided these last forty years as we have ever been, and I fear it is because we are drawn to the division itself, to feeling that our opinion matters, and therefore needing to be on a precipice. Does fundraising matter?  It must, mustn't it? Does the general economy matter? Doesn't it always?  Are gas prices and the unemployment rate they two main figures to look at, as they always are?  

I don't know.

Obesity, Vaccination, and Excess Mortality by State

 Bethany has a new post up.  Interesting if you like correlations and things that don't immediately suggest plausible theories.

George Elmer Browne

 Browne (1871-1946) was a Provincetown artist before it was, er, P-town.

Perce Rock, Gaspe Peninsula, Canada

Peter and Dudley Again

 When you start watching them, you can't stop.  It's the phrasing that gets you.

"So there's hope?" You should know in this scene that Moore had club feet, and only one of them responded to surgery very well. It is said that comedy is often an expression of all our pain, crystalised by a brilliant expositor.  Think of Joan Rivers expressing the male/female double standard, or the many black and Jewish comedians who could put a spin on their distress.  Or Robin Williams and Jonathan Winters, who had vultures of depression always circling overhead but broke through.

PS: I just learned that Dudley was not only at Oxford, but at Magdalen College where Lewis was, so there is a connection between this post and the last. Moore graduated (music) in 1954 and Lewis left for Cambridge that year. Overlap of four years, but not necessarily enormous contact. He seems to have been a musical prodigy.

Which leads, almost inexorably, to this...

Put all of the above into this. I chuckle and laugh more than any any ten people you know put together, which is perhaps the only reason people like having me over.  Yet I seldom give a full-throated laugh. But I do here.

The Completion of CS Lewis

I am listening to William O'Flaherty interview Hal Poe about volume III of his biography, The Completion of CS Lewis, covering the years from 1945 until his death in 1963. I have not bothered much with biographies of Lewis after having read a few, and I assumed - on the basis of no information whatsoever - that this lengthy treatment by Poe was going to be mere tedious detail about things I already knew. There are some OCD tendencies about scholars of any topic or person. This does not seem to be the case after all and I have already learned a few things in less than an hour. I had not realised that he had developed good literary friendships in his ten years at Cambridge.  Those are largely unrecorded because those scholars did not produce any material popular with the general public and are thus not remarked on by other biographers. Yet they were important to Jack, and he was in many ways more comfortable there than Oxford, with which he is more closely associated.

Other biographers and commenters stress  he was passed over for promotion at Oxford because he was resented for both his popularity and his Christianity, despite his outstanding scholarship. Poe identifies that this is also because he did not fit well with the toxic, vindictive, bullying atmosphere in academia, as he was comfortable in disputation and stood up for ideas and people no matter who he was engaging with. Tolkien kept a lower profile in general, particularly in controversial matters. The last of the committees that passed over Lewis for a chair claimed that his scholarship was not that notable.  Poe's take is that nothing they have written remains unless one seeks it out in archives, while Lewis's The Allegory of Love, written before he was much know for his Christian beliefs or had any popular audience, remains in print and assigned at the graduate level. A Preface to Paradise Lost also remains in print and scholars even now find themselves obliged to engage with it decades later. The usual life of an academic book is less than five years. Perhaps least-known but of continuing importance is English Literature in the Sixteenth Century Excluding Drama, volume five of The Oxford History of English Literature (still in reprint). His scholarship turns out to have been not only excellent with regards to the expectations for holding a chair, but to be one of the very few of 20th C scholars of English letters that is still read all these days, even by people indifferent or even disdainful of his faith.

Yet he had locked horns with most of them in his career, seldom about Christianity but often about Oxford politics or literary subjects. That may have been the more prominent reason for their enmity.

I was also pleased to learn that Lewis did not like Pauline Baynes' illustrations for Narnia, though he thought she had learned enough by the last two volumes to be passable.  I have never liked them and have tried to make my peace with them by noting that they do seem to be modern echoes of medieval illustration such as tapestries, and remembering that I have little artistic sensibility myself and am in no position to judge.

Perhaps I will run into one or the other of O'Flaherty or Poe beginning Wednesday.

Saturday, September 03, 2022

Inklings Conference

I will be at Montreat, NC for an Inklings Conference during next week. I am a bit apprehensive about having wasted my money, as sitting and listening for hours is difficult for me and the Thursday program runs 9-5 with an hour for lunch and then another 75 minutes in the evening. Even Wednesday and Friday look lengthy to these eyes. I prowl restlessly at the back of church as it is and still remember sitting agonisingly in classes as a lad, sometimes even sending my brain away to daydream or count into the thousands to distract my mind from the tedium. It is a rare speaker who can hold me beyond 20 minutes.*

I had hoped to blast out to meet Grim for a beer in Asheville (I think we are equidistant - 30 minutes - from opposite directions) but I am not getting out until 8:15 Wednesday and Thursday, and I no longer push late into the evening. (I've got your email and may give you a try if I decide to skip one of the evening programs, Grim. I'll give notice after scouting out these folks during registration.)

I am not in the Inner Ring of Lewis people (ironic that there are people who clearly enjoy being in the Inner Ring in light of his essay on it), but such is the stuff humans are made of. Still, I know enough of them that there are a full dozen I would like to meet, led by Devin Brown who is a professor at Asbury where my sons went, and only three, maybe four, I hope not to get trapped with. Those are, unsurprisingly very much Inner Ring people who love talking about having had tea with Walter Hooper and the like.

If I absorb anything worth mentioning I will certainly mention it.

*Even the exceptions prove (the word means test in that context, not the silly idea that a counterexample actually reinforces a theory. Think proof as in alcohol, or "proving grounds," or "the proof of the pudding is in the eating." [And now you have a second correction of a common idea that the saying is 'the proof is in the pudding.']) the rule and uphold it.  When I went to overnight six-week advanced studies one summer in high school we had 3.5 hours of math every morning and lots of homework.  I was enraptured and had the grade of Superior for weeks 1&2.  Weeks 3&4 I hit Satisfactory.  But by then I was obsessed with a girlfriend, was playing in an impromptu band in chapel, and had secured a role in "Lysistrata." And was diagramming plays for the 6-man flag football intramural with other slackers. And playing in BASIC to devise a program that wrote poetry. (The mind grew where the brain withdrew was the best line out of hundreds.) Weeks 5&6 you can imagine.  I had Unsatisfactory grades, figured I had to rally for the final, and did eventually pass. We did not know what ADHD was at the time, nor that OCD should be classified as an anxiety disorder. BTW, I have counted to 10,000 a few dozen times in my life when I have been in situations where I had to be in place. That's three hours, and usually occurred after a couple of hours of daydreaming proved insufficient. I fixed it.  I can now daydream about five hours, especially if I am walking or driving. So even when things are fascinating I have limits, and that's not good. Yet that's why you come here, isn't it, because I not only write about the subjects that fascinate you, but throw in a few others that you have at least passing interest in. I'd say it was a SmörgÃ¥sbord, but that is usually repetitive, with 4M versions of herring and salmon and lutfisk, followed by ham and potatoes, followed by small amounts of fruit, cheese, and nuts. It sounds like a lovely variety but is mostly just herring and salmon, but you don't notice because of the quantities of aqvavit, snapps, and glogg you have consumed. Hey, the footnote is longer than the post! There was a recent novel that did that, sci-fi maybe, where whole chapters were footnotes. Cool idea but it would make me crazy.

Jiggling Elections

Matt Breunig points out that Democrats are in favor of opening things out so that more people can vote - unless they are Greens, in which case they will move heaven and earth to keep them off the ballot. 

Republicans needn't get too sniffy about this, however. Ben Paris, GOP Chair of Seminole County, FL, has been convicted of setting up a fake progressive ballot candidate in order to siphon off Democratic votes.

Orthodoxy

I am told that Renovare Book Club has Chesterton's Orthodoxy on the list for this year.  I no longer have a copy, or at leat cannot find it at present, but the quote one is looking for is usually easy to track down on Chesterton, as his fans are a committed bunch who want to make sure the word gets out.  I imagine it is in Gutenberg at this point, if I wanted to check. (I should, actually, shouldn't I, as I am going to a conference in Montreat next week about the Bible's influence on English writers.)

I liked The Everlasting Man better, or at least I have returned to it more often, but Orthodoxy has its own power. Chesterton always surprises, starting in an unexpected place that one sees immediately is a fine launch point for the key parts of a discussion. In setting out what he plans to do in describing his philosophy...well, better to let him say how he came to his belief

How can we contrive to be at once astonished at the world and yet at home in it? How can this queer cosmic town, with its many-legged citizens, with its monstrous and ancient lamps, how can this world give us at once the fascination of a strange town and the comfort and honour of being our own town?...We need so to view the world as to combine an idea of wonder and an idea of welcome. We need to be happy in this wonderland without once being merely comfortable.

The world is both strange and home, and any philosophy of life needs to give some explanation for that. I would never have thought to start there myself, yet apprehend immediately that it will eventually bring in all the right pieces.

Friday, September 02, 2022

The Western Elite From a Chinese Perspective

 An older article (2017) from American Affairs. 

" Someone once said that it is necessary to know English in order to learn about China. Important perspectives on China are only available in English and are generally not accessible on the mainland." The reverse might be becoming true as well. The author has experience at Goldman Sachs, Stanford Business School, and Trinity College at Cambridge.

Banned Books

Think age-appropriate.  That's where we're going here.

There are library controversies in Jamestown Township, MI; Llano, TX; Vinton, IA and elsewhere. The disagreements are about LGBT books being available to children. The reporting you will see on this will come from either the elite media perspective or the expressly conservative perspective, so you have to fill in the missing pieces.  I know little about any of these particular situations, but we have followed this for a long time, as my wife was an elementary school librarian and a city librarian before that.  My new daughter-in-law is a children's librarian.

The conservative media will focus on the worst few titles they can find, especially those that can be described easily. The elite media will focus on the dumbest aspects of the complaints they can find, so that you know these rubes just don't want to deal with reality. This is apparent if you have been following the ALA's Banned Books week over the decades.  Who wants to ban books? My goodness, only nazis, right? Who are these terrible people harassing these gentle professional librarians?

Let me be clear that there are indeed terrible people who harass gentle professional librarians, and it is ongoing. Stupid and unreasonable, many of them, who have unrealistic opinions about what should be in American libraries.

However, there are some missing pieces from the ALA and the elite media reports. The ALA includes any book that was challenged in its list, so its lifetime list includes the Bible, Koran, much of Shakespeare, Civil War histories from all perspectives.  It doesn't mean that any of them were actually banned. Secondly, a lot of times the challenge is from parents, because sexual (even borderline pornographic) or pro-LGBT material is available to young children. While you can find people who will stomp their foot and say they don't want this anywhere in the library because "I paid for it," the newspapers love those quotes, the reality is that the parents don't want some of the books available for third-graders, and if the libraries move them to junior high, high school, or adult sections they are fine with that. 

One would think that the solution is simple, then, right?  Get everyone together and work out what part of the library the book(s) should be in. Or have the librarians get a general idea of the terrain and just make that call on their own. That is in fact what usually happens with most challenges. It can get sticky.  Sometimes the librarians are quite liberal and think it is appropriate to make stuff available to young children or to engage in advocacy because they have believed some false ideas about sexual orientation and development. Sometimes the parents complaining include a few people who want to run for office or make a big splash and actually like wrestling in the mud. LGBT activism has tried to push such material to younger ages for years, largely because of their own false retrospectives of "when they knew." It is part of the current received wisdom that many children know from earliest years that they are homosexual or trans. It is true that many know they are somehow not like the others, but this this can have many outcomes. LGBT activists push that there is only one possible eventual outcome partly because of their own psychological need to rewrite their past. Sorry, it's just true.  I have taken detailed histories from people who said "I knew I wasn't like the other boys.  I wondered if I was gay. But I don't think that now" and similar sentiments.  Children pick up what is in the air as possible explanations for why they feel different.

In fact, so do adults, and feeling different from others you might be expected to be similar to is actually a fairly common experience. Not like other boys/not like other girls is a big category, likely a majority of us if we take a whole-childhood perspective. Lots of answers to that.

Thirdly, even if we are speaking about a child - I say this reluctantly and only for sake of argument - who actually is the wrong gender, that does not mean that sexual material presented at a young age is appropriate. As with Freudian psychology, where Siggy insisted that these impulses were pre-sexual and not fully sexual until puberty but everyone wanted to see it differently and regarded them as sexual, so too the current advocate adults look back on presexual affections and desires that became sexual at 13 (or later - lots of kids know their bodies have changed but still have little interest for years after. We should not be regarding the sexually precocious as normative). Pushing sex and romance on eight-year-olds because you had feelings of loneliness at fifteen is not reasonable.

The books often capture sad, or at least poignant and complicated stories of finding one's identity, and librarians and readers, who can often recognise quality writing, sometimes feel miffed because a particular book is quite well written, or a particular author is very good and tackles lots of difficult subjects. It almost works, because it is similar to adults looking at artists whose beliefs they disagree with but seeing that the craftsmanship is good. I don't much like that one even with adults for reasons about to become clear, but I at least hear it offered from reasonable people.

Let me assure you that this would not be said about a poignant, superbly-written book about a lonely boy who realises that he wants to sexually mutilate girls and so feels isolated and resentful that no one will date him. (Such boys exist and I have known them.  Ditto teenagers who want to have sex with young children.) Smart, sassy girls who were victimised by bullies in German in 1929 because they wanted to join the nazis (or the KKK, or fill-in-the-blank about unacceptable groups) aren't going to get nominated for any Newbery's. Try books about hunting now - the topic used to be common in children's literature. The books would never even be accepted for publication, so librarians don't see the censorship that naturally occurs on such subjects, and used to naturally occur on sexual subjects until quite recently. It;s just that some people have changed in what they think is sexually appropriate. 

When you hear the argument that we should respect quality even if we are uncomfortable with the subject matter, know that this always means "subject matter that I don't think you should be uncomfortable about."  Reverse the poles and this becomes clear.

The parents operate noisily, clumsily and stupidly at times, because this is not their field. Those pushing from the other direction operate more smoothly, at the level of publication, reviews, acquisition, and placement to keep out what they don't like.  So the former comes off looking worse. And in truth, they often haven't thought it through and don't want to.  But when you frame it in terms of age-appropriateness you can get a lot of them - not all - to agree. And they often have a good point, that inappropriate material, even designed to be aimed at a particular age-group by art and vocabulary, is in the wrong place. 

I got my sex education from the library, trying to invisibly wander over to the 570's(?) in the adult section. I don't think that material should have been in the children's section, but it should be in the library.  And I now know that if I had told Miss Thorpe that my mother (a single mom whom she knew and liked) seemed to be afraid to tell me about sex, that librarian would have quietly brought me over to exactly what I needed.  She would have saved me a lot of time, probably as well.  I am very grateful to the Bartholin's Glands for all they do, but I have never needed to know much about their structure, y'know?

The Tipping Point

When we identify tipping points in retrospect we are often highlighting symbolic events. These may not have actually been big in themselves, but they seem to us telling. I think that is true here. Though I am calling the statement by a thousand medical professionals a big deal, had it not happened I don't think things would be that different. A dozen or a hundred smaller things would have had to happen or not happen to change our national trajectory about covid beliefs. Thus, if you find some other incident around the same time more important, I won't fuss. This one was highly representative and symbolic, allowing us to identify threads that would become whole cloth and then garments down the road.

We were greatly shut down in early 2020. Liberals were just switching from calling Trump a racist xenophobe for shutting down the border and starting to listen to the medical people - largely drawn from their own ranks with credentials from places they liked - saying "No, this is serious. Buckle in." Everyone was nervously and sullenly accepting it, hoping it would be over soon. There was still much we didn't know.  Or most of us didn't.  There were voices even then saying that variants were going to be the big danger, but it wasn't part of the conversation. 

Into this mix comes the George Floyd protests. There was a statement from a thousand medical professionals, some of high prominence, saying that it was okay to go out for this, because wacism is also a public health crisis. It turns out that the danger wasn't high.  Outdoor transmission is minimal so long as people aren't hugging and cheek-by-jowl.  But we didn't know that then, and the message on that was minimal.  The statement was clearly "Oh SURE. Practice distancing, be careful, it's still dangerous, get right back inside...but go ahead. This is important."

So liberals got permission to bust out and have a good time seeing people and moving around, and got to feel self-righteous to boot.  I remain convinced that this was an invitation to party for a type of non-raucous liberal white person who just wanted to have a walk in the park and chat with like-minded people. Another excuse that wasn't George Floyd would have been just as good.  I am not saying that they don't "really care" about the issue of police targeting young black men, though I admit I am perpetually irritated on the issue because the police aren't doing that. The protests are founded on an untruth. Yet I do still get it that people legitimately believe it for sometimes understandable reasons, and they do at least partly "really care." Motivations are mixed and complicated. But it was unacknowledged at the time and still is that these protests were a great opportunity for liberals to go out and play while the conservatives had to stay cooped up.

The medical professionals who put this out weren't everyone, and it would be unfair to say "you all did this to us, the whole Medical Establishment." Yet the great majority, all those quite others, at minimum did not push back with any force saying this is irresponsible, or, if they believed there was little danger, that we could start going outdoors for other things too. This protest, which had some violence, led to further violence.  Whatever excusing language you choose, that most protesters were peaceful, that injustice had left a lot of dry tinder around just waiting for a spark, that the critics of the protests were vewwy vewwy evil, the permission giving is not in doubt.  Protesting, even with some violence, is okay, covid or not.

There were similar events that could have become the focus: a prominent black politician's funeral that was attended by many in conditions that were forbidden to everyday folks; a constant stream of stories about well-connected people (including a few conservatives) who were having get-togethers, or traveling, or going unmasked. The switch by Fauci on masks could have been forgivable if it was indecision or ambiguity.  But it turned out to have a lot of deception, of not telling the public the full story because it wasn't good for them.

Well, what would the average person conclude from this?

You don't really think this is dangerous.

Your stuff matters but our stuff doesn't.

You are afraid of what black people will do if you don't allow this. 'Better let 'em blow off some steam and not be cooped up,' huh? (And who's the racist, here?)

The discussion changed forever at that point. Not for the better.

A Dangerous World?

Interesting research out of UPenn that contradicts the standard beliefs about conservatives and liberals - so you know I'm all ears on that. Twitter is still used heavily by academics, remember, for preprint discussion, and they find it very useful, whatever we might think the cultural effect of more political tweeting is.* Belief in a dangerousness of the world does not drive conservative beliefs - other beliefs affect it much more

Abstract:Decades of research suggest a correlation between belief in a dangerous world and political conservatism. However, research relied on a scale that may overemphasize certain types of dangers. Furthermore, few other world beliefs have been investigated, such that fundamental worldview differences between liberals and conservatives remain largely unknown. A preregistered study of nine samples (N = 5,461; mostly US Americans) found a negligible association between a newly improved measure of generalized dangerous world belief and conservatism, and that the original scale emphasized certain dangers more salient to conservatives (e.g., societal decline) over others most salient for liberals (e.g., injustice). Across many measures of political attitudes, other world beliefs—such as beliefs that the world is Hierarchical, Intentional, Just, and Worth Exploring—each explained several times more variance than dangerous world belief. This suggests the relevance of dangerous world belief to political attitudes has been overstated, and examining other world beliefs may yield insights.

I had not heard of Jer Clinton, but he's an Ivy League PhD at the Positive Psychology Center, so let's take the under on how conservative he might be. I like the way he did the research though. When he noticed that his results were unexpected, even contradicting his own organisation's research, he dug deeper and asked new questions rather than trying to explain it away. 

His research focuses on primals,people's most deeply-held beliefs, and in this instance there were several differences between liberals and conservatives, but one stood out. Oversimplifying, conservatives believe the world is more naturally hierarchical and it is best to accept that reality. Better things rise to the top, worse things drift to the bottom. (His explanation is longer and better.) He provides summary access to some of the paywall stuff in PDF form.


Safe/Dangerous barely registers as a difference between us. Five other things are much bigger, four in one direction.

There's a lot to poke around with on this research. There's a quiz on what your primal beliefs are, too, for those who like that sort of thing. My results are too complicated to summarise easily. I do think my answers changed over the course of the 99 questions, but as a lot of my answers were midrange I don't think it much mattered. I did have some categories that were solidly in one direction.

*This may generate more comments than the post, but I continue to believe that if Donald Trump had stayed off Twitter, he would have been reelected handily. He just enjoyed pwning people too much and discomfiting them, and too many of his supporters thought that was fun, too. As with the "conservatives" who gave us Obamacare, further co-opting of agencies, and extra small wars because they wouldn't vote for McCain and Romney, to those Trump supporters who encouraged that foolishness I say "Thanks a bunch.  Enjoy President Biden."

Thursday, September 01, 2022

Types of Privilege

I used to say that there is no privilege like Liberal Privilege, but I think that is no longer true.  Even they are getting eaten now for saying the wrong things. Privilege Recently I heard of two additional types of privilege, which I believed on sight to be true: Attractive people are believed to be more intelligent, trustworthy...just everything nice. 45 countries for that one. Nick Wright (one more sports journalist from Syracuse) also mentioned that being funny also confers privilege - if you can make the joke land and gave examples of Dave Chappelle and Charles Barkley. It reminded me of Screwtape (Letter XI)

“Humour is for them the all consoling and (mark this) the all-excusing grace of life. Hence it is invaluable as a means of destroying shame. If a man simply lets others pay for him, he is ‘mean;’ if he boasts of it in a jocular manner and twits his fellows with having been scored off, he is no longer ‘mean’ but a comical fellow. Mere cowardice is shameful; cowardice boasted of with humourous exaggerations and grotesque gestures can be passed off as funny. Cruelty is shameful—unless the cruel man can represent it as a practical joke… And this temptation can be almost entirely hidden from your patient by that English seriousness about Humour. Any suggestion that there might be too much of it can be represented to him as ‘Puritanical’ or as betraying a ‘lack of humour’!

Privilege, BTW, was originally about many types of privilege and their interplay.

Anti-Natalist

 I don't think I know anyone anti-natalist, that it is wrong to have children.  I know people who don't want children, and people who say "I just can't see bringing any more children into this (overflowing/terrible/dangerous) world."  But no one who thinks it is wrong.  If I do, they probably wouldn't say it to someone who has five kids anyway. Interesting study that anti-natalists score higher on Dark Triad traits (psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism) 

CWCID: Rob Henderson

C S Lewis and Preferences

Lewis, commenting on a letter to the Church Times from the previous week (1951). Reprinted in God In The Dock

Having read Mr. Bradbury's letter on the Holy Name, I have a few comments to make. I do not think we are entitled to assume that all who use this Name without reverential prefixes are making a 'careless' use of it; otherwise, we should have to say the the Evangelists were often careless. I do not think we are entitled to assume that the use of the world Blessed when we speak of the Virgin Mary is 'necessary'; otherwise we should have to condemn both the Nicene and Apostles' Creed for omitting it. Should we not rather recognise that the presence or absence of such prefixes constitute a difference, not in faith or morals, but simply in style? I know that as their absence is 'irritating' to some, so their frequent recurrence is irritating to others.  Is not each party innocent in its temperamental preference but grossly culpable if it allows anything so subjective, contingent, and (with a little effort) conquerable as a temperamental preference to become the cause of division among brethren? If we cannot lay down our tastes, along with other carnal baggage at the church door, surely we should at least bring them in to be humbled and, if necessary, modified, not to be indulged?

Nashville

We are back from a long weekend in Nashville which also included a side trip to Mammoth Cave. I was down for a live fantasy football draft.  The league has been going for over forty years - it used to be played by postcard and telephone - and they decided to have a live draft in Ohio for the 40th and rolled it back again this year.  I have been in for five years and am still the new guy. 

We renter a house in Leiper's Fork, a section of Franklin I had never heard of but is apparently quite the up-and-coming suburb.  People making money in entertainment buy big spreads for horses or cattle.  Justin Timberlake, Tim McGraw and Faith Hill, Chris Stapleton and some others call it home now. Going back and forth into the city I learned a little of the geography. I like seeing what the countryside of a place looks like. This is more like Memphis than like Appalachia.

As we only had two days in Nashville we were limited in what we could see.  We went to the Parthenon, which also has an excellent exhibit of 19th C painting inside, and the Johnny Cash Museum, which is very well done. But one of the things I wanted to see was the downtown area with the noisy bars and the new phenomenon of bachelorette parties traveling far for a few nights of drinking and whooping. It seems odd to us from our generation, when bridesmaids might get together at a local restaurant beforehand. But not a whole long weekend hundreds of miles away.  It seems an extravagance and waste of resources.

Compared to traveling to Nashville for a fantasy football draft, that is.

We got to see one of the parties up close before we even got there. There was a group in Baltimore airport in matching black T-shirts that had something about whiskey on them, already a bit loud.  The eight of them ended up in the rows in front of us, and they brought out the little nip bottles they had smuggled on. The bride mentioned "getting their rally pants on" which sounded suggestive so I looked it up. I reported back to my sons that it seemed to refer to motorcycle or dirt bike racing pants, and the youngest corrected me that it meant throwing up so that you could keep drinking. Yes, that makes more sense in context. Chelsea and Erica discussed how the one-hour time change affected arrival time for about twenty minutes, and then again later after the flight was delayed they discussed it again. Lindsay and Caitlin reminded the group that they can't be thrown out of the plane. 

We saw similar groups on trolleys on Broadway, having a fine time.  There is also a type of trolley that is pedaled while the women sit across from each other and someone steers and serves drinks. Less whooping out of those girls, I think. Broadway is quite loud, as expected, as everyone has their doors and windows open and has live music. 


I think that is Anita Carter singing lead, but correct me if it is June. 

I have run this next video before, but it is featured strongly at the end of the museum display and is quite powerful in that context, perhaps especially when you are hearing it back-to-back a few times. It has been named top five and even best-ever by several raters, so I guess my instincts were right a few years ago.



Lia Thomas

I continue to love House of Strauss. Ethan uses sports to talk about larger issues.  Sometimes these are media issues I care about less, but he is interesting nonetheless. His substack article on why the Lia Thomas movement failed is excellent. It is paywalled, but you can get the first bit free, it is narrated in his podcast, and the underlying article by Dan Wetzel he is referring to is here. The short version is that FINA, the international swimming federation, banned transgender athletes from competing against females. Other agencies are already following.

Quite suddenly, according to Wetzel, we’re about to see one of those preference cascades I often mention. A domino has tipped over and bureaucracies around the world are now unapologetically dismantling a movement so powerful that nobody at ESPN dared question it openly. Last week, it was impossible to fight. This week, it’s impossible to save. That’s one hell of a shift.(Italics mine.)

There is an exception, and Wetzel has to take the usual slam that some of the opponents were bigots and pandering Yeah, you guys are completely right but it's for the wrong reasons. But as with the lawsuits against Tavistock that I referred to a couple of weeks ago, this may be where the high point was reached and the madness began to recede.

FINA headquarters in Lausanne, Switzerland. Perfect look for what it is.

The decision stressed fairness over inclusion, and Seb Coe, the director of World Athletics that oversees track & field and other running events has been public that he comes down on the same side when the two are in conflict. 

Strauss comments "So much of the Great Awokening is premised on inexorability. This was perhaps  articulated most bluntly by the narrator in Nike's  peak-cringe Euro Cup ad 'Welcome to the land of New Football.'...The commercial is built on the idea of youthful new football as this tolerant utopia that will cleanse the intolerant practices of old football. The pudgy narrator sounds like a movie villain when she announces 'You might as well join us, because no one can stop us.'" (Notice the working-class accent on the old football. No prejudice from New Football - only love.)

Strauss: "I have my own assumptions about the future, though I also understand it to be a contested property. Reality eventually wins. Maybe not immediately, hell maybe not even in our lifetime.  But eventually over time, it announces its presence against vigorous suppression efforts."

****

Additional bit that I picked up from Ethan on another show: Among younger listeners there is a growing number of people who listen at increased speeds. Once they have gotten used to a speaker's or a show's cadence they will speed it up, sometimes getting to 2.5x or even triple speed. There are programs that will increase the speed without making you sound like a chipmunk. This group reads less and less, relying increasingly on oral communication, and are pushing this to other media.

I read less and less every year.  Part of that is eyesight and need for light, but much of it is the ease of listening while I am walking or driving now. I haven't tried speeding it up yet, because I am not in a rush. Not usually. I may try it soon. Interestingly, it seems to encourage more thinking about things, especially thinking about what I will write, as I am out listening in a place where I can't immediately create a post. Driving while writing seems a bad idea. But I do spend more time writing than reading at this point, listening and daydreaming in between. Maybe it's not daydreaming if I am focused on topics to write.  Maybe that is simply "thinking."

I doubt we are much wired for reading, as it has only been a few centuries that people have been able to read in quantity.

Wednesday, August 31, 2022

Symbolism

I think the symbolism of this war statue commemorating our victory at the Battle of Midway is fairly clear.

Chicago Airport.

Lobster Is Overrated

One brother sent this along, and it reminded the other brother of the Bert & I stories, beloved by our father, and then by us. 

 

On our return flight last night, the attendant told us she had never been to NH before and asked us what the deal was with lobsters. She had some conversation with those up front, but on my way out I likely undercut their message. "Lobster is overrated. In colonial times it was considered slaves' food." "I understand butter is involved," she smiled.  "A fair point.  But they are still bottom feeders."

They are bottom feeders. When we had to take Kyle to the ER years ago after his mouth got tingly and face was flushed eating lobster (and crab), the doctor offered the opinion that he might not be allergic, but some other ingredient that had gotten down to lobsterland - sewage, medical waste, other attractive things - was what he was reacting against. He regarded this as not uncommon, and speculated that many people who believe they are sensitive or even allergic to shellfish actually are not.  Once bad experience can make any of us wary.  As Kyle was young, he was of course not wary, and had another go at lobster quickly.* (Of course his first lobster rechallenge was when he was camping with friends, far from civilisation.) Out to sea this is less of an issue, and is better the farther one gets from population density, but it is quite real.  Kyle eats lobster just fine now.

I'm not that enamored of the stuff, though I nod to the importance of any food that is a vehicle for butter. Lobster is fine, but it takes work, sometimes the eggs are a nuisance.  Some people regard those as a delicacy, but not all. They change color and look interesting. I think the effort may be part of the charm for some people.

I likely shouldn't talk them down.  People come from out of state and plunk down big money for them, and the life of a lobsterman is difficult.

Ministry of Presence

More and more, the desire grows in me simply to walk around, greet people, enter their homes, sit on their doorsteps, play ball, throw water, and be known as someone who wants to live with them. It is a privilege to have the time to practice this simple ministry of presence. Still, it is not as simple as it seems. My own desire to be useful, to do something significant, or to be part of some impressive project is so strong that soon my time is taken up by meetings, conferences, study groups, and workshops that prevent me from walking the streets. It is difficult not to have plans, not to organize people around an urgent cause, and not to feel that you are working directly for social progress. But I wonder more and more if the first thing shouldn’t be to know people by name, to eat and drink with them, to listen to their stories and tell your own, and to let them know with words, handshakes, and hugs that you do not simply like them, but truly love them. Henri Nouwen, Gracias!:A Latin American Journal.
This was quoted at the church we visited in Franklin, TN by a pastor and wife noted for their hospitality as they were saying farewell to the congregation.

More Nouwen quotes here.

Return

 I am back from Nashville.  I have some fun things to pass along.

Thursday, August 25, 2022

Political Observations

Years ago, I noted that in political ads, Republicans would say they were going to work for you, while Democrats said they would fight for you, and I far preferred the former, for the good of the country and the national discourse.  Now Republicans are advertising themselves in "fight" mode almost as much, and I still don't like it.  If you are working for me it is likely to involve some confrontation and resolve, but I trust you to get more accomplished in the long run working, whatever short run victories you achieve fighting.  

One of the candidates for a local primary has decided to go negative in a big way against another Republican, and I will not only not vote for her in said primary, but she has shot to the top of the list as my contest to boycott and vote for no one in the general election.  It is an exercise that likely benefits only me, but I think it valuable nonetheless. PJ O'Rourke wrote Don't Vote, It Just Encourages The Bastards (lovely blurb) semi-seriously, while Daniel Schwindt's Don't Vote, It Only Encourages Them treated it as a serious proposition, reasoning that voting gives us an illusion of power that puts us back to sleep. I do still vote, I will in all likelihood continue, as habits die hard.  But each time around I consider desisting from this except in local races, in hopes that it might force me to do something stronger. While it is always possible that my vote will matter this year or in some future election, in nearly fifty years there is not one race where it was close enough that my personal vote mattered.  It is worth reflecting on that. Voting is a statement to myself plus a few around me.

The NH presidential primary is 18 months away, and a few candidates have shown up quietly to speak to a group here and there.  It used to be in full swing for only the 11 months prior, but I expect it will ratchet up significantly right after the November elections this time.  It has been getting earlier every cycle anyway, and this one is going to be interesting on both sides.  It may finally be the weakening of the primary system this time, as campaigns are so entirely national and media-driven now that the advantage of a smaller, microcosmic race is ebbing. We used to scope these guys and gals out for the rest of you in our walled garden up here, but that's not so much the case anymore. 

Wednesday, August 24, 2022

Louis Vuitton

Rob Henderson compares student loan forgiveness with forgiving credit card debt on Louis Vuitton handbags.

Nashville Cats

 


Tuesday, August 23, 2022

The Other Side of Trauma

I recall evangelicals loving everything James Dobson taught in the 1980s and 90s.  I liked him well enough, read a couple of his books, listened to the show occasionally.  He had a few things I disagreed with, but mostly I started to find him a bit tiresome as he became more political.

But a particular lesson stuck with and was applied almost ferociously when the boys arrived from Romania, and later when Kyle came to us at age twelve after some significant abandonment. Children do not fall apart because bad things happen to them.  They fail to thrive because not enough good things happen to them. Loving your parents is not an even matchup with "turning out alright," but there's a lot of overlap there.  We see it in adults describing their own parents - in the black community more often Mom - as someone they love and "always had my back" even though the hard evidence indicates they didn't really. Parents who made many bad decisions that affected the children, decisions that make you wonder what the definition of "love" actually is in that person's head. Yet somehow they put enough good things in that the bad things were less important.

It is a side of the trauma question, of fortifying a child (or an adult) beforehand and also bringing them out later WRT trauma. Bad things will happen to your child whatever you hope for them, and some of the bad things may even spring from you. There may be some difference between a Good Parent, who does little wrong, and a Great Parent who puts many good things into you.  Best to be both, certainly. Yet if you want to focus on one, it would be on being a Great Parent.

There is a redemptive quality to it, that no matter what harm we have done another, our next act can be one of healing.  It does not change or excuse what we have done, but we can at least contribute one next good thing to their happiness and development.

This is important in all loves, and it may even be what God expects in our love for Him.

Monday, August 22, 2022

Those Alphabetical Streets

I think it's most tourists' favorite area of Boston. Near Boston Common and the swan boats and duckling statues; Trinity Church reflected in the Hancock Center; Newbury St, and Boston Public Library.



Anjelah

 


Historical Perspective

 From Adam Cerious

Me:  I need a passport so I can go to Australia

Clerk:  Have you ever been convicted of a crime?

Me: Is...Is that still necessary?

Aristotle, Offensive Lineman

 

Based on a reconstruction from his bust.  He really does look like an O-Lineman, doesn't he? Thanks to Emma Baccellieri.

Reversing Their Position

The American Academy of Pediatrics has reversed its position on transgender youth, and is now not recommending surgery and hormones for most children. You will notice they are making it sound like there is no change and they have been "affirming" in this much more limited way all along. Notice also the WaPo choice of headline.  It is like Russians in WWII noticing that the glorious victories reported in Pravda were drawing ever-closer to key cities. 

As for the UK and support for medicalisation waning, there is the giant class-action lawsuit against Tavistock. That might mean something.

We Don't Believe It

It costs about fifty cents a mile to drive somewhere. So if you go five miles to the store to pick up milk, that milk costs you $5 more. If you drive even a mile out of your way to save a few cents on gas, you are losing money.  The arithmetic is there, but we don't believe it.

This is likely because of all the sunk costs of the vehicle - purchase, insurance, upkeep - that we don't notice once we have already spent them. I think we also do live by arithmetic that much, and so think that large-sounding sums of money for an individual are actual large amounts when distributed over a country or an industry.  We deplore the money in politics, but it is invisible compared to the amount spent on cosmetics, for example.

Sunday, August 21, 2022

Becoming More Theatrical

She is coming along. Refreshing to see. Her younger sister has been the one with the vaudevillian face, but that one is not interested in theater.  This one has the bug.  She will be doing Alice in Wonderland, likely a chorus member, before school starts up again.

I believe the expression has something to do with a cheese curd.

Saturday, August 20, 2022

The Lives of Wild Animals

Grim posted about a bear who came to an unfortunate and unfair bad end. I don't know how many societies in history would consider it unfair though. Topic for another day.

Do animals in the wild live Good Lives? It should immediately go to definitions, but I ask that you consider the question in an informal sense first. Is it better than a pet's life? Obviously in some ways much better, yet we consider it a value to return animals to the wild when we can.  Our history of movies and books ( Born Free, Free Willy) glorify living in the wild, with more than a hint of the anthropomorpication of beasts who yearn to breathe free.  We read into their escape behavior of wanting to impulsively chase food or random smells a philosophy of life.  It ain't so. 

But is this really their experience?  And as they experience things primarily in the moment with no overarching summation of what their life is like, does it make sense for us to apply that standard for them, of the turkey's great life as of November 20th actually being a bad deal? The value of a pet's life is deeply bound up in its value to the owner. Or do the questions of Good and Value not overlap enough to inform each other?

I'm not trying to trap anyone with this one.  I can see points all over the place here.

All of History

 From a (currently anonymous) book review over at ACX

Probably the biggest thing I learned is that human history is little more than 5000 years of gang war.

Whatever the dates some particular tribal pissing match took place, whomever its participants were, it probably deserves to be little noted nor long remembered. It's only through story-telling that the actions of mortals become anything more than trivial data about primate behavior. And yet - once spun into a narrative, accounts of all-too-stereotypical gangs and their generic homicides can be transmuted into archetypes and national myths, inspiring poetry and heroism. History only becomes meaningful in the telling.

I'm quite sure I don't fully agree.  But my own view is fairly close to that.

2022 Ten-Four Good Buddy Duck Race

Race results determine draft order for Fantasy Football this year. Done with phone cameras up in the White Mountains and then edited by the world's best league manager.


Unfortunate result for me in 11th place. Fortunately it's a snake draft, meaning I will also be drafting at #14 after the turn. I shouldn't have to tell you it's not really ESPN+, but I just want to be sure about these things.

Friday, August 19, 2022

Caught Up

I am finally caught up on blog topics, and hope to get some mileage in before leaving for Nashville Thursday. Asheville two weeks after that. Then hopefully at home for a bit.

Boys of Summer

 


Ben doesn't make videos much anymore. But he has one coming up.

Between Heaven and Hell

Thinking of Lewis's last days made me think of Peter Kreeft's book about JFK, Aldous Huxley, and CS Lewis, Between Heaven and HellIt's a fascinating premise:


The three died within a few hours of each other on the same day in 1963, and Kreeft imagines a conversation between them in some unidentified place. Folks will oftens say it is Purgatory, but this is mostly because they can't think of any other place that is neither Heaven nor Hell after death.  It always struck me as simply a waiting room of some sort, an artistic device of Professor Kreeft's. 

The work is short, and rather superficial, but perhaps the more valuable for that. It quickly summarises the animating ideas of Kennedy, a Christian in name and Christian-influenced, but more concerned with this world and the things that men can do - God as onlooker more than involved; the brilliant Huxley, much more philosophically trained but very much caught in the intellectual fashion of the day of Eastern mysticism supplanting Christianity; and Lewis, an orthodox Christian with a long history of defending the historical precepts of the faith. Kennedy comes off the worst, but this is not the fault of Kreeft so much as the incoherence of this modern Christianity which is no Christianity at all. Admittedly, this is not a skillful literary work and is intended to convey ideas, not character. Yet that is valid - if you want to capture JFK's charisma in a more complete way, write your own dialogue - this was never Peter Kreeft's intent.

We note this because we do not get much of a sense of Huxley's and Lewis's personalities either.  We get their thoughts.  Huxley thus comes off a good deal better even though Kreeft clearly sides with Lewis and wants him to emerge triumphant in the end. Huxley and Lewis engage each other's ideas in the book.

We Have No "Right to Happiness"

CS Lewis wrote an essay published in the Saturday Evening Post late in his life entitled "We Have No 'Right to Happiness'." It made a profound impression on me in the 1970's when I first read it in God In The Dock. It was one of the great examples of the time of watching Lewis cut through all the puffery and fine-sounding words of what people that they were saying, down to the reality of what they must actually mean.

Clare, in fact, is doing what the whole western world seems to me to have been doing for the last 40-odd years. When I was a youngster, all the progressive people were saying, “Why all this prudery? Let us treat sex just as we treat all our other impulses.” I was simple-minded enough to believe they meant what they said. I have since discovered that they meant exactly the opposite. They meant that sex was to be treated as no other impulse in our nature has ever been treated by civilized people. All the others, we admit, have to be bridled. Absolute obedience to your instinct for self-preservation is what we call cowardice; to your acquisitive impulse, avarice. Even sleep must be resisted if you’re a sentry. But every unkindness and breach of faith seems to be condoned provided that the object aimed at is “four bare legs in a bed.”

It is like having a morality in which stealing fruit is considered wrong—unless you steal nectarines.

Thanks to commenter G. Poulin for prompting this memory with his onbservations under my recent post "Love Wins."

Odysseus & PTSD

Statistician Lyman Stone tweets out to a study of 1200 adults who had court-record documented abuse as children. The results were...surprising.

We found that, even for severe cases of childhood maltreatment identified through court records, risk of psychopathology linked to objective measures was minimal in the absence of subjective reports.

Lyman Stone's final tweet in his discussion:  "If the trauma-->psychopathology linkage operates primarily through self-appraisal then what happens if society suddenly encourages more scrupulous excavation of personal history, more intense reflection on past trauma, and lower tolerance for abuse?" This leaves us with a lot of but...but...we surely don't want people to get away with these things. Weren't we to understand that the culture of silence about abuse is a huge part of the problem? I would ask "OK, if true, where does this subjective impression of having an abusive childhood come from, if it's not clearly from abuse?"

I worked with many, many adults who had been abused as children or had traumatic events when younger, and was sometimes puzzled by the lack of linearity between severity of trauma, age the event occurred, duration of trauma...just everything. But not always puzzled.  One mostly notices such things at the extremes, when a person who experienced horrific events seems unaffected against all odds, or when the identified traumatic event(s) seem bad, but not horrifying. Those bring out the spontaneous observations from the staff. But I usually just considered those outlier events.  I figured that there would be a statistical linearity associating pathology with something about the severity or the event. 

Shouldn't more abuse trend toward more psychopathology? Wouldn't we expect that relationship to the abuser would matter, or severity or duration of abuse? But this study suggests that something less easy to define is a bigger issue, some subjective impression of whether one's overall experience was bad. It would be interesting to see whether something similar happens for combat veterans, that the overall experience counts for more than the incidents. More on that below.

I had read research over the last few decades of "protective factors," that helped in recovery from trauma, such as having a religious faith and especially a community, of having supportive friends and family, of not abusing substances (interesting in light of the later psychedelic-based treatments being touted now).  And of course, what you were like before the trauma figures in ways that are sometimes measurable. But this is a whole different level.

I would like to be clear that no one should be jumping to the conclusion that people can therefore have control on whether they develop symptoms or not.  People don't decide to have nightmares. Having startle reflex is...a reflex, not a choice. Responses to smells are involuntary. Whatever is bringing you to your subjective opinion of the whole experience in the broad sense, it is operating at some subterranean level.

I have wondered if expectations are a large factor. Most boys grow up with someone trying to pick a fight with them a few times, shoving them or sucker-punching them in ways we would regard as a clear assault as an adult.  Yet men believe these are not traumatic events worth reporting as adults. We have trouble even remembering them.  Only if they exceeded some level into the unexpected do we note them - if we were frequently outnumbered or bullied, if weapons were involved, if we got injured. We had a young woman at the hospital who was distraught because of an incident at a party in which a boy she knew tried to sexually assault her at least briefly before he believed her protests were...sincere?...loud and energetic enough? It had happened five months earlier and she still could not stop thinking about it and was afraid to go out.  One of the nurses was not sympathetic. "At my high school, we just called that dating." Others jumped on her for that, pointing out that the girl was quite the innocent and had been sickly and protected as a child. But that someone could even say that shows there is something up with expectations. In war zones where whole families or villages of women are raped, isn't that like to be a different experience than being the only one? Less bad...more bad? At one level no one is blaming you, but all the people you would go to for support are also wounded. 

An anecdote closer to home. My two Romanian sons were badly abused by both father and mother, though the neglect in the villages may have been worse. It was at a level nearly unknown in America. About a year after coming here, John-Adrian was at a church youth group event at which the educational game of how fortunate they are was being played.  Take a step forward if you ever stay with one of your parents. Take another step forward if you ever stay with the other. Take a third step forward if you stay with both together. Take a step back if no family member made a meal for you today...Well into the game, JA found himself near the front, then perked up his head and said "Oh, you mean ever in my whole life! I belong way back there near the beginning," and walked back. Laughing. When Son#5 came to us about a decade later after having been abandoned by both bio parents, JA shook his head angrily.  "I can't believe it. I can't imagine how this could happen.  This should never happen to a kid." I looked at him dumbfounded. "John-Adrian. That happened to you!" He was caught up short and then covered a bit (John-Adrian never admitted he was wrong). "I meant it should never happen in America."

The next younger brother did not shake off his past so easily, though things have gotten better over the years.  He is still locked in some contact with his Romanian siblings, including one who takes advantage of him, for example. His past haunts him more.

I will come back to the childhood abuse when discussing treatment, but for now let us go to the other major category of trauma, combat.

*****

Sidetrack, but there's a reason: A history podcast guest was discussing the response of ancient combatants to trauma. Interesting but not earth-shaking.  He did suggest that the story of Odysseus in the epic is supposed to represent the journey home that all soldiers make. A fun idea, but one I think can be defended only by forcing the episodes into some framework of what one believes returning soldiers go through.  However, I think that in some solid way we can enjoy it. Any story that has lasted this long must speak powerfully to a variety of circumstances. An epic about a journey home from war that did not speak to centuries of men returning from war in some way would not survive, except perhaps as an accidental curiosity. For readers of Tolkien's essays, this is the difference between allegory, which is limited and often stilted, versus myth, which has broader (if less-definable) applicability.  Certainly coming home and being recognised by the dog and finding that other men are trying to take off with your wife could be recognised as a country-music theme in our own era. The story has legs for a reason. If you are a Homer fan you might go back over the poem with that in mind to get more from it.  But I wouldn't impose that structure on it as a necessity. It has power, but not for box-checking.

The guest went on to his real topic, of evidence of trauma in ancient sources of returning soldiers. The example of Epizelus, an Athenian soldier who was struck by what we would now call hysterical blindness at the Battle of Marathon is often referred to, but as with many things - as with allegory above - people try to shove the story into whatever theory they have going. I am not going to do that, I only bring him up to note that context and expectations seem to matter in this sort of trauma as well. Being so frightened by a phantom opponent that he went blind did not make him a figure of scorn in Athens upon his return.  He had done his duty as a hoplite, a citizen-soldier whose main task was to go into battle without much training, wearing minimal armor that he could afford himself, and getting slaughtered in a phalanx creating space for the trained professionals to fight. That was enough and he was still held in regard. It was not unusual to be a hoplite, it was expected.  You came back to a world where most men had seen whatever battle horrors you had or could be expected to in the future. 

So it is worth looking at the two ancient examples to carry that over to the centuries-long story of soldiers and trauma, of return and expectations. It is different in every time and place. It is different to come home to American from a modern war, because so few have seen what you saw. Heck, a lot of the actual military has not seen combat but have jobs in support. It's the reverse of Epizelus's situation. So if we are to look at common factors for the understanding and perhaps treatment of trauma, it is going to have to cover a lot of ground.

*****

Enter EMDR and Dr. Andrew Huberman, Stanford neurolscientist, who I linked to WRT gratitude being something that seems to be actually physically good for you. Huberman has become very popular, with a YouTube channel and lots of videos purporting to tell you how to stay awake, reduce your attention-deficit symptoms, calming or energizing your mind with various Hz frequencies (40 and 528, reportedly) and learn to become a force in the world and mostly happy. Anyone this popular this fast arouses my suspicions, and more than suspicions.  At this point in my life I am primed for disbelief in such things, regarding them all as medicine-show stuff. "...and the diminution of the marital impulse" as Garrison Keillor once joked. And yet. The research looks good, sounds plausible. I comment only on one bit of it here.

When EMDR came out in the 90s I thought it was voodoo. Moving your memories to another part of your brain? Sliding your eyes back and forth while recalling your traumas and getting coached through that to store the memories differently?  Preposterous. Over the years I did come to accept that there was something to this memory-storage bit, that some memories are stored in places that also hold a lot of emotional information while others are set down in a more boring file cabinet.  That sounded good, to store high-emotion memories in a boring place. Some evidence came out that writing boring reports after a trauma actually helped create some distance.  Recalling the event, but in its most stripped-down, bloodless fashion seemed to help. This is new and may not play out, but would make some sense in terms of putting horrible memories in a boring place, so that when the events occurred to you, you could use the boring version instead, eventually making it the main version.  Not that the other version would ever go away, but you could take a different past it. You put the deep ruts in the road you want to use, not the one you are trying to avoid.

Huberman has this idea that the eye movements back and forth mimic traveling, especially walking.  When we travel we scan from side-to-side automatically. We are literally telling our brain "I am walking" now. Whether that is walking onward to the next skirmish if you won, or walking away from a place you hope never to see again, it just might be much better than being physically stuck - such as in a siege, or if your village was raided and you are staying on surrounded by memories. The actual physical walking - or sailing, or riding - may have been part of the treatment, and being trapped and unable to get away may be a huge risk factor.

And maybe that works for those victims of incest and abuse as well.  We use therapy to walk away from the past metaphorically, and even call such things a journey, or a leaving behind, and related metaphors.  But maybe involving other parts of our brain, instead or in tandem, is much more important than we realised. Thousands of years of traumatic experience developed hard wiring that responds to literally walking away. I knew a few returning VN vets who took up backpacking or even hiking the AT upon return who thought it had helped. I had female patients who thought a "road trip" across the country as soon as they turned 18 had been beneficial in terms of independence from toxic families. (Though they often exposed themselves to trauma in that way as well.) We tell ourselves the story that such hikes and trips cause us to think about deep things and put events in perspective and that's what was good about them.  Those of us who are talk-people instead of action people may be especially prone to that. But the very movement itself may have been key. 

For a next speculative step, if any of this pans out, that the treating your brain - or tricking it - by just getting the hell out of Dodge in reality by walking or virtually with simple eye movements actually works in some way, it will be interesting if it becomes something we can self-administer.  EMDR therapists don't take walks with you at the moment, you go to their offices. But what if it's technique, and the treatment for trauma becomes repeated walks, or drives, or cycling with a very specific agenda of remembering the trauma and automatically putting it in a different place. I don't recommend trying this at home until we know more about how it might work.

Like the soldier from the invading army who kept going to the next place and morale remained high, however horrible the last encounter.

Thursday, August 18, 2022

Candidates

The primaries are coming up in about four weeks in NH. This will be of interest to NH residents only. A friend in Naval Intelligence (Brad Holt, for those who know him) tells us that he heard nothing but good things about Brig. Gen Don Bolduc when he was at SOCAFRICA himself, and if he were still in NH would be working directly on his campaign to unseat Democratic Senator Maggie Hassan in November.

Granite Dad, who follows the candidates more closely than I, tells me he is supporting Mowers to run against Chris Pappas in the House race.

CDC on Monkeypox

 Benjamin Ryan tweets

98% men

93% men with recent sexual contact with men (when sexual history known)

Median age 35

White 35%, 33% Latino, 28% black 

Wednesday, August 17, 2022

Internationalists and Just War/UN

Another book review at ACX, of The Internationalists:How a Radical Plan to Outlaw War Remade the World by Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro (2017)

As the reviewer confirms pretty quickly, most of us were taught to regard WWI and WWII as deeply related, even to the point of seeing the latter as a continuation of the former. GK Chesterton predicted that the war was not over and would have to be refought, and even noted a major reason why any response to Germany's rise would be delayed: the accusations of German atrocities in Belgium were later dismissed as mere propaganda, even though they were later verified. There was an attitude of not believing anyone, of being above all that and too wise to be taken in. It was a Lost Generation in several ways.

But Hathaway and Shapiro see a sharp break in 1928 with the Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact. Though this is today regarded as starry-eyed and entirely ineffective, they see it having driven a great change in international attitudes that continues to the present day. I won't comment whether that seems accurate to me or not, as I am not one who is fascinated by WWII history, though I have a few friends who are. The reviewer knows far more than I. Yet I will note that there was a great change in the understanding of internationalism in the 20th C, and it seems to track with this timing pretty well. Call it moving the Overton Window if you will, but how virtually everyone views war is different now.  In the leadup to the Iraq War in 2003, a student at St Anselm's - a Catholic college, I will note - described to me how a professor was alerting the class that the Bush administration was trying to position its plans as fulfilling Just War criteria, which it obviously wasn't as they did not have the blessing and permission of the United Nations. I don't recall the permission of the UN being part of Medieval Catholic doctrine myself. Yet the view was widespread even among Catholics that this lack of blessing was itself evidence that Just War criteria were not met. An amazing thing, really, and not something anyone would have said about the League of Nations or even of the UN itself over its first decades. 

Many now regarded it as a controlling authority, and were distressed when even Obama stated he was going to make his own decisions about American involvement anywhere, thank you very much. And Barack was right about that. Though perhaps he overstated what was going to be entirely his own call. Yet even that, maybe not, as each successive president has grabbed more executive authority in military matters. Obama may just have been a bit ahead of his time on that.  No one expects Congress to declare war anymore.  It is another Overton Window move of what is even acceptable to talk about. I cross-reference it to my recent Euthanasia post. I think people do not quite notice how their views have moved over the decades in response to changes in the Spirit of the Age.

 

Send Us Thine Asteroid, O Lord

 From a commenter over at the Orthosphere.


Freddie deBoer

I am becoming fond of the term "Substack Liberal." Disillusioned liberals still have the language and tone of liberalism when they criticise. Language alert.

The answer to the problem of what terms one should use if woke, identity politics, and political correctness are now disfavored is that it is the concept underneath that people are criticising. No matter how many times people say the phrase they like is entirely innocent but demonised by the opposition, it falls flat when the evidence keeps leaking out that they actually do mean what they are accused of meaning. Woke was intended to mean "alert to nuances of race, gender, etc in all interactions" and many people still think it was never anything worse.  But it got worse quickly, on its own terms, not its critics, and the opposition is not obligated to use words the way you are pretending you mean them, when you clearly don't. The term is poisoned, not because someone injected poison into it, but because its poison was revealed. "Reform school" was originally a hopeful-sounding name, and many people did want to strive for that meaning. But "kid's jail, plus some unfortunates whose parents should be locked up instead" is what it was, and there was no disguising it with language.

Tuesday, August 16, 2022

Proto-World (and small rodents)

I have not been convinced that evidence of a Proto-World language is recoverable, but I have been sympathetic to the idea that it is possible, and extremely critical of the way more traditional linguists have gone about criticising Merritt Ruhlen and Joseph Greenberg. When you have to go all Mean Girls* right off the bat, as my linguistics podcast did today, I am immediately suspicious. When I was in school we were assured that it was impossible to detect relationships between languages at a depth of more than 5000 years, and now it's grudgingly up to 10,000. There are also small bits of evidence for demonstrable relationships up to 20,000, such as the purported connection between Ket in the Yenisien Valley of Eastern Russia and some Native American languages, and some  odd things that go even deeper. Also the evidence from other fields, such as genetics, has been supporting said "impossible" connections in biological fact, making linguistic connections at least more possible.

The Aspie quality that makes some historical linguists good at their job is not without its downside. If you can't make them believe it incontrovertibly, they smugly believe it must therefore not be true at all. Sigh.

It is a signal-to-noise problem, in that one side says they believe they can hear someone broadcasting on the wireless, while others say they are imagining things. Yet as equipment and technology get better, we might hope to accurately discern signal better. Also, there are a bunch of Russian linguists working with disparate families we have been unfamiliar with who have been claiming associations at deep time-depths for years, and I don't have any reason to believe they were less competent than our linguists.

Yet in defense of the critics, we have to ask that even if we can detect the signal, based on focusing on Swadesh words and particular sounds (see my first back-link for some of that), what have we got, really? In the Americas, Greenberg and those who follow him believe that there is one big Amerind family that includes most of the continent and all the Proto-Algonkian, Proto-Iroquoian, and Proto-Everything, plus some minority Na-Dene languages (Navajo, Hopi, and many Canadian) and the Inuit languages. Most linguists would break that into many more families. They say there's not enough signal to make solid assertions. And at this point we have to ask even if Greenberg, et. al are right, what's it mean? These are similarities so faint as to be unnoticeable. If there are connections between tribes and movements to be traced, perhaps we had better leave that to the archaeologists and geneticists at this point.

****

Fun fact: many Germanic and Slavic languages have a word for hoarding things that is based on the word "hamster." Yet it is not so in English, which is a Germanic language. Why not? Well, hamsters are not native to the British Isles, and only go as far as the Continent. Which is why instead of hamstering things, we squirrel them away.

*I saw a clip from "Mean Girls" for the first time in the review of The Dawn of Everything at ACX that I posted on a couple of weeks ago. While the characters were exaggerated for art's sake, I was impressed that they seemed like a great many of the girls I went to high school (and college) with - and more of the boys, once I thought about it.  We are all Mean Girls. In the case above though, the podcasters were both female, adult academics, so maybe I just haven't the faintest idea what the real percentages are.

Olivia

I thought of this song last week, I assumed out of the blue. More likely, her picture or name in a story announcing her death was in a sidebar that I saw without noticing. I associate her with a particular memory, of Monroe* dorm at W&M, watching her sing this in the summer of 1974.  I suspect it was this performance on the Andy Williams Show. The young men were, frankly, whimpering while looking at her, spontaneously volunteering out loud to be the one Olivia loved, promising to leave whoever our other girl was. "I don't often wish I was white," my friend Gerard chuckled. "I think we're all about equally badly placed to be on her date list," another friend laughed. 

Looking at it now, I am struck by how much the line "There you are with yours, and here I am with mine" strikes me much more negatively now. She remains lovely and gives the song great emotion, but my brain now goes "Therefore, you're not supposed to..."  It looks different when you are married, I think. At the time I suspect I thought she showed great restraint and honorableness. Now I think then you shouldn't even be mentioning it. That's not quite fair, I know.  Songs can express what we think we might say, what we wish we could say, and not be true representations of what we actually would say.

And my goodness she is adorable and plaintive and one hates to say anything against her, so I can scramble for excuses.

It was decades ago that the women in our Bible study noticed that they responded very differently to "Dr. Zhivago" than when they were schoolgirls.  Then, they were in love and it was sooo romantic, and she was beautiful and he was handsome." Later the thought came to them while watching: But wait. She's...married. It matters. Yet as above, in art it is permissible to express what we might not in the hard light of day. 

*Of course we had a Monroe dorm. Come on.

Monday, August 15, 2022

Belief in Hell

The percentage of people who believe in heaven and hell hasn't changed much from 2014 to 2021, according to Pew Research.  I checked other pollsters like Lifeway and Gallup who had similar numbers. It is the group breakdown which is interesting - Mainline churches and Catholics showing lower numbers and evangelical and historically black churches higher.  Tim King, who you just heard from about the opiates and addictions, lives downtown and has friends among the poorer and homeless (as he has for years). He also has lots of educated, liberal friends.  He finds it striking that among the latter group the belief in hell is often regarded as risible, impossible, but among his minority friends it is more accepted.

He wonders if having clear examples of oppressors moving in the world, such as being more aware of slave traders and bigots causes one to be more reluctant to give everyone a pass on eternal justice, while having easier lives makes us more...tolerant? merciful? lax? ...about evil in the world. One can see doctrinal reflections in the numbers, certainly, but I have to wonder if he is on to something.