The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Feminists: Making Children Cry on Halloween Since 1969
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the NYT:

Boys and Girls, Constrained by Toys and Costumes
OCT. 30, 2015

Claire Cain Miller
@clairecm

Indeed, toys are more strictly gendered today than they were 50 years ago, when adult gender roles were much more separate, according to research by Elizabeth Sweet, a sociologist at the University of California, Davis.

Until the 1960s, girls’ toys focused on homemaking and boys’ on work in the industrial economy, she found. That changed significantly with the rise of the feminist movement of the 1970s. But in the 1990s, gendered toys returned with a vengeance, resulting in the action heroes and princesses available today.

In the Sears catalog ads of 1975, according to Ms. Sweet, just 2 percent of toys were marked as girls’ or boys’; on the Disney Store website in 2012, according to a study in which Ms. Auster was a co-author, all toys were labeled that way.

Children’s clothing has also become more gendered. Before World War I, babies and toddlers all wore white, loosefitting dresses and long hair, according to a history by Jo B. Paoletti, a professor of American Studies at the University of Maryland, and pink was considered a masculine color and blue a feminine one until the mid-20th century. During the feminist movement of the 1970s, clothes became more gender-neutral.

You might take from that history the conclusion that feminist dogma has been tried and failed, largely due to children’s tears. But it’s impossible for feminism to be wrong, so the only allowable conclusion is that it just hasn’t been tried hard enough.

The big difference over the decades, however, is the growth of Slutty Halloween as a national holiday.

Spyglass Hill

I don’t recollect it being a big grown-up party day when I was a child. The first time I noticed the New Halloween was in Monterey, CA on Halloween 1986. I was having breakfast on my way to play 18 holes at Spyglass Hill, and the entire wait staff at the restaurant was dressed in Halloween costumes at dawn. That was new to me. I attributed it to the gay influence of San Francisco.

Googling, I see a 2010 Slate article:

When Did Halloween Get So Tawdry?
In the 1970s.

By Juliet Lapidos

… When did sexy costumes become the norm?

In the 1970s. Costuming has been a part of Halloween since at least the 19th century, when Scottish and Irish children went “guising” house-to-house in exchange for coins. The Victorians enjoyed a good costume ball on Halloween, and some daring getups, like Gypsy outfits, were popular. But risqué costumes were not pervasive until right around Gerald Ford’s presidency, when gay communities in the United States adopted Halloween as an occasion for revealing, over-the-top attire.

The Halloween parade in New York City’s Greenwich Village began in 1973 as a family-and-friends promenade from house-to-house organized by a local puppeteer and mask-maker. It quickly became a neighborhoodwide party, however, and since the Village was New York’s de facto gay district, the gay community cottoned to it. The event, with its drag outfits and otherwise rebellious costuming, became famous in New York and across the country, as did similarly bawdy Halloween parties in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood and in West Hollywood.

Gay communities planted the seed, then retailers did the rest of the work, capitalizing on the spirit of these parades with readymade sexy outfits that got skimpier from year to year. A 2006 New York Times article quotes the purchasing director for BuyCostumes.com as saying that “ultra sexy” costumes emerged in the early aughts, with products like the Little Bo “Peep Show” outfit.

So, I guess I was right back in 1986: it was a gay thing that was spreading to straight people.

Anyway, it’s extremely reasonable for parents to want to discourage their young daughters away from dressing like a stripper on Halloween. But these days we lack a vocabulary of moral restraint. (For some individuals, the word “inappropriate” works well enough.)

We do have a vocabulary of oppression, however. Somebody must be blamed, but it’s unthinkable to mention that females like to dress up like hookers and they need to restrain themselves. In our current mindset, anything bad that females do can’t be blamed on them, so it must be blamed on white male patriarchy.

But how often do these triple bankshots work?

 
Hide 168 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Spot on Steve. Have you been reading Macintyre’s After Virtue? Regarding a gay homosexual influence, a micro-trend on Halloween appears to be hyper-masculine dudes in drag—what I call a pink-shirt type o’ thing.

    But I wonder, does Nerf still put out ever cooler Nerf guns? That was what we wanted most whenever we did, more high-tech and harmless crossbows and guns. I wonder if playing with nerf guns makes playing with real guns actually less imaginable, in some paradoxical way, so that black boys who never got to play with expensive nerf guns harbor a relative moral deficit.

    Stan Evans called liberalism a revolution within the form. That’s a great descriptor, except when it comes to feminism they really did bend shit out of shape, made the form all lopsided, like a certain kind of cancer maybe…

    • Replies: @Salty
    Nerf guns are amazing now. Belt fed, battery powered full autos are common.
  2. according to a history by Jo B. Paoletti, a professor of American Studies at the University of Maryland, and pink was considered a masculine color and blue a feminine one until the mid-20th century.

    vs.

    from
    http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141117-the-pink-vs-blue-gender-myth

    But what about the idea that a century ago little boys were dressed in pink and pink for girls is only a recent fashion? It seems even that might be something of a myth too. Psychology writer Christian Jarrett describes in his new book Great Myths of the Brain, how an Italian psychologist Marco Del Giudice, who tried to find the origins of this idea, could find just four short magazine quotes, describing pink as the colour for boys. In two of these he believes that perhaps the blue and pink were accidentally swapped around. That seems unlikely to me, but when he searched a database of five million books printed in American or British English from 1800-2000 more convincing was the lack of any mentions of “pink for a boy”, even though from 1890 onwards there were increasing mentions of “pink for a girl”.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    A lot of the social history of colors in fashion needs to pay attention to the fact that in the past color choices in clothes were much more constrained by the availability of certain dyes. The phrase "the royal purple" is an example of how expensive certain colors were until not that long ago. The Germans invented a whole bunch of industrial dyes in the later 19th and early 20th centuries, which eventually liberated people to choose whatever colors they liked.
  3. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Why not blame it all on Heff?

    Like a fabled demi-god, or at least a lecherous satyr in the mould of Pan – with the gift of immortality to go with immorality, Heff, is the ultimate blame hound, the ultimate buckstop of all female immodesty.
    Why?, at least at one point in his life he walked this earth as a mortal man and is thus marked with eternal guilt.

  4. I recall staring with intense acquisitory interest at many Sears Christmas catalogs in the 1970s, and I had little trouble distinguishing the boys’ and girls’ sections. The toys didn’t need to be labeled according to sex because this division was obvious.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Yes, I agree. I think the rise of toy labeling has more to do with parents being disconnected from their children and from common sense. It goes like this...

    healthy/normal parent: My son Tommy likes airplanes, so I'll get him a toy airplane.

    unhealthy circa 1970: I don't know what Tommy likes, but I know boys like vehicles, so I can't go wrong with an airplane.

    unhealthy circa 2010; I don't know what Tommy likes, and I don't know what boys like, but I can't go wrong buying from the section labeled "boys' toys."



    Steve,

    Possible plagiarism?

    Incidentally, we taught at least this study by Elizabeth Sweet in my English school in Japan about 4 months ago. When I started reading that NYT article, I thought it was the same one, then I saw the byline on October 30, 2015. I think the article is not the same, but it definitely covers the same material, and that third paragraph above, in particular, sounds very familiar. Possibly both the former and the current author basically lifted it from a study abstract or something. Anyway, I'm not going to Google this one to find out, but possible plagiarism going on here in the NYT...
  5. Feminism at its core is about removing all negative consequences for all choices made by females. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your grapes’ sourness) this tends to come back and bite them in the ass, but not before causing horrific amount of collateral damage to men, children and prudent women.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    Feminism at its core is about removing all negative consequences for all choices made by females. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your grapes’ sourness) this tends to come back and bite them in the ass, but not before causing horrific amount of collateral damage to men, children and prudent women.
     
    Well said Andrew, except i'd change the last to just "women".

    The truth is feminism has done tremendous to society, making it more difficult for men and women to find harmonious relations and raise children successfully and happily together. But among it's biggest victims, are the "imprudent women" who buy into feminist nonsense and as a result seriously degrade their ability to attract and keep and man and be successful in family life.

    There are substantial numbers of women--who could have been good women--who simply "wake up too late" and never get married or never have the family or the size of family they desired because they bought into feminism or simply didn't set about organizing their life because they were pickled in the feminist nonsense our culture is swimming with.
  6. I searched for ‘claire caine miller children’ – no autocomplete at all, literally a blank search page. Changing to ‘husband’, it did show an autocomplete, but the results were about how useless husbands were or how fewer women are keeping maiden names.

    Anyone that writes about parents foisting anything on children when it comes to toys or costumes never had a child or is an idiot. My daughter for most of her childhood had superpowers and could single handedly destroy an entire Toys R Us if she didn’t get what she wanted. And she wanted pink, hot barbie pink, and Disney Princess costumes, despite Boulder and all its wacky parents, despite day care being something like The Los Feliz Day Care twitter account , despite a Jewish feminist mom. And my son was Bam Bam, who figured everything was a nail, because everything else was hammer used to pound on it, who received a jigsaw wooden puzzle map of the US, looked at it, took Florida, held it like a pistol, aimed it at the well meaning giver, and shot them, saying ‘bang bang bang’.

    • Replies: @CJ
    From Claire Cain Miller's Facebook page:

    Reporter at The New York Times

    Studied at Yale University

    Lives in San Francisco, California

    From Portland, Oregon



    No mentions of her own family, but the above explains a lot.
    , @TomSchmidt

    And my son was Bam Bam, who figured everything was a nail, because everything else was hammer used to pound on it, who received a jigsaw wooden puzzle map of the US, looked at it, took Florida, held it like a pistol, aimed it at the well meaning giver, and shot them, saying ‘bang bang bang’.
     
    God Bless for that! Children are born into the world as cavemen. Just such a boy lives next door to me, and it's occasionally troubling and usually quite refreshing and humorous to watch. Keep the Ritalin away from the boys.
  7. Halloween is also known as ‘Gay New Year’.

    Up in Toronto, this night is the second busiest night of the year for taxi drivers. You see legions of 30/40ish women dressed up in slutty costumes, pretending to be bisexual, craving and demanding male attention, while their boyfriends/husbands play along, often emasculated in some ridiculous get up.

    Halloween was supposed to be a night of trick or treating for the kids.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Niccolo....Slutty costumes? Tread easy my friend, a Toronto cop started the "slut-shaming" protest movement....."Dress like a slut and you get raped, what did you expect." I was in Toronto one year during Carribanna (sic) Festival...talk about costumes. Nothing like 200 pound women wearing thongs and feathers prancing around to calypso music.
    , @MC
    "Halloween is also known as ‘Gay New Year’"

    Funny, I've taken to calling it "Mardi Gras for Kids," which is what it really should be. (i.e., a night of dressing up and excess, albeit with KitKats instead of alcohol and boobs).
    , @Prof. Woland
    Back in my days as a yuppie in SF in the 1980's, we used to go to Halloween in the Castro. As if these guys were not liberated enough already, they could all just let their inner selves loose for an evening.
  8. I smiled when my 17-year-old daughter recently said to one of her classmates, “Putting a pair of rabbit ears on your head doesn’t make your slutty outfit a Halloween costume.”

  9. @The Last Real Calvinist
    I recall staring with intense acquisitory interest at many Sears Christmas catalogs in the 1970s, and I had little trouble distinguishing the boys' and girls' sections. The toys didn't need to be labeled according to sex because this division was obvious.

    Yes, I agree. I think the rise of toy labeling has more to do with parents being disconnected from their children and from common sense. It goes like this…

    healthy/normal parent: My son Tommy likes airplanes, so I’ll get him a toy airplane.

    unhealthy circa 1970: I don’t know what Tommy likes, but I know boys like vehicles, so I can’t go wrong with an airplane.

    unhealthy circa 2010; I don’t know what Tommy likes, and I don’t know what boys like, but I can’t go wrong buying from the section labeled “boys’ toys.”

    Steve,

    Possible plagiarism?

    Incidentally, we taught at least this study by Elizabeth Sweet in my English school in Japan about 4 months ago. When I started reading that NYT article, I thought it was the same one, then I saw the byline on October 30, 2015. I think the article is not the same, but it definitely covers the same material, and that third paragraph above, in particular, sounds very familiar. Possibly both the former and the current author basically lifted it from a study abstract or something. Anyway, I’m not going to Google this one to find out, but possible plagiarism going on here in the NYT…

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Incidentally, we taught at least this study by Elizabeth Sweet in my English school in Japan about 4 months ago. When I started reading that NYT article, I thought it was the same one, then I saw the byline on October 30, 2015. I think the article is not the same, but it definitely covers the same material, and that third paragraph above, in particular, sounds very familiar. Possibly both the former and the current author basically lifted it from a study abstract or something. Anyway, I’m not going to Google this one to find out, but possible plagiarism going on here in the NYT…
     
    This is at least the second time Steve has addressed the material from the third paragraph.
  10. Nature or nurture? From a lifetime of experience … it’s nature. Little boys know they are boys; and little girls know they are girls. Data points:

    We just attended a Halloween Walk at our youngest grandson’s pre-school. About 90% of the girls were princesses; about 70% of the boys were action figures. Our grandson is fascinated with action figures — Iron Man, Superman, Batman, etc. He likewise has been fascinated with the “Bob the Builder” cartoon series since he was two.

    Last month we took the family (and grandchildren) on a Disney cruise. It was a “princess extravaganza” for the girls. Our oldest grandson was bored. He asked if we could take him on a Star Wars cruise.

    One of our daughters-in-law is a committed feminist. At first, she would only allow our granddaughter to have “boy toys”, hoping she would grow up to become an engineer. She refused to let her wear pink or receive presents with pink … her toys were ships and airplanes and her clothes were blue. The outcome? Our daughter-in-law gave up … too many tantrums. Our granddaughter (now three) plays with “girl toys” and almost exclusively wears pink. Our daughter-in-law blames social pressure at the pre-school for her failed project.

    Is all of this new? No, we’ve noticed the same consistent gender-based dynamics from the early 1970s through today when watching toddlers play. Throw a bunch of toddlers into a room with cars, trucks and “girl toys” and watch what happens. The scene quickly sorts itself out. Guess which gender plays with the cars and trucks?

    • Replies: @Days of Broken Arrows
    Sure, it might be nature. And all those studies that personality is genetic might be right -- including the one the New York Times reported on back in 1986 (Google it).

    But remember, "Born This Way" only counts if you're gay. The rest of us need to be Educated and Enlightened by NPR types about all this.
  11. females like to dress up like hookers and they need to restrain themselves

    Restraining themselves from dressing like hookers? Why should they? It’s everyone’s personal decision what to wear. No idiotic feminists or ultra-conservatives have any right to interfere. If any people need to restrain themselves then it’s those primitive minds who think that any woman who doesn’t wear “appropriate” clothes is fair game.

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    We're talking about children here, and parents can and should overrule inappropriate or downright dangerous decisions...
    , @Sparkling Wiggle
    Spot on. We all need to restrain ourselves from telling loose women to restrain themselves. Is this [current year], or the 50s? So primitive.
    , @Josh
    Is this parody? I seriously can't tell.
    , @shrinker
    What's your point? This post is about the incremental effects of gays' weaponized immaturity (getting them wedded on the steps of the Supreme Court was supposed to "solve" this if you were dumb enough to believe MSGOP media back in the 90s). Women as always don't have much in the way of minds of their own and so tend to follow the lead of charismatic men, who in this case were a bunch of flaming homos
  12. I read about this kind of stuff in the media but have never experienced it personally. My kids go to a “progressive” education school where the political disposition of most of the faculty and parents is what you would expect, but at the Halloween parade the costume choices were as traditional as it gets for the boys and girls. I have also had a surprising number of conversations with parents about how boys will be boys and girls will be girls when it comes to their preferences and behavior and every single time the parents will comment on how it’s just innate, even those that are same sex parents or as left as they come politically.

    Of course, that’s not to say that people at a very high level are not trying to ram this stuff down our throats, but at the street level I don’t see any see any support for it whatsoever.

    • Replies: @This Is Our Home
    That's because you speak with other parents. They know better. Progressives from younger generations don't and many of the girls blame their minor weaknesses on things like 'gendered toys.'

    Since they, like all girls, have the propensity to cry quite often it and they feel ashamed for it, except of course but bizarrely when they are using it to be manipulative, then it is the result of Disney Princess based nurture.

    Personally, I very always just thought that girls like a good cry and some men are so easily swayed by this that some girls are corrupted.

  13. My take is Halloween began to change in the mid-80’s. Before that, it was much the same as when we were kids – mostly cheap (poncho+plastic mask or bedsheet ghost) costumes and trick-or-treating.
    After that beer and snack food companies starting targeting ‘adult halloween’, complete with adult-sized (and better made/higher priced) costumes. By the mid-90’s trick-or-treating had substantially faded and the adult costumes had become sexier.
    Eventually even preteen girls costumes began to emulate the older (often mother’s) getup.
    Not to mention mimicking the dress of pop music and toys such as the ‘Bratz’ figures:
    http://creativetypes.blogspot.com/2007/10/open-letter-to-that-parent-that-buys.html
    That triggered some backlash and Party City (the biggest Halloween retailer) has discontinued/toned down the more egregious examples such as ones that clearly show too much skin (not much more than a swimsuit) or thematically wrong (such as child-sized ‘french maid’).

  14. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Haha. Scots-Irish plan backfires. New show depicting America if AXIS won WW2. Supposed to demonize White people “The High and The Mighty”. But 90% of youtube comments say stuff like: “Great all White… Civilized… No dindu crime… Better German immigs than blacks /hispanics”. Sides are splitting. Could be used as PRO-WHITE PROPAGANDA!

    • Replies: @Romanian
    You mean "The Man in the High Castle"? That struck me as another hit piece, especially when the Japanese occupiers (compared to the Nazi occupiers of the East) had at least the saving grace of Eastern philosophy and martial arts and being accepting of a woman. I will admit the Nazis in this show had good fashion sense and great interior decorating
  15. WhatEvvs [AKA "Internet Addict"] says:

    I think it was the British Tory cutie pie Tim Stanley who credited feminism with restraining some of the sexual revolution’s excesses. You and he are onto the same thing.

    BTW, the NY Times has a good article on the billionaire backing Marco Rubio,

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/31/us/politics/paul-singer-influential-billionaire-throws-support-to-marco-rubio-for-president.html

    This should remove all doubt as to whether Mr. Rubio is a cuck or a con. Singer is the liberaltarian who gave NY State gay marriage. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

  16. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The gays seem to have helped get the ball rolling by giving women the green light to dress as skimpily as possible for Halloween. However, it’s not just that particular day but all the time. Lots of women just literally jump at the opportunity to wear as revealing clothing as possible; short shorts and skirts, yoga pants, skimpy beach attire, etc. People may of course like that but pointing out that many women have a need to hang it all out is usually met with denial. It’s their freedom to dress as they want and has nothing to do with anything else. Most of that clothing isn’t even comfortable so that can’t be it. Let’s not even mention the absurd Slut Walks which are getting ever more popular.

    • Replies: @CJ
    IDK how old you are but I'm over 60 and I can assure you that before approximately 1990 much of the everyday clothing worn by young (and not so young) women today would have been worn only by strippers and hookers. If you can find video of crowds in the 1980s or before it jumps out at you. (This also largely applies to piercings, tattoos and obesity.) That's about the same time as Hallowe'en began its expansion into the major event it now is.
  17. Behind every “politically correct” idea is a lie.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

  18. @Luke Lea
    Behind every "politically correct" idea is a lie.

    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you’re probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth–‘all races are the same’ is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and ‘women like respectful guys’ will leave you dying alone. But…every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    • Agree: gruff, (((Owen)))
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Natural selection favours those who rank survival above telling the truth. Nowadays the dominant ideologies are based on lies, but so far they're way more successful than those based on HBD realism and scientific fact.
    , @gruff
    Excellent point. The truth is no respecter of political inclination. For example, I expect advances in the understanding of genetics to upset people all across the spectrum soon.
    , @Polymath
    @SFG

    Generally agree with your comment, but don't be too glib about global warming, because (1) "on record" just means that the current fluctuation is a 1-in-a-century amplitude, smaller than represented by the Medieval warm period, much smaller than other fluctuations in historical times, much much smaller than fluctuations on a scale of several thousand years, much much much smaller than fluctuations corresponding to ice ages on a scale of tens of thousands of years, and already arguably reversing based on terrestrial and solar observations; and (2) the climate data has been seriously fudged which makes the recent warming trend even harder to interpret.

    This isn't in disagreement with your comment, just pointing out that in this particular controversy there are plenty of lies and exaggerations coming from the other side than the one you mentioned.
    , @AndrewR
    You're not going to find many folks around these parts who don't believe in macroevolution, in contrast to the some on the right and the virtually everyone on the left.

    Conservative creationism is pretty silly but it's also not terribly important. Many bible beaters may believe that "we didn't come from monkeys" but most accept the theory of antibiotic resistance, etc. So conservative creationists might be childishly ignorant but they're not dangerous.

    Contrast this with leftists who, universally for all intents and purposes, believe in the equally absurd but far more dangerous myth that statistically significant, genetically influenced intergroup differences in behavior and cognition do not exist. The dangers of believing in this myth are far more dangerous than the young earth myth, for reasons well-documented by Sailer and many other insightful alt-right bloggers

    , @Cryptogenic
    This ideological dichotomy is naive.

    We're currently living in a glaciation period. My location used to be buried under a mass of ice over a hundred feet thick. Evolution not real = almost any argument positing social constructs. A Christian in Flyoveria can refuse to believe in the basic tenets of evolution and be safely ignored, but liberals have ensured that the very notion of race (and intelligence) is viewed as "pseudoscience".
    , @MyNewUserName

    Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record?
     
    That's a bit of a strawman isn't it? I think even most "conservatives" agree that the there is warming. The questions are about whether they are caused by human activity. This leads to "is this really a net positive or negative" and finally is the massive cost of intervention worth offset by the uncertain benefits?

    There is a rising drumbeat in the MSM to keep the message of storms, drought (climate change!) etc front and center and no mention whatsoever of the benefits of warming. This is clear (to me at least) because it leads to a license for massive governmental action across the globe. If we can't have intergalactic aliens, then let's fight global warming together.
    , @GW
    Every year being the warmest on record would be evidence of a warming trend if it were actually occurring--of course the reality is data has been manipulated and adjusted by deceitful professionals and defended by SCIENCE! types in the media to give that impression. The trend has been toward cooler temps since 1998.

    Small modifications in bacteria don't prove evolution anymore than small decreases in the white/black IQ gap is proof we're all equally endowed and racism is the cause of the gap and so one day it will be erased. If anything rapidly mutating bacteria is evidence against a non-essentialist biology since bacteria remains bacteria in spite of mutations.
    , @D. K.
    Did the Medieval Warm Period prove that human carbon emissions were then causing catastrophic global warming? Did the petering out of the Little Ice Age, in the 19th Century, prove CAGW? Even if there were comparably valid and reliable statistics from over the centuries, how would recently recorded temperatures prove the theory of CAGW? "Climate denialism" is not limited to right-wingers.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record?"

    Even dyed-in-the-wool AGW proponents like Kevin Trenberth at NCAR had to admit that warming leveled off in the late 90s and that his camp could not explain it, ca. 2009. They continued to not be able to explain it until a year or two ago; Since NOAA rejiggered thier algorithms, the hiatus disappeared, and temperatures in the 1930s that were as high or higher than those in the 00's are now miraculously lower. Now that they've got the data straight with thier story, they can go on pushing their story.

    Did you ever read the Hadley/CRU E-mails that were hacked in 2009? I was at home sick for an extended period right when that story broke, so I spent a good deal of time reading through them. It certainly opened my eyes; there was a wealth of information in there. It showed what a lot of the principle players in the AGW field were really thinking: admitting that they could not explain the (then) current temperature trends, and even conspiring with one another to suppress publication of results they didn't like. And to my knowledge, none of those people ever said that the E-mails were forged. They never denied that those were things they had actually written. Their only defence was: those were private E-mails, you shouldn't have read them.

    I don't doubt that CO2 is a "green-house" gas (it certainly is) or that there might be some warming attending our pumping it into the atmosphere. But I do doubt that I am getting a complete or rigorously scientific assessment from the climate-science establishment. Science and/or sciencey establishments are not immune to the phenomenon of shared delusion.
    , @AnotherDad

    Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?
     
    SFG, i'm I complete agreement that ideology can lead one off the deep end, but your examples to prove contemporary balance are not particularly compelling.

    --> Global Warming.
    First off, your "every year the warmest on record" is just wrong. The best data we have is the satellite record. The last ten years have the usual fluctuations but have been pretty darn flat. http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2015/august2015/Aug2015graph.jpg
    This requires either that the natural variations are still on the same level as AGW—and we’re in natural cooling cycle exactly cancelling AGW. Or that the climate models are still junk, and don’t understand how the climate—most probably the oceans—react to warming. (For reference the 1998 el Nino spike is about on the same level of as the late 1930s temperature peak. So we are slightly below the modern peak. We have been warming steadily with a few dramatic setbacks, coming out of the Little Ice Age.)

    The serious arguments aren’t about whether CO2 is a greenhouse gas, or that CO2 concentrations are increasing. It’s about whether the warming seen is significant, whether the climate models are at all accurate, whether the warming is caused primarily by AGW and whether if so it’s even a big problem.

    Personally, since all of civilized life has been in the comparatively warm Holocene, i want to extend that rather than going back to the ice ages, when my house—sitting on glacial till—was under ice. I’m open to the thought that a little excess CO2 may allow us to stay comfy and put off the next ice age. But I’m conservative, so I’m also cautious about mucking things up too much. But generally, I don’t think that in the time frame the oil economy is likely to last we’re courting catastrophe. And in any case people are not going to give up their lifestyle, so we aren’t going to flick off the oil switch immediately regardless.

    I think most conservatives suspect that most of this “climate change” hubbub is driven by standard managerial big state leftism trying to grab more power, dovetailing with the interests of climate scientists (more funding and more self-importance) and breast beating—man-is-destroying-the-planet—religious environmentalism. A useful metric to test this is that we have a direct technical solution readily available, that can preserve the existing order of high energy use and personal transportation—nuclear power. If climate change was an existential crisis, then secondary concerns would be brushed away in favor of saving the planet. Actual interest in nuclear from the AGW howling left is essentially zero. Of course, if the climate change folks were serious they’d also be for an immediate immigration moratorium and a serious effort at 3rd world—i.e. African—population control. What’s the sign of those?

    --> Evolution.
    There’s even less to this point. Yes, fundamentalist Christians who believe in a rigid biblical literacy are anti-evolution. (An unnecessary and in fact arrogant position--who are they to argue with God about his method for creating the world and man?) But that’s their particular *religious* ideology driving them into error, not “conservatism”. And yes historically, “conservatives”—meaning those of biblical Christian bent—were suspicious of\opposed to Darwin’s insights again from religious ideology.

    But generally down through the ages, “conservatives” are the folks who’ve argued that there is “human nature”, that our natures are not immutable, that men and women are different, that individuals have their innate character (i.e. there are good and bad, smart and dumb, hardworking and lazy, etc.) and when encountered that different racial and ethnic groups had their own differing characters\temperaments\intelligences. In other words, while the religious did not welcome “the theory of evolution”, conservatives have had the essentials right.

    The modern liberal believes in “Evolution”—meaning that they are modern, intelligent and sophisticated while conservatives are bible beating, pickup driving hayseeds, who should be mocked and abused. But they do not believe in “evolution”—i.e. that natural selection has been continuously working on humans, giving us a human nature, and different endowments, tendencies and behaviors even for the sexes (see Larry Summers), much less for the races. (In fact, as we’re tediously reminded "race does not exist"… while we’re out endlessly “closing the racial achievement gap”.)

    This hostility to human nature—the belief that everything could be tossed upside down and man remade—has been a leftist constant, and cause of great suffering and evil. Lysenko theories are the left’s stock in trade.

    , @Anonym
    I am not sure why climate change denialism is supposedly a conservative or right-wing thing. Or opposition to environmentalism for that matter. There is not a lot that is 'conservative' about getting a one-shot boost to the vaunted economy for a century or two by burning through all the earth's energy stores.
    , @Luke Lea

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you’re probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?
     
    Hi SFG, I think you may mistake me. I see political correctness on the right as well as on the left and, in my opinion, it is equally destructive of human welfare no matter which side it is on.

    Free trade, for instance, is a politically correct idea that appeals mainly to economic conservatives on the right. The lie here is that free trade is almost always a good thing, that everyone or almost everyone in a trading nation will be made better off by free trade. But in truth orthodox textbook trade theory makes no such claim, particularly in the case of trade between countries at vastly different levels of economic development, where the comparative advantages lie in their relative endowments of labor and capital. In those cases for everyone to benefit it is necessary to compensate the losers (ordinary working people) out of the gains of the winners (people whose incomes derive primarily from capital, including human capital in the form of high IQ and superior education). But this is something you will never read about in the mainstream press for the simple reason that among elite economists it is "politically incorrect" to say so. See here for the details: https://goo.gl/ogyov5

    In the case of climate change the lie is not that global warming is real and that rising CO2 levels are contributing to that it, but rather that it is necessarily a bad thing, in fact a very bad thing that threatens the future of human civilization; and that therefore we should take radical steps urgently costing many trillions of dollars to try to stop or minimize it.

    Nevermind that there is no good evidence that we can do much if anything to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere significantly in the century ahead no matter how money we spend. More important is that a prima facie case that can be made that higher CO2 levels are probably a net good for the planet. For a couple of reasons:

    First, because carbon dioxide is a basic plant food, much like oxygen to animals. Thanks to rising levels in the atmosphere world agricultural productivity is estimated to have already increased something on the order of 20%, which helps to feed a hungry world. See here: https://goo.gl/sZnkP2

    And secondly, because climate models predict that most of the warming caused by rising CO2 levels will occur near the poles, at night, in the winter. This is ideal from a human point of view as a quick look at the map will easily confirm; for it means that the world's temperate zones will grow larger, they being the preferred habitat of advanced civilization.

    I don't know why I've gone to all this trouble except that a sense of duty compels me.

    , @Johanus de Morgateroyde

    Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record?
     
    There are three questions that stump most of the Global Warming pearl-clutchers:

    1. What percentage of GW is presumed to be caused by humans? (hint: nowhere near all of it)
    2. What percentage of what we're causing can be reasonably brought to heel? (hint: not a lot, without getting, literally, Medieval)
    3. The numbers bandied about are the top of the 95th percentile confidence interval, out on the long tail of the probability density distribution; which is to say that the thing yon scientists are 95% "confident" of is that the actual warming will be less than this. So, what's the 50/50 number for warming, the amount that's as likely as not? (hint: it's a lot lower)

    Multiple (1)*(2)*(3) and you get a number so small that any any alarm over it is clearly ridiculous.

    (for the record, that number is well under 0.1°C/century ... probably less, given the latest research suggesting that CO₂ is less important than thought and water vapor more important.)

  19. The event, with its drag outfits and otherwise rebellious costuming …

    Isn’t “transgressive” available any more? It reigned for decades as the go-to post-modern word for “nasty”.

    I guess lefties are comfortable with “rebellious” eight-year-olds, but not “transgressive” ones.

  20. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Natural selection favours those who rank survival above telling the truth. Nowadays the dominant ideologies are based on lies, but so far they’re way more successful than those based on HBD realism and scientific fact.

    • Replies: @AnAnon
    it also ranks survival above believing and acting on lies.
    , @Anonym
    Telling the truth (all the time) vs telling no lies is a different thing. A lot of people do the latter, as most people enjoy dealing with the latter sort of person vs a liar.
  21. From an article that links off the one referenced in Steve’s post:

    “Research repeatedly shows that boys and girls are more alike than different,” Ms. Day said in an email. “We’d like to see more products that are simply aimed at children who like superheroes, and that’s an interest that crosses gender.”

    Amazing isn’t it? If it weren’t for that pesky Y chromosome we could all be the same and then everyone would be happy.

  22. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Excellent point. The truth is no respecter of political inclination. For example, I expect advances in the understanding of genetics to upset people all across the spectrum soon.

  23. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Generally agree with your comment, but don’t be too glib about global warming, because (1) “on record” just means that the current fluctuation is a 1-in-a-century amplitude, smaller than represented by the Medieval warm period, much smaller than other fluctuations in historical times, much much smaller than fluctuations on a scale of several thousand years, much much much smaller than fluctuations corresponding to ice ages on a scale of tens of thousands of years, and already arguably reversing based on terrestrial and solar observations; and (2) the climate data has been seriously fudged which makes the recent warming trend even harder to interpret.

    This isn’t in disagreement with your comment, just pointing out that in this particular controversy there are plenty of lies and exaggerations coming from the other side than the one you mentioned.

  24. But in the 1990s, gendered toys returned with a vengeance, resulting in the action heroes and princesses available today.

    I don’t get this unisex obsession. Unless we label he-man action figures and Barbies as “boy” and “girl”, how will all our young Bruce Jenners learn that they are supposed to stop wearing work shirts, khakis and work boots and switch to blouses, ruffles and stiletto heels.

    In this age of fluid genders, gender labeling is critically important to signaling one’s gender of choice (and preferred pronouns).

    Which reminds me. Why didn’t feminists get freaked out by Bruce Jenner switching to makeup, high heels, slinky dresses and glamour photos as part of his transformation to “woman”? Isn’t he just reinforcing “tired old gender stereotypes” about the way women should dress? Wouldn’t it have been more “liberating” for women if he dressed as a diesel dyke (i.e. dressed the way he always has)?

  25. I guess I won’t go out in my Angela Merkel costume. I’ll just put in on at home like I always do…

    • Replies: @Steve Austen
    Zwangsjacke is the answer to the question of what should Angela Merkel be wearing oops I did it again I mean is the answer to what is the German for straitjacket.
    , @tbraton
    "I guess I won’t go out in my Angela Merkel costume. I’ll just put in on at home like I always do…"

    I am relieved to hear that you dress like a man when you are at home. With a name like "Buzz Mohawk," I didn't think you were a woman.
  26. At some point Hollywood decided that adult Halloween (not just the sexy kind, but in milder forms as well) was a normal thing that should be promoted and indeed retconned into always having been normal. I remember a decade ago watching an episode of Ugly Betty (for some reason – I was certainly not a regular watcher of that show) in which Betty was shocked that her snobby Manhattan co-workers did not dress up for Halloween like her salt-of-the-earth neighbors back in Queens. This seems the opposite of the truth as far as I can tell – this started at the top and worked its way down. At least The Office correctly depicted adult Halloween as being most enjoyed by the self-absorbed and self-centered.

    • Replies: @Anon
    "At some point Hollywood decided that adult Halloween (not just the sexy kind, but in milder forms as well) was a normal thing that should be promoted and indeed retconned into always having been normal."

    People are sheep. They must be blamed too for being so easy to manipulate via mass marketing and propaganda. I mean this is a nation where people fell for 'gay marriage'.

    A nation of zombies.
  27. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    You’re not going to find many folks around these parts who don’t believe in macroevolution, in contrast to the some on the right and the virtually everyone on the left.

    Conservative creationism is pretty silly but it’s also not terribly important. Many bible beaters may believe that “we didn’t come from monkeys” but most accept the theory of antibiotic resistance, etc. So conservative creationists might be childishly ignorant but they’re not dangerous.

    Contrast this with leftists who, universally for all intents and purposes, believe in the equally absurd but far more dangerous myth that statistically significant, genetically influenced intergroup differences in behavior and cognition do not exist. The dangers of believing in this myth are far more dangerous than the young earth myth, for reasons well-documented by Sailer and many other insightful alt-right bloggers

  28. Cryptogenic [AKA "Mr. Zeepie"] says:
    @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    This ideological dichotomy is naive.

    We’re currently living in a glaciation period. My location used to be buried under a mass of ice over a hundred feet thick. Evolution not real = almost any argument positing social constructs. A Christian in Flyoveria can refuse to believe in the basic tenets of evolution and be safely ignored, but liberals have ensured that the very notion of race (and intelligence) is viewed as “pseudoscience”.

  29. @Buzz Mohawk
    I guess I won't go out in my Angela Merkel costume. I'll just put in on at home like I always do...

    Zwangsjacke is the answer to the question of what should Angela Merkel be wearing oops I did it again I mean is the answer to what is the German for straitjacket.

  30. Homoween

    Great Humpkin

  31. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    “Gay communities planted the seed, then retailers did the rest of the work, capitalizing on the spirit of these parades with readymade sexy outfits that got skimpier from year to year.”

    Black culture also defeated feminism. Black culture is about fighting and fuc*ing, but feminists couldn’t oppose cuz it’d be ‘racist’.

  32. So how is it that gendered toys and clothes are arbitrary and artificial, but then if a little boy likes to wear pink dresses, suddenly he needs to be labeled as a girl and given hormone blocking drugs before he hits puberty?

    • Replies: @EvolutionistX
    Feminist ideology and trans ideology are actually at odds. Trans people basically think that gender is real, they've just got the wrong one. Feminists believe that gender is fake. That's why a lot of feminists are vehemently opposed to trans people.
    , @ben tillman

    So how is it that gendered toys and clothes are arbitrary and artificial, but then if a little boy likes to wear pink dresses, suddenly he needs to be labeled as a girl and given hormone blocking drugs before he hits puberty?
     
    Good point.
  33. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record?

    That’s a bit of a strawman isn’t it? I think even most “conservatives” agree that the there is warming. The questions are about whether they are caused by human activity. This leads to “is this really a net positive or negative” and finally is the massive cost of intervention worth offset by the uncertain benefits?

    There is a rising drumbeat in the MSM to keep the message of storms, drought (climate change!) etc front and center and no mention whatsoever of the benefits of warming. This is clear (to me at least) because it leads to a license for massive governmental action across the globe. If we can’t have intergalactic aliens, then let’s fight global warming together.

  34. Well, at least Las Vegas, sin city, became more family-friendly.

  35. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Every year being the warmest on record would be evidence of a warming trend if it were actually occurring–of course the reality is data has been manipulated and adjusted by deceitful professionals and defended by SCIENCE! types in the media to give that impression. The trend has been toward cooler temps since 1998.

    Small modifications in bacteria don’t prove evolution anymore than small decreases in the white/black IQ gap is proof we’re all equally endowed and racism is the cause of the gap and so one day it will be erased. If anything rapidly mutating bacteria is evidence against a non-essentialist biology since bacteria remains bacteria in spite of mutations.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @thinking about it
    Good god what is an evolution denier doing on an hbd website?
  36. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Did the Medieval Warm Period prove that human carbon emissions were then causing catastrophic global warming? Did the petering out of the Little Ice Age, in the 19th Century, prove CAGW? Even if there were comparably valid and reliable statistics from over the centuries, how would recently recorded temperatures prove the theory of CAGW? “Climate denialism” is not limited to right-wingers.

    • Replies: @Jimbo
    What is in question is not evolution per se (the idea that living things have changed and continue to change over time), which unless you are a true blue young earth creationist is obvious. The question is whether Darwinian evolution by essentially random processes is the only, or even the primary, mechanism for it. These are, of course, conflated in the popular mind, but there is no reason they need to be. Plenty of people, going back to the ancients, theorized about some form of evolution before Darwin came up with natural selection.

    The evolution of bacterial resistance, rather than proving Darwinism, calls it into question. The simple idea of "a lot of bacteria die, leaving those that have some mutation that allows them to survive" story that is repeated ad nauseum has yielded, as microbiologists have learned more about the process, to a rather facinating picture where colonies of bacteria under stress engage in a furious rengineering of their own genome: actively rewriting regions of code and sharing the ones that work with the rest of the colony. No Darwinism to be found.
  37. But these days we lack a vocabulary of moral restraint.

    Indeed. Especially true for sexual matters, and even more especially for women’s sexual choices. That is why they like to focus on their extremely broad definition of “rape” since it recasts these matters in terms of male predation.

  38. This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    It’s always worth remembering that this class is close to two-thirds women. When the sex-ratio skews that much toward women, sluttiness happens.

    Thanks feminists!!

    • Replies: @e
    This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    Yes, the "affluent, college-educated" selfie class are simply mimicking gay culture. "If it's good for gays, it's good for us," is their motto. Translation: "It's not just okay, it's GOOD to call attention to oneself."

    , @snorlax
    I always found the Halloween posts on your (former?) blog very amusing.
    , @Anonymous
    Right, and the concomitant decline/postponement in marriage/having children. If you have kids and live in a suburban neighborhood with families, you're less likely to go out partying. You're going to be at home monitoring your kids going out trick-or-treating and manning the house for trick-or-treaters stopping by.
    , @Anonym
    I am not sure where you are getting the 2/3 figure from. IME it was 50:50 approximately.
    , @Josh
    Dude, you're alive!
  39. In my experience, most young professional women claim that dressing up in revealing costumes is somehow liberating and thus, feminist. Anything can be feminist or anti-feminist simply by declaring it so.

  40. advancedatheist [AKA "RedneckCryonicist"] says:

    I’ve thought of Halloween as a socially acceptable way to mock religious beliefs.

    • Replies: @Josh
    So you're an asshole?
  41. ” Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?”

    Oh, please. I am one who accepts Darwin’s scientific theory of evolution based on natural selection. I am not aware of any other scientific theory out there to explain the undeniable fact of evolution. “Intelligent design” is not a scientific theory, and the Book of Genesis is not a scientific treatise. Most people these days reject the literal interpretation of the Bible and conclusion that the Earth is only about 6000 years old, with certain exceptions, such as the Seventh Day Adventists, such as Dr. Ben Carson. (I wonder when anyone in the MSM is going to ask the good doctor about his religious beliefs and whether he embraces all the beliefs of his church.)

    On the other hand, you speak of “global warming” when the issue is really “man-made global warming.” Or “man-made climate change,” to use the terminology du jour. The scientific record clearly reveals that in the 4-1/2 billion year history of planet Earth we have experienced many periods where the global temperature has been much warmer than today and we have experienced many periods of “climate change,” going from warm to cold (“Ice Age” anyone?). You apparently are unaware that we have been maintaining recorded temperatures only since the latter part of the 19th century, a period of roughly 150 years, a blink of an eye in comparison to the 4-1/2 billion year age of Earth. How would you explain the presence and subsequent disappearance of the thick slab of ice (estimated to be 1-2 miles thick) that covered a large part of the upper mid-west of the present day U.S. and most of Canada more than 10,000 years ago, which was the end of the last major Ice Age? What caused that massive ice sheet to melt? Was it man-made global warming? According to Wikipedia, “The world population in 35,000 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 million people, all of whom subsisted as hunter-gatherers.[27] The population had increased to around 15 million at the time agriculture emerged in around 10,000 BCE.[28] By contrast, it is estimated that around 50–60 million people lived in the combined eastern and western Roman Empire in the 4th century CE.[29]” So humans were so few in number and their lifestyle was so primitive that there must have been some other force at work causing these alternating periods of climate change before Al Gore came along.

    Are you even aware of the tests conducted at the CERN super collider a few years ago which confirmed that cosmic rays play the dominant role in controlling the climate on Earth and that the Sun is the major regulator of the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth? Who would have imagined that the Sun was the deadly culprit playing games with our climate? This is an excerpt from a message I posted on TAC three years ago, quoting from an article on the tests conducted at CERN:

    “The science is now all-but-settled on global warming, convincing new evidence demonstrates, but Al Gore, the IPCC and other global warming doomsayers won’t be celebrating. The new findings point to cosmic rays and the sun — not human activities — as the dominant controller of climate on Earth.

    The research, published with little fanfare this week in the prestigious journal Nature, comes from über-prestigious CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, one of the world’s largest centres for scientific research involving 60 countries and 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities and national laboratories. CERN is the organization that invented the World Wide Web, that built the multi-billion dollar Large Hadron Collider, and that has now built a pristinely clean stainless steel chamber that precisely recreated the Earth’s atmosphere.

    In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes have done what global warming doomsayers said could never be done — demonstrate that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules that in Earth’s atmosphere can grow and seed clouds, the cloudier and thus cooler it will be. Because the sun’s magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth’s atmosphere (the stronger the sun’s magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth.”

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Are you even aware of the tests conducted at the CERN super collider a few years ago which confirmed that cosmic rays play the dominant role in controlling the climate on Earth and that the Sun is the major regulator of the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth? Who would have imagined that the Sun was the deadly culprit playing games with our climate? This is an excerpt from a message I posted on TAC three years ago, quoting from an article on the tests conducted at CERN:"

    I am very interested in this theory ever since having heard about it, however I don't think that this effect has been conclusively demonstrated as explaining the temperature increase over the last century and a half. The mechanism is plausible, the initial measurements are intriguing, but is it definitive? I don't believe that it is yet.
  42. @Buzz Mohawk
    I guess I won't go out in my Angela Merkel costume. I'll just put in on at home like I always do...

    “I guess I won’t go out in my Angela Merkel costume. I’ll just put in on at home like I always do…”

    I am relieved to hear that you dress like a man when you are at home. With a name like “Buzz Mohawk,” I didn’t think you were a woman.

  43. @Foseti
    This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    It's always worth remembering that this class is close to two-thirds women. When the sex-ratio skews that much toward women, sluttiness happens.

    Thanks feminists!!

    This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    Yes, the “affluent, college-educated” selfie class are simply mimicking gay culture. “If it’s good for gays, it’s good for us,” is their motto. Translation: “It’s not just okay, it’s GOOD to call attention to oneself.”

  44. I don’t remember Halloween parties or costumes on college kids at Berkeley in the ’70’s. Maybe I’m forgetting, but I just don’t. It was a very adult atmosphere. Keggers every Friday. The girls screwed. Then when I got to law school in 1980, everybody wanted to go to the Castro for Halloween. Weird.

  45. The Daily Mail Etiquette Expert has spoken: Hallowe’en celebration is “common” (i.e. lower class.)

    I just checked out his archive on DM. He also has funny (intentionally or otherwise) advice on how to write an email, serve cocktails, etc.

  46. I’m lost. Don’t get how toys and toy catalogs, mainly associated with Christmas, are making children cry on Halloween.

    If little Bruce or Betty is crying because they aren’t allowed to dress like sluts, and their crying is caused by feminists, is it because the feminists are doing the not-allowing, or because the feminists are urging the sluttiness the parents are not allowing?

    It is of course undeniable that the hijacking of Halloween from children by adults is a crime that will not go unpunished in the world beyond.

  47. It seems like a very large demographic of our city’s seasonal Halloween store: Attractive late high school/early college aged women who are trying on the trampzilla costumes. Halloween has become the new Mardi Gras for everyone outside of Louisiana who doesn’t have a real Mardi Gras.

    And as Foseti said, many of the women seem to be upscale – white and tastefully dressed (though there are certainly lower class folks shopping there, too, but they’re usually looking at the slasher film type of stuff.) And some of these young women even have their mom’s along with them, too.

  48. PC-had is the West’s Jihad.

  49. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @James Kabala
    At some point Hollywood decided that adult Halloween (not just the sexy kind, but in milder forms as well) was a normal thing that should be promoted and indeed retconned into always having been normal. I remember a decade ago watching an episode of Ugly Betty (for some reason - I was certainly not a regular watcher of that show) in which Betty was shocked that her snobby Manhattan co-workers did not dress up for Halloween like her salt-of-the-earth neighbors back in Queens. This seems the opposite of the truth as far as I can tell - this started at the top and worked its way down. At least The Office correctly depicted adult Halloween as being most enjoyed by the self-absorbed and self-centered.

    “At some point Hollywood decided that adult Halloween (not just the sexy kind, but in milder forms as well) was a normal thing that should be promoted and indeed retconned into always having been normal.”

    People are sheep. They must be blamed too for being so easy to manipulate via mass marketing and propaganda. I mean this is a nation where people fell for ‘gay marriage’.

    A nation of zombies.

  50. @D. K.
    Did the Medieval Warm Period prove that human carbon emissions were then causing catastrophic global warming? Did the petering out of the Little Ice Age, in the 19th Century, prove CAGW? Even if there were comparably valid and reliable statistics from over the centuries, how would recently recorded temperatures prove the theory of CAGW? "Climate denialism" is not limited to right-wingers.

    What is in question is not evolution per se (the idea that living things have changed and continue to change over time), which unless you are a true blue young earth creationist is obvious. The question is whether Darwinian evolution by essentially random processes is the only, or even the primary, mechanism for it. These are, of course, conflated in the popular mind, but there is no reason they need to be. Plenty of people, going back to the ancients, theorized about some form of evolution before Darwin came up with natural selection.

    The evolution of bacterial resistance, rather than proving Darwinism, calls it into question. The simple idea of “a lot of bacteria die, leaving those that have some mutation that allows them to survive” story that is repeated ad nauseum has yielded, as microbiologists have learned more about the process, to a rather facinating picture where colonies of bacteria under stress engage in a furious rengineering of their own genome: actively rewriting regions of code and sharing the ones that work with the rest of the colony. No Darwinism to be found.

  51. If women without restraint like to dress like hookers, do men without restraint want to dress up as superheroes?

    http://takimag.com/article/no_kids_allowed_gavin_mcinnes/print#axzz3qAUPX6Qn

  52. But how often do these triple bankshots work?

    For as long as the left owns the megaphone. You (and those making the shots) can see the artifice in the triple bank shot but the sheeple only see the ball entering the pocket – it is right and proper that adult women wear slutty costumes just as gay men do on Halloween – it’s always been that way. We know that lynchings and so on that happened 90 or 100 years ago are so fresh that they might as well have happened yesterday, but for other things, 1973 might as well be Roman times.

    It will end only when the last white lady has died alone with her cats and the Mormons and Latinos who have replaced her come to pick up her body. Romans used to celebrate Bacchanalia too, but you haven’t seen too many ancient Romans lately, have you?

    In today’s NYT there is a well reasoned op-ed about ” Academia’s Rejection of [Political] Diversity” complete with many cogent examples of leftist bias in academia, but the leading comments to the article are all to the effect that “well of course most academics are leftists because academics are smart and interested in truth and only Jesus hollering , evolution and climate change denying liars and idiots are conservatives” . It’s all about projection with these people.

    • Replies: @ren
    The problem isn't the differences of opinion which are too be expected. The problem is at the fact level. Like the screaming about how only 3% of Planned Parenthood's services are abortion. Fine, but then when folks note that 12% of all clients get abortions, and abortion is by far the most expensive service that PP offers, the PC "news" agencies just completely ignore it as though that has nothing to do with anything, when of course, that is the main point. Even if you like PP and support access to abortion, it doesn't change the fact that PP is pretty much mainly an abortion clinic. All primary care doctors and county health clinics etc, do birth control pills etc. Almost no doctors do abortions.
  53. @Foseti
    This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    It's always worth remembering that this class is close to two-thirds women. When the sex-ratio skews that much toward women, sluttiness happens.

    Thanks feminists!!

    I always found the Halloween posts on your (former?) blog very amusing.

  54. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    “Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record?”

    Even dyed-in-the-wool AGW proponents like Kevin Trenberth at NCAR had to admit that warming leveled off in the late 90s and that his camp could not explain it, ca. 2009. They continued to not be able to explain it until a year or two ago; Since NOAA rejiggered thier algorithms, the hiatus disappeared, and temperatures in the 1930s that were as high or higher than those in the 00’s are now miraculously lower. Now that they’ve got the data straight with thier story, they can go on pushing their story.

    Did you ever read the Hadley/CRU E-mails that were hacked in 2009? I was at home sick for an extended period right when that story broke, so I spent a good deal of time reading through them. It certainly opened my eyes; there was a wealth of information in there. It showed what a lot of the principle players in the AGW field were really thinking: admitting that they could not explain the (then) current temperature trends, and even conspiring with one another to suppress publication of results they didn’t like. And to my knowledge, none of those people ever said that the E-mails were forged. They never denied that those were things they had actually written. Their only defence was: those were private E-mails, you shouldn’t have read them.

    I don’t doubt that CO2 is a “green-house” gas (it certainly is) or that there might be some warming attending our pumping it into the atmosphere. But I do doubt that I am getting a complete or rigorously scientific assessment from the climate-science establishment. Science and/or sciencey establishments are not immune to the phenomenon of shared delusion.

  55. I have never understood, and probably will never understand, why any adult would want to play dress-up, Halloween or not: it’s all quite undignified to my way of thinking, though I do laugh at the dowdy plain-Janes railing against the “tawdriness” of other women confidently flaunting their attractiveness.

  56. Toys have become more gender differentiated because people have more money to buy toys. When I was a kid, I interpreted at a living history museum as a middle class 9 year old girl ca. 1830. We played with historically correct toys, of which there were very few. The options on offer were basically: a hoop and stick, a ball, checkers and a couple other board games, tin soldiers, dolls, and a game called graces, where you throw a small hoop back and forth using sticks. That was about it. Except for the last three, they were all gender neutral because when people had few material objects, most had to work for all the kids. Ditto clothing for young children. Today even poor people have a roomful of plastic toys, and baby clothes are so abundant I got bags of free hand me downs when my daughter was born. At this point, there’s no reason not to have pink and blue sleepers and different toys for each kid.

    I suspect this is also why all the lady engineers I know are from Eastern Europe or Asia. When you’re poorer, you can’t afford to take a bright person and let them gender differentiate into marketing or engineering based on taste. You go for engineering because it pays better. As people get wealthier, then, you can expect more sex differences, not fewer.

    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    I think you are right. except I think it might be interesting how girls play jump rope together and boys only compete together. Though jumprope, if you've seen them do it in se DC, really is a competition. But no one would look and call it that. Still, the sharpest tack on the wire is a black process detective who sits around whittling artisan miniature doll furniture to sell online because no one listens to him till they do and there is buckoo in small detailed objects smart parents pick up on. I suppose smart toys can't make kids smarter, but they can probably make them better behaved, or aesthetically sensitive, or simply knowledgeable. I think what they are at best is a spot light for gifted children who need things preoccupying to keep them on task, industrious, serious. And it's funny how those kids turn out---as if every pose on FB, every clipped text, every choice or two of the week simply fits with what he did when he was really young.
  57. “Children’s clothing has also become more gendered. Before World War I, babies and toddlers all wore white, loosefitting dresses and long hair, according to a history by Jo B. Paoletti, a professor of American Studies at the University of Maryland, and pink was considered a masculine color and blue a feminine one until the mid-20th century.”

    This is probably due to the combination of blank slate ideology and more aggressive business marketing. In the early 20th century, most adults realised nature trumped nurture, so they knew that dressing young kids in gender neutral clothes had little bearing on how they turned out. Today people give too much credit to environmental influences, so feminists, for example, believe girls will turn out weak and submissive if they are given pink dresses and barbie dolls. As for marketers, they just conduct surveys and go with want the majority want. The majority of young girls probably like pink more than most boys do, so companies package girls’ toys in pink packaging – it’s about money not ideology.

  58. I first noticed adult Halloween in the early-to-mid 80s; some women showing up at work in costume. Then I noticed that adult Halloween parties started being a thing. These were in areas both geographically and socially far outside of the gay-zones of New York and San Francisco. In contrast, with my parents generation, Halloween had always been strictly a kid’s thing, and not at all important.

    If one needed a single picture to encapsulate just how fundmentally decadent and creepy the notion of “adult Halloween” has become, grok this:

    Halloween at the Playboy Mansion

    As the girls say nowadays: “Ewww”

  59. @GW
    Every year being the warmest on record would be evidence of a warming trend if it were actually occurring--of course the reality is data has been manipulated and adjusted by deceitful professionals and defended by SCIENCE! types in the media to give that impression. The trend has been toward cooler temps since 1998.

    Small modifications in bacteria don't prove evolution anymore than small decreases in the white/black IQ gap is proof we're all equally endowed and racism is the cause of the gap and so one day it will be erased. If anything rapidly mutating bacteria is evidence against a non-essentialist biology since bacteria remains bacteria in spite of mutations.

    Good god what is an evolution denier doing on an hbd website?

  60. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    SFG, i’m I complete agreement that ideology can lead one off the deep end, but your examples to prove contemporary balance are not particularly compelling.

    –> Global Warming.
    First off, your “every year the warmest on record” is just wrong. The best data we have is the satellite record. The last ten years have the usual fluctuations but have been pretty darn flat. This requires either that the natural variations are still on the same level as AGW—and we’re in natural cooling cycle exactly cancelling AGW. Or that the climate models are still junk, and don’t understand how the climate—most probably the oceans—react to warming. (For reference the 1998 el Nino spike is about on the same level of as the late 1930s temperature peak. So we are slightly below the modern peak. We have been warming steadily with a few dramatic setbacks, coming out of the Little Ice Age.)

    The serious arguments aren’t about whether CO2 is a greenhouse gas, or that CO2 concentrations are increasing. It’s about whether the warming seen is significant, whether the climate models are at all accurate, whether the warming is caused primarily by AGW and whether if so it’s even a big problem.

    Personally, since all of civilized life has been in the comparatively warm Holocene, i want to extend that rather than going back to the ice ages, when my house—sitting on glacial till—was under ice. I’m open to the thought that a little excess CO2 may allow us to stay comfy and put off the next ice age. But I’m conservative, so I’m also cautious about mucking things up too much. But generally, I don’t think that in the time frame the oil economy is likely to last we’re courting catastrophe. And in any case people are not going to give up their lifestyle, so we aren’t going to flick off the oil switch immediately regardless.

    I think most conservatives suspect that most of this “climate change” hubbub is driven by standard managerial big state leftism trying to grab more power, dovetailing with the interests of climate scientists (more funding and more self-importance) and breast beating—man-is-destroying-the-planet—religious environmentalism. A useful metric to test this is that we have a direct technical solution readily available, that can preserve the existing order of high energy use and personal transportation—nuclear power. If climate change was an existential crisis, then secondary concerns would be brushed away in favor of saving the planet. Actual interest in nuclear from the AGW howling left is essentially zero. Of course, if the climate change folks were serious they’d also be for an immediate immigration moratorium and a serious effort at 3rd world—i.e. African—population control. What’s the sign of those?

    –> Evolution.
    There’s even less to this point. Yes, fundamentalist Christians who believe in a rigid biblical literacy are anti-evolution. (An unnecessary and in fact arrogant position–who are they to argue with God about his method for creating the world and man?) But that’s their particular *religious* ideology driving them into error, not “conservatism”. And yes historically, “conservatives”—meaning those of biblical Christian bent—were suspicious of\opposed to Darwin’s insights again from religious ideology.

    But generally down through the ages, “conservatives” are the folks who’ve argued that there is “human nature”, that our natures are not immutable, that men and women are different, that individuals have their innate character (i.e. there are good and bad, smart and dumb, hardworking and lazy, etc.) and when encountered that different racial and ethnic groups had their own differing characters\temperaments\intelligences. In other words, while the religious did not welcome “the theory of evolution”, conservatives have had the essentials right.

    The modern liberal believes in “Evolution”—meaning that they are modern, intelligent and sophisticated while conservatives are bible beating, pickup driving hayseeds, who should be mocked and abused. But they do not believe in “evolution”—i.e. that natural selection has been continuously working on humans, giving us a human nature, and different endowments, tendencies and behaviors even for the sexes (see Larry Summers), much less for the races. (In fact, as we’re tediously reminded “race does not exist”… while we’re out endlessly “closing the racial achievement gap”.)

    This hostility to human nature—the belief that everything could be tossed upside down and man remade—has been a leftist constant, and cause of great suffering and evil. Lysenko theories are the left’s stock in trade.

    • Replies: @Rob McX

    Of course, if the climate change folks were serious they’d also be for an immediate immigration moratorium and a serious effort at 3rd world—i.e. African—population control. What’s the sign of those?
     
    For me, that's the clincher. It shows how hollow the whole SJW-environmentalist-climate-change lobby is. Environmentalists (with a few honourable exceptions) are at best indifferent to immigration, and open-borders enthusiasts at worst. Immigration is making the problem worse in countless ways. It absolves Third World countries of their responsibility to control their population, and puts more strain on the environment in the white countries on to which they unload the surplus. Thanks to foreign aid (environmentalists never oppose or suggest imposing conditions on it) and remittances from immigrants, Africa's human population will keep on growing and wiping out other species until the whole continent from Cairo to Cape Town looks a derelict parking lot.
  61. After a half century of effort, feminism’s most visible achievement is having freed girls from dressing as princesses on Halloween to dressing as prostitutes. Now if they can just get the boys to straighten up (so to speak) and start dressing as rent boys, we’ll all finally be liberated from the patriarchy.

    • Replies: @Anon7
    I liked your comment, but remember that there will never be a "final liberation" for women. Women will never stop pushing for everything that there is. As Genius Coates says, no amount of reparations will ever be enough. The stain of maleness can never be wholly removed and the legacy of male domination can never be overcome regardless of the degree to which society is feminized and men are emasculated. It won't be over until we are conquered by a more masculine culture that knows that failure to keep women under control will doom any civilization.
  62. @AnotherDad

    Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?
     
    SFG, i'm I complete agreement that ideology can lead one off the deep end, but your examples to prove contemporary balance are not particularly compelling.

    --> Global Warming.
    First off, your "every year the warmest on record" is just wrong. The best data we have is the satellite record. The last ten years have the usual fluctuations but have been pretty darn flat. http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2015/august2015/Aug2015graph.jpg
    This requires either that the natural variations are still on the same level as AGW—and we’re in natural cooling cycle exactly cancelling AGW. Or that the climate models are still junk, and don’t understand how the climate—most probably the oceans—react to warming. (For reference the 1998 el Nino spike is about on the same level of as the late 1930s temperature peak. So we are slightly below the modern peak. We have been warming steadily with a few dramatic setbacks, coming out of the Little Ice Age.)

    The serious arguments aren’t about whether CO2 is a greenhouse gas, or that CO2 concentrations are increasing. It’s about whether the warming seen is significant, whether the climate models are at all accurate, whether the warming is caused primarily by AGW and whether if so it’s even a big problem.

    Personally, since all of civilized life has been in the comparatively warm Holocene, i want to extend that rather than going back to the ice ages, when my house—sitting on glacial till—was under ice. I’m open to the thought that a little excess CO2 may allow us to stay comfy and put off the next ice age. But I’m conservative, so I’m also cautious about mucking things up too much. But generally, I don’t think that in the time frame the oil economy is likely to last we’re courting catastrophe. And in any case people are not going to give up their lifestyle, so we aren’t going to flick off the oil switch immediately regardless.

    I think most conservatives suspect that most of this “climate change” hubbub is driven by standard managerial big state leftism trying to grab more power, dovetailing with the interests of climate scientists (more funding and more self-importance) and breast beating—man-is-destroying-the-planet—religious environmentalism. A useful metric to test this is that we have a direct technical solution readily available, that can preserve the existing order of high energy use and personal transportation—nuclear power. If climate change was an existential crisis, then secondary concerns would be brushed away in favor of saving the planet. Actual interest in nuclear from the AGW howling left is essentially zero. Of course, if the climate change folks were serious they’d also be for an immediate immigration moratorium and a serious effort at 3rd world—i.e. African—population control. What’s the sign of those?

    --> Evolution.
    There’s even less to this point. Yes, fundamentalist Christians who believe in a rigid biblical literacy are anti-evolution. (An unnecessary and in fact arrogant position--who are they to argue with God about his method for creating the world and man?) But that’s their particular *religious* ideology driving them into error, not “conservatism”. And yes historically, “conservatives”—meaning those of biblical Christian bent—were suspicious of\opposed to Darwin’s insights again from religious ideology.

    But generally down through the ages, “conservatives” are the folks who’ve argued that there is “human nature”, that our natures are not immutable, that men and women are different, that individuals have their innate character (i.e. there are good and bad, smart and dumb, hardworking and lazy, etc.) and when encountered that different racial and ethnic groups had their own differing characters\temperaments\intelligences. In other words, while the religious did not welcome “the theory of evolution”, conservatives have had the essentials right.

    The modern liberal believes in “Evolution”—meaning that they are modern, intelligent and sophisticated while conservatives are bible beating, pickup driving hayseeds, who should be mocked and abused. But they do not believe in “evolution”—i.e. that natural selection has been continuously working on humans, giving us a human nature, and different endowments, tendencies and behaviors even for the sexes (see Larry Summers), much less for the races. (In fact, as we’re tediously reminded "race does not exist"… while we’re out endlessly “closing the racial achievement gap”.)

    This hostility to human nature—the belief that everything could be tossed upside down and man remade—has been a leftist constant, and cause of great suffering and evil. Lysenko theories are the left’s stock in trade.

    Of course, if the climate change folks were serious they’d also be for an immediate immigration moratorium and a serious effort at 3rd world—i.e. African—population control. What’s the sign of those?

    For me, that’s the clincher. It shows how hollow the whole SJW-environmentalist-climate-change lobby is. Environmentalists (with a few honourable exceptions) are at best indifferent to immigration, and open-borders enthusiasts at worst. Immigration is making the problem worse in countless ways. It absolves Third World countries of their responsibility to control their population, and puts more strain on the environment in the white countries on to which they unload the surplus. Thanks to foreign aid (environmentalists never oppose or suggest imposing conditions on it) and remittances from immigrants, Africa’s human population will keep on growing and wiping out other species until the whole continent from Cairo to Cape Town looks a derelict parking lot.

  63. When we had some more societal restraint i used to enjoy halloween in the 80s /early 90s, women would don a close fitting black top and tights and put on cat ears…. it was a chance to be sexy one night of the year- gals who would not otherwise expose themselves like that – now i see that much *ss every day (yoga pants, tight tights, leggings ) … not that i mind….
    but halloween it self is no fun because the women just look trashy.

  64. Claire Cain Miller

    I guess now that Ellen and Buddy are old news she doesn’t have anything else to write about. She could probably pick up some extra work at The Onion.

  65. “The cops now know the whole scene, even the costumes, the jesuschrist strung-out hair, Indian beads, Indian headbands, donkey beads, temple bells, amulets, mandalas, god’s-eyes, fluorescent vests, unicorn horns, Errol Flynn dueling shirts….” – Tom Wolfe, The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test

    It wasn’t just homosexuals that adultized Hallowe’en and introduced today’s Age of Perpetual Adolescence, it was the whole Sixties’ shebang of “Do Your Own Thing” that commerce latched onto and marketed pop culture fads on the treadmill that morphed seamlessly into today’s “gone viral” fads that create endless instant opportunities to addict lifelong adultescents and, let’s not forget, that rake in loads of cash. You, Mr. Sailer, have touched on this with your writings on California’s post-WWII culture of individualism.

    Forget adultized-adultescent Hallowe’en. Even today’s everyday dress for most people is childish. Mark Steyn riffed on this in a nice bit on how someone from 1890 transported to 1950 would still recognize the world of 1950 but, transported to today, the 1890 visitor would see today’s adults everywhere accoutered and groomed like children.

    • Replies: @njguy73
    Steyn also added the if the 1890 man was transported to 1950, the technological advancements would blow his mind: cars, refrigerators, TVs, etc. He would then expect that by 2010, it would be even more mid-blowing. But except for car cupholders and an iPod, meh.

    So:

    1890-1950: technological leaps and bounds, adult dress stays same
    1950-2010: technological stagnation, adult dress becomes unrecognizable
  66. Love the phrase….” when the gay community cottoned to it’”, well hee haw, pardner. The eye opening gay costume party, nation wide is San Francisco’s Folsom Street Faire, extremely NOT SAFE FOR WORK. Gays do love them some git-ups.

  67. Progressive thought consists of a great many bank shots. Tortured logic is often necessary to ensure that some people are demonized and others aren’t. The fact that Chicago has a lot of gun violence despite restrictive laws only proves to them that the problem is guns coming in from other places. The fact that those guns don’t cause the same level of crime in other places does not cause them to question their premises.

    But perhaps my favorite is the way progressives will sneer at an “old-fashioned” stay-at-home mom and blame her choice on the oppression of the Western patriarchy, but if some Muslima says she’s happy in her niqab, well then you’re a racist bigot for not supporting her in her freely-chosen lifestyle!

  68. OT

    Many Need to Shop Around on HealthCare.gov as Prices Jump

    The vast majority of marketplace consumers receive tax credits that insulate them from premium increases,” Mr. Frank said.

    What kind of “marketplace” is it when the “vast majority” of consumers can’t and don’t pay for the product?

    • Replies: @Lugash
    It's the same marketplace that forces you to by its product at government gunpoint.
  69. @Foseti
    This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    It's always worth remembering that this class is close to two-thirds women. When the sex-ratio skews that much toward women, sluttiness happens.

    Thanks feminists!!

    Right, and the concomitant decline/postponement in marriage/having children. If you have kids and live in a suburban neighborhood with families, you’re less likely to go out partying. You’re going to be at home monitoring your kids going out trick-or-treating and manning the house for trick-or-treaters stopping by.

  70. @Auntie Analogue

    "The cops now know the whole scene, even the costumes, the jesuschrist strung-out hair, Indian beads, Indian headbands, donkey beads, temple bells, amulets, mandalas, god's-eyes, fluorescent vests, unicorn horns, Errol Flynn dueling shirts...." - Tom Wolfe, The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test

     

    It wasn't just homosexuals that adultized Hallowe'en and introduced today's Age of Perpetual Adolescence, it was the whole Sixties' shebang of "Do Your Own Thing" that commerce latched onto and marketed pop culture fads on the treadmill that morphed seamlessly into today's "gone viral" fads that create endless instant opportunities to addict lifelong adultescents and, let's not forget, that rake in loads of cash. You, Mr. Sailer, have touched on this with your writings on California's post-WWII culture of individualism.

    Forget adultized-adultescent Hallowe'en. Even today's everyday dress for most people is childish. Mark Steyn riffed on this in a nice bit on how someone from 1890 transported to 1950 would still recognize the world of 1950 but, transported to today, the 1890 visitor would see today's adults everywhere accoutered and groomed like children.

    Steyn also added the if the 1890 man was transported to 1950, the technological advancements would blow his mind: cars, refrigerators, TVs, etc. He would then expect that by 2010, it would be even more mid-blowing. But except for car cupholders and an iPod, meh.

    So:

    1890-1950: technological leaps and bounds, adult dress stays same
    1950-2010: technological stagnation, adult dress becomes unrecognizable

  71. Hey man, girls dressing up sexy for Halloween is a fun and beautiful thing. Girls in America today are so bombarded with Feminist propaganda that they should be imitation men that a lot of the time the best way for them to back in touch with their femininity is to dress sexy.

    • Replies: @Dennis Dale
    You might be on to something. Are women dressing and behaving more provocatively in subconscious defiance of feminist sexual paranoia? Feminism has adapted to having lost its battle against porn and heterosexuality without acknowledging it, by mostly adopting the cultural Marxist assault on sexual mores (every college now seems to have a "sex week"--as if the kids needed any prompting!), but remains obsessed with what has always been a legitimate female concern and fell under those same sexual norms they're hacking away at--restricting male sexuality. Feminism is a ball of confusion.
  72. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    I am not sure why climate change denialism is supposedly a conservative or right-wing thing. Or opposition to environmentalism for that matter. There is not a lot that is ‘conservative’ about getting a one-shot boost to the vaunted economy for a century or two by burning through all the earth’s energy stores.

    • Replies: @JerryC
    I am not sure why climate change denialism is supposedly a conservative or right-wing thing.

    It's because the alleged solutions to global warming all fail miserably on technical/engineering grounds, and people with technical/engineering knowledge tend to skew right politically.
  73. @eah
    OT

    Many Need to Shop Around on HealthCare.gov as Prices Jump

    The vast majority of marketplace consumers receive tax credits that insulate them from premium increases,” Mr. Frank said.

    What kind of "marketplace" is it when the "vast majority" of consumers can't and don't pay for the product?

    It’s the same marketplace that forces you to by its product at government gunpoint.

  74. @Harold

    according to a history by Jo B. Paoletti, a professor of American Studies at the University of Maryland, and pink was considered a masculine color and blue a feminine one until the mid-20th century.
     
    vs.

    from
    http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141117-the-pink-vs-blue-gender-myth


    But what about the idea that a century ago little boys were dressed in pink and pink for girls is only a recent fashion? It seems even that might be something of a myth too. Psychology writer Christian Jarrett describes in his new book Great Myths of the Brain, how an Italian psychologist Marco Del Giudice, who tried to find the origins of this idea, could find just four short magazine quotes, describing pink as the colour for boys. In two of these he believes that perhaps the blue and pink were accidentally swapped around. That seems unlikely to me, but when he searched a database of five million books printed in American or British English from 1800-2000 more convincing was the lack of any mentions of “pink for a boy”, even though from 1890 onwards there were increasing mentions of “pink for a girl”.

     

    A lot of the social history of colors in fashion needs to pay attention to the fact that in the past color choices in clothes were much more constrained by the availability of certain dyes. The phrase “the royal purple” is an example of how expensive certain colors were until not that long ago. The Germans invented a whole bunch of industrial dyes in the later 19th and early 20th centuries, which eventually liberated people to choose whatever colors they liked.

    • Replies: @Cracker
    Feldgrau is my favorite.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    Wasn't it determined that the Puritans' coats weren't plain brown, but a variety of bright, solid colors? How did they do that-- Indian corn? War paint?

    A century and a half later, thise British coats were red.
    , @5371
    The reservation of purple for royalty in antiquity was a matter of policy and law, not of expense, just as in China with the imperial yellow.
  75. For some individuals, the word “inappropriate” works well enough.

    Careful. You could be accused of cultural inappropriation.

  76. @Steve Sailer
    A lot of the social history of colors in fashion needs to pay attention to the fact that in the past color choices in clothes were much more constrained by the availability of certain dyes. The phrase "the royal purple" is an example of how expensive certain colors were until not that long ago. The Germans invented a whole bunch of industrial dyes in the later 19th and early 20th centuries, which eventually liberated people to choose whatever colors they liked.

    Feldgrau is my favorite.

  77. -Global Warming: your graph shows an upward trend over a long period of time. Is it, maybe, worth it to keep using oil and avoid global disruptions? Sure, it could be–but that’s my point, you choose which set of lies you say is less disturbing. Same with your arguments about evolution–if you believe conservative errors are less important in the grander scheme of things, you will throw in your lot with conservatives. (This has increasingly been the case with me over the past few decades.)

    @FormerlyRobX: Yup, storytelling is a social-primate survival skill. As Derbyshire has pointed out, truth-seeking is sort of a deleterious mutation.

    : Yes, exactly! When you make a statement that liberal myths are more dangerous, you are ‘paying your money and taking your choice’–deciding that the conservative myths are more conducive to a strong society.

    @Mr. Zeepie: It’s a little more complex–all the ‘social construct’ stuff is true, it’s just superimposed on the effects of HBD. Women are actually encouraged by social pressures to take on traditional feminine roles…but those pressures exist because it’s more easy if they do take on those roles due to biological differences that are not mutable given present technology.

    @D.K.: Sure there have been cases of warming in the past, but we’re seeing it happen now, we’re burning CO2, and we know CO2 traps heat. What to do about it is another question.

    There’s nothing wrong with saying ‘I care about affordable family formation more than climate disasters, and I’m conservative as a result.’ I’m just pointing out every political movement lies to get its aims forward, and you wind up picking which set of lies you dislike least.

    BTW, I’m not defending environmentalists’ disregard for immigration, which has to do with Democratic Party coalition politics and liberal groupthink in universities. Just because you’re right on climate doesn’t make you right on everything. In fact, one of the things I’m arguing is that no currently existing political group is right on everything.

  78. @bossel

    females like to dress up like hookers and they need to restrain themselves
     
    Restraining themselves from dressing like hookers? Why should they? It's everyone's personal decision what to wear. No idiotic feminists or ultra-conservatives have any right to interfere. If any people need to restrain themselves then it's those primitive minds who think that any woman who doesn't wear "appropriate" clothes is fair game.

    We’re talking about children here, and parents can and should overrule inappropriate or downright dangerous decisions…

  79. @bossel

    females like to dress up like hookers and they need to restrain themselves
     
    Restraining themselves from dressing like hookers? Why should they? It's everyone's personal decision what to wear. No idiotic feminists or ultra-conservatives have any right to interfere. If any people need to restrain themselves then it's those primitive minds who think that any woman who doesn't wear "appropriate" clothes is fair game.

    Spot on. We all need to restrain ourselves from telling loose women to restrain themselves. Is this [current year], or the 50s? So primitive.

    • Replies: @Josh
    Okay, this is definitely parody (right?).
    , @shrinker
    Ha, that's my next Zazzle bumper sticker right there: "HOW CAN WE AS A SOCIETY STILL TOLERATE THIS, IN THE YEAR [current year]"
  80. @Foseti
    This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    It's always worth remembering that this class is close to two-thirds women. When the sex-ratio skews that much toward women, sluttiness happens.

    Thanks feminists!!

    I am not sure where you are getting the 2/3 figure from. IME it was 50:50 approximately.

  81. A lot of straight men wear sexy/slutty costumes. For men into weightlifting halloweens a good excuse to walk around shirtless in public. There’s entire threads about this in the fitness subreddit. I myself drested as Khal Drogo last year.

    • Replies: @oh its just me
    I have noticed the rise in straight male vanity - guys running with their shirts off in 64 degree weather, etc.
    It's unmanly and revolting.
  82. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you’re probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Hi SFG, I think you may mistake me. I see political correctness on the right as well as on the left and, in my opinion, it is equally destructive of human welfare no matter which side it is on.

    Free trade, for instance, is a politically correct idea that appeals mainly to economic conservatives on the right. The lie here is that free trade is almost always a good thing, that everyone or almost everyone in a trading nation will be made better off by free trade. But in truth orthodox textbook trade theory makes no such claim, particularly in the case of trade between countries at vastly different levels of economic development, where the comparative advantages lie in their relative endowments of labor and capital. In those cases for everyone to benefit it is necessary to compensate the losers (ordinary working people) out of the gains of the winners (people whose incomes derive primarily from capital, including human capital in the form of high IQ and superior education). But this is something you will never read about in the mainstream press for the simple reason that among elite economists it is “politically incorrect” to say so. See here for the details: https://goo.gl/ogyov5

    In the case of climate change the lie is not that global warming is real and that rising CO2 levels are contributing to that it, but rather that it is necessarily a bad thing, in fact a very bad thing that threatens the future of human civilization; and that therefore we should take radical steps urgently costing many trillions of dollars to try to stop or minimize it.

    Nevermind that there is no good evidence that we can do much if anything to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere significantly in the century ahead no matter how money we spend. More important is that a prima facie case that can be made that higher CO2 levels are probably a net good for the planet. For a couple of reasons:

    First, because carbon dioxide is a basic plant food, much like oxygen to animals. Thanks to rising levels in the atmosphere world agricultural productivity is estimated to have already increased something on the order of 20%, which helps to feed a hungry world. See here: https://goo.gl/sZnkP2

    And secondly, because climate models predict that most of the warming caused by rising CO2 levels will occur near the poles, at night, in the winter. This is ideal from a human point of view as a quick look at the map will easily confirm; for it means that the world’s temperate zones will grow larger, they being the preferred habitat of advanced civilization.

    I don’t know why I’ve gone to all this trouble except that a sense of duty compels me.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Nothing wrong with that; I actually do agree with you on that. (So I guess we don't really disagree?)

    Your listing of free trade is actually a very good point and one much better at making the point (since many people here are anti-free trade) than any of the ones I came up with. It hasn't done the bottom three-quarters of America much good, for example.

    As for the CO2...I think you are right we won't be able to shut it down; if nothing else due to the business lobby in the USA and China's desire to industrialize. I'm less sanguine about the natural disasters that are likely to result. I wish conservatives would stop arguing over its veracity and start finding ways to deal with it. Faith and family are, after all, good supports in a time of crisis...
  83. @AndrewR
    Feminism at its core is about removing all negative consequences for all choices made by females. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your grapes' sourness) this tends to come back and bite them in the ass, but not before causing horrific amount of collateral damage to men, children and prudent women.

    Feminism at its core is about removing all negative consequences for all choices made by females. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your grapes’ sourness) this tends to come back and bite them in the ass, but not before causing horrific amount of collateral damage to men, children and prudent women.

    Well said Andrew, except i’d change the last to just “women”.

    The truth is feminism has done tremendous to society, making it more difficult for men and women to find harmonious relations and raise children successfully and happily together. But among it’s biggest victims, are the “imprudent women” who buy into feminist nonsense and as a result seriously degrade their ability to attract and keep and man and be successful in family life.

    There are substantial numbers of women–who could have been good women–who simply “wake up too late” and never get married or never have the family or the size of family they desired because they bought into feminism or simply didn’t set about organizing their life because they were pickled in the feminist nonsense our culture is swimming with.

  84. @Niccolo Salo
    Halloween is also known as 'Gay New Year'.

    Up in Toronto, this night is the second busiest night of the year for taxi drivers. You see legions of 30/40ish women dressed up in slutty costumes, pretending to be bisexual, craving and demanding male attention, while their boyfriends/husbands play along, often emasculated in some ridiculous get up.

    Halloween was supposed to be a night of trick or treating for the kids.

    Niccolo….Slutty costumes? Tread easy my friend, a Toronto cop started the “slut-shaming” protest movement…..”Dress like a slut and you get raped, what did you expect.” I was in Toronto one year during Carribanna (sic) Festival…talk about costumes. Nothing like 200 pound women wearing thongs and feathers prancing around to calypso music.

  85. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Global warming denialists are on thin ice (pun intended). The total heat content has been increasing a lot, its just been absorbed into the oceans. But, the slow down since 98 is likely due to a lower reponse to CO2 than earlier thought. The response is still there and we will see big changes. The models are really good and increasing CO2 is going to increase temperature a lot.

    The much better argument is on benefit-cost grounds and Matt Kahn has made the arguments for why small ball adaptation won’t be very hard and big carbon tax measures might not be needed. Its a much more intellectually defensible position that doesn’t make you look crazy. Better move to that argument now since I’d lay real money on continuing to set records for a while.

    Yes if people were at all serious about GW arguments they would argue for population control and immigration restrictions. Both things are true, there is real GW and SJWs are only interested in it to the extent they can use it to bash people they don’t like over the head.

    It would be real smart to get some contingency plans in place just in case GW is worse than thought. its just cheap insurance.

  86. @Doug
    A lot of straight men wear sexy/slutty costumes. For men into weightlifting halloweens a good excuse to walk around shirtless in public. There's entire threads about this in the fitness subreddit. I myself drested as Khal Drogo last year.

    I have noticed the rise in straight male vanity – guys running with their shirts off in 64 degree weather, etc.
    It’s unmanly and revolting.

  87. @Anonym
    I am not sure why climate change denialism is supposedly a conservative or right-wing thing. Or opposition to environmentalism for that matter. There is not a lot that is 'conservative' about getting a one-shot boost to the vaunted economy for a century or two by burning through all the earth's energy stores.

    I am not sure why climate change denialism is supposedly a conservative or right-wing thing.

    It’s because the alleged solutions to global warming all fail miserably on technical/engineering grounds, and people with technical/engineering knowledge tend to skew right politically.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    I am from an engineering background and skew way to the right politically. Want to see an exponential graph?

    http://cleantechnica.com/2015/01/27/two-graphs-highlighting-surge-us-solar-market-growth/

    Check out the costs:

    http://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/us-installed-cost-of-solar-power-ilsr.jpg

    Failing miserably, just like Moore's Law.
  88. “Adults” act more childish than ever these days, and seizing on any excuse to wear a costume outside of Halloween is a trend I’ve noticed. Witness CosPlay clubs, Anime, and Comic-con style conventions, where people (granted these are usually people in their 20s, but still) make elaborate and expensive costumes of their favorite characters. I live near Disneyland and like to run their half marathons four times a year and most of the participates in the races dress in a costume when they do it. Often the first question after registration opens asked in the Facebook groups dedicated to discussing the races is not What training plan do I use?, but rather, What costume should I wear? Disney and the rise of comic book/sci fi/ gamer nerd culture into the mainstream has played a not-insignificant role in the increase of costume wearing among adults.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Disney and the rise of comic book/sci fi/ gamer nerd culture into the mainstream has played a not-insignificant role in the increase of costume wearing among adults.
     
    This shows how we are no longer a serious people.
  89. As far as I remember in my youth in Germany Halloween was no festival at all. Some people knew that at that time Americans had their parties, but most people didn´t care. In the last decade the importance of Halloween has risen fast. But in Germany the children party style stage has been skipped, right from the beginning it has been a party for young grown ups. Thus 16 year old boys throw eggs at windows and 25 year old women dress up as vampire gogo dancers. Also people binge-drink, puke in the subway etc

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    As far as I remember in my youth in Germany Halloween was no festival at all. Some people knew that at that time Americans had their parties, but most people didn´t care. In the last decade the importance of Halloween has risen fast. But in Germany the children party style stage has been skipped, right from the beginning it has been a party for young grown ups. Thus 16 year old boys throw eggs at windows and 25 year old women dress up as vampire gogo dancers. Also people binge-drink, puke in the subway etc
     
    A fitting tribute to American cultural influence.
    , @Romanian
    In Romania, too. Face painting kids and the like is much rarer than adults making (or buying) some sort of outfit to go clubbing with. So we skipped that stage. Thankfully, it's pretty rare, and confined to club parties for adults.
  90. @Luke Lea

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you’re probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?
     
    Hi SFG, I think you may mistake me. I see political correctness on the right as well as on the left and, in my opinion, it is equally destructive of human welfare no matter which side it is on.

    Free trade, for instance, is a politically correct idea that appeals mainly to economic conservatives on the right. The lie here is that free trade is almost always a good thing, that everyone or almost everyone in a trading nation will be made better off by free trade. But in truth orthodox textbook trade theory makes no such claim, particularly in the case of trade between countries at vastly different levels of economic development, where the comparative advantages lie in their relative endowments of labor and capital. In those cases for everyone to benefit it is necessary to compensate the losers (ordinary working people) out of the gains of the winners (people whose incomes derive primarily from capital, including human capital in the form of high IQ and superior education). But this is something you will never read about in the mainstream press for the simple reason that among elite economists it is "politically incorrect" to say so. See here for the details: https://goo.gl/ogyov5

    In the case of climate change the lie is not that global warming is real and that rising CO2 levels are contributing to that it, but rather that it is necessarily a bad thing, in fact a very bad thing that threatens the future of human civilization; and that therefore we should take radical steps urgently costing many trillions of dollars to try to stop or minimize it.

    Nevermind that there is no good evidence that we can do much if anything to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere significantly in the century ahead no matter how money we spend. More important is that a prima facie case that can be made that higher CO2 levels are probably a net good for the planet. For a couple of reasons:

    First, because carbon dioxide is a basic plant food, much like oxygen to animals. Thanks to rising levels in the atmosphere world agricultural productivity is estimated to have already increased something on the order of 20%, which helps to feed a hungry world. See here: https://goo.gl/sZnkP2

    And secondly, because climate models predict that most of the warming caused by rising CO2 levels will occur near the poles, at night, in the winter. This is ideal from a human point of view as a quick look at the map will easily confirm; for it means that the world's temperate zones will grow larger, they being the preferred habitat of advanced civilization.

    I don't know why I've gone to all this trouble except that a sense of duty compels me.

    Nothing wrong with that; I actually do agree with you on that. (So I guess we don’t really disagree?)

    Your listing of free trade is actually a very good point and one much better at making the point (since many people here are anti-free trade) than any of the ones I came up with. It hasn’t done the bottom three-quarters of America much good, for example.

    As for the CO2…I think you are right we won’t be able to shut it down; if nothing else due to the business lobby in the USA and China’s desire to industrialize. I’m less sanguine about the natural disasters that are likely to result. I wish conservatives would stop arguing over its veracity and start finding ways to deal with it. Faith and family are, after all, good supports in a time of crisis…

  91. @anonymous
    The gays seem to have helped get the ball rolling by giving women the green light to dress as skimpily as possible for Halloween. However, it's not just that particular day but all the time. Lots of women just literally jump at the opportunity to wear as revealing clothing as possible; short shorts and skirts, yoga pants, skimpy beach attire, etc. People may of course like that but pointing out that many women have a need to hang it all out is usually met with denial. It's their freedom to dress as they want and has nothing to do with anything else. Most of that clothing isn't even comfortable so that can't be it. Let's not even mention the absurd Slut Walks which are getting ever more popular.

    IDK how old you are but I’m over 60 and I can assure you that before approximately 1990 much of the everyday clothing worn by young (and not so young) women today would have been worn only by strippers and hookers. If you can find video of crowds in the 1980s or before it jumps out at you. (This also largely applies to piercings, tattoos and obesity.) That’s about the same time as Hallowe’en began its expansion into the major event it now is.

    • Replies: @dcite
    I don't know about that. The short skirts and tight pants of the 60s and 70s caused a great deal of consternation. They were even called "hot pants." An article from the early 60s described tight slacks seen on the French (who else) with a v-shaped plunge in the front that shocked even some Parisians. So they said. Back in the 1700s, they were gnashing their teeth over increasingly low decolletage, sometimes even allowing, among the most fashionable, a nipple to peer out. And around 1800, women were barely dressed at all and what tissue did float around them was often wetted down to stick (did that in New Orleans). "Times was scandalous then", as Mammy said to Scarlett when Scarlett wanted to show her "bosoms" before sundown..
  92. Hahaha. The idea that “everyone” pre-WWI dressed their babies in white dresses is laughable. White dirties fast, and babies are even dirtier than normal children, what with the constant pooping, spitups, crawling around on the ground, and occasional vomits. “Undyed” garments, perhaps, but I guarantee they weren’t white!

  93. Trump issues position paper on Veterans Adminstration reforms.

    https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/veterans-administration-reforms

    VETERANS ADMINISTRATION REFORMS THAT WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

    The Goals Of Donald J. Trump’s Veterans Plan

    The current state of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is absolutely unacceptable. Over 300,000 veterans died waiting for care. Corruption and incompetence were excused. Politicians in Washington have done too little too slowly to fix it. This situation can never happen again, and when Donald J. Trump is president, it will be fixed – fast.

    The guiding principle of the Trump plan is ensuring veterans have convenient access to the best quality care. To further this principle, the Trump plan will decrease wait times, improve healthcare outcomes, and facilitate a seamless transition from service into civilian life.

    The Trump Plan Will:

    Ensure our veterans get the care they need wherever and whenever they need it. No more long drives. No more waiting for backlogs. No more excessive red tape. Just the care and support they earned with their service to our country.
    Support the whole veteran, not just their physical health care, but also by addressing their invisible wounds, investing in our service members’ post-active duty success, transforming the VA to meet the needs of 21st century service members, and better meeting the needs of our female veterans.
    Make the VA great again by firing the corrupt and incompetent VA executives who let our veterans down, by modernizing the VA, and by empowering the doctors and nurses to ensure our veterans receive the best care available in a timely manner.
    The Trump Plan Gives Veterans The Freedom To Choose And Forces The VA To Compete For Their Dollars

    Politicians in Washington have tried to fix the VA by holding hearings and blindly throwing money at the problem. None of it has worked. In fact, wait times were 50% higher this summer than they were a year ago. That’s because the VA lacks the right leadership and management. It’s time we stop trusting Washington politicians to fix the problems and empower our veterans to vote with their feet.

    Under a Trump Administration, all veterans eligible for VA health care can bring their veteran’s ID card to any doctor or care facility that accepts Medicare to get the care they need immediately. Our veterans have earned the freedom to choose better or more convenient care from the doctor and facility of their choice. The power to choose will stop the wait time backlogs and force the VA to improve and compete if the department wants to keep receiving veterans’ healthcare dollars. The VA will become more responsive to veterans, develop more efficient systems, and improve the quality of care because it will have no other choice.

    The Trump Plan Treats The Whole Veteran

    We must care for the whole veteran, not just their physical health. We must recognize that today’s veterans have very different needs than those of the Greatest Generation.

    The Trump Plan Will:

    Increase funding for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury and suicide prevention services to address our veterans’ invisible wounds. Service members are five times more likely to develop depression than civilians. They are almost fifteen times more likely to develop PTSD than civilians. This funding will help provide more and better counseling and care. More funding will also support research on best practices and state of the art treatments to keep our veterans alive, healthy and whole. With these steps, the Trump plan will help the veteran community put the unnecessary stigma surrounding mental health behind them and instead encourage acceptance and treatment in our greater society.
    Increase funding for job training and placement services (including incentives for companies hiring veterans), educational support and business loans. All Americans agree that we must do everything we can to help put our service men and women on a path to success as they leave active duty by collaborating with the many successful non-profit organizations that are already helping. Service members have learned valuable skills in the military but many need help understanding how to apply those skills in civilian life. Others know how to apply those skills but need help connecting with good jobs to support their families. Still others have an entrepreneurial spirit and are ready to start creating jobs and growing the economy. The Trump plan will strengthen existing programs or replace them with more effective ones to address these needs and to get our veterans working.
    Transform the VA to meet the needs of 21st century service members. Today’s veterans have very different needs than those of the generations that came before them. The VA must adapt to meet the needs of this generation of younger, more diverse veterans. The Trump plan will expand VA services for female veterans and ensure the VA is providing the right support for this new generation of veterans.
    Better support our women veterans. The fact that many VA hospitals don’t permanently staff OBGYN doctors shows an utter lack of respect for the growing number female veterans. Under the Trump plan, every VA hospital in the country will be fully equipped with OBGYN and other women’s health services. In addition, women veterans can always choose a different OBGYN in their community using their veteran’s ID card.

    The Trump Plan Will Make The VA Great Again

    The VA health care program is a disaster. Some candidates want to get rid of it, but our veterans need the VA to be there for them and their families. That’s why the Trump plan will:

    Fire the corrupt and incompetent VA executives that let our veterans down. Under a Trump Administration, there will be no job security for VA executives that enabled or overlooked corruption and incompetence. They’re fired. New leadership will focus the VA staff on delivering timely, top quality care and other services to our nation’s veterans. Under a Trump Administration, exposing and addressing the VA’s inefficiencies and shortcomings will be rewarded, not punished.
    End waste, fraud and abuse at the VA. The Trump plan will ensure the VA is spending its dollars wisely to provide the greatest impact for veterans and hold administrators accountable for irresponsible spending and abuse. The days of $6.3 million for statues and fountains at VA facilities and $300,000 for a manager to move 140 miles are over. The Trump plan will clean up the VA’s finances so the current VA budget provides more and better care than it does now.
    Modernize the VA. A VA with 20th century technology cannot serve 21st century service members and their needs. The VA has been promising to modernize for years without real results. The Trump plan will make it happen by accelerating and expanding investments in state of the art technology to deliver best-in-class care quickly and effectively. All veterans should be able to conveniently schedule appointments, communicate with their doctors, and view accurate wait times with the push of a button.
    Empower the caregivers to ensure our veterans receive quality care quickly. Caregivers should be able to easily streamline treatment plans across departments and utilize telehealth tools to better serve their patients. As we have seen from the private sector, the potential for new, innovative technology is endless. Abandoning the wasteful and archaic mindset of the public sector will give way to tremendously effective veteran healthcare.
    Hire more veterans to care for veterans. The more veterans we have working at the VA, the better the VA will be. They understand the unique challenges facing their community. To increase the number of veterans hired by the VA, this plan will add an additional 5 points to the qualifying scores of veterans applying for VA jobs.
    Embed satellite VA clinics in rural and other underserved areas. The Trump Administration will embed satellite VA clinics within hospitals and other care facilities in rural and other underserved areas. This step will ensure veterans have easy access to care and local hospitals and care facilities can handle the influx of patients without backlogs while tapping the specialized knowledge of VA health specialists.

  94. @Clement Pulaski
    So how is it that gendered toys and clothes are arbitrary and artificial, but then if a little boy likes to wear pink dresses, suddenly he needs to be labeled as a girl and given hormone blocking drugs before he hits puberty?

    Feminist ideology and trans ideology are actually at odds. Trans people basically think that gender is real, they’ve just got the wrong one. Feminists believe that gender is fake. That’s why a lot of feminists are vehemently opposed to trans people.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Feminist ideology and trans ideology are actually at odds. Trans people basically think that gender is real, they’ve just got the wrong one. Feminists believe that gender is fake. That’s why a lot of feminists are vehemently opposed to trans people.
     
    A lot like the Iran / Iraq War or Alabama vs. Auburn, you hate both sides and wish they would just remain locked in a deadly embrace forever.
  95. @Mark Minter
    I searched for 'claire caine miller children' - no autocomplete at all, literally a blank search page. Changing to 'husband', it did show an autocomplete, but the results were about how useless husbands were or how fewer women are keeping maiden names.

    Anyone that writes about parents foisting anything on children when it comes to toys or costumes never had a child or is an idiot. My daughter for most of her childhood had superpowers and could single handedly destroy an entire Toys R Us if she didn't get what she wanted. And she wanted pink, hot barbie pink, and Disney Princess costumes, despite Boulder and all its wacky parents, despite day care being something like The Los Feliz Day Care twitter account , despite a Jewish feminist mom. And my son was Bam Bam, who figured everything was a nail, because everything else was hammer used to pound on it, who received a jigsaw wooden puzzle map of the US, looked at it, took Florida, held it like a pistol, aimed it at the well meaning giver, and shot them, saying 'bang bang bang'.

    From Claire Cain Miller’s Facebook page:

    Reporter at The New York Times

    Studied at Yale University

    Lives in San Francisco, California

    From Portland, Oregon

    No mentions of her own family, but the above explains a lot.

    • Replies: @Lugash
    No mentions of her own family, but the above explains a lot.

    I was going to say something snarky about her not mentioning her family explains it as well, but her NYT bio does mention a family in San Francisco.

    OT: We just passed the 77th anniversary of the War of the Worlds Hysteria. We still talk about it to this day, but our modern day hoaxes get tossed down the memory hole.

  96. @Vince
    Hey man, girls dressing up sexy for Halloween is a fun and beautiful thing. Girls in America today are so bombarded with Feminist propaganda that they should be imitation men that a lot of the time the best way for them to back in touch with their femininity is to dress sexy.

    You might be on to something. Are women dressing and behaving more provocatively in subconscious defiance of feminist sexual paranoia? Feminism has adapted to having lost its battle against porn and heterosexuality without acknowledging it, by mostly adopting the cultural Marxist assault on sexual mores (every college now seems to have a “sex week”–as if the kids needed any prompting!), but remains obsessed with what has always been a legitimate female concern and fell under those same sexual norms they’re hacking away at–restricting male sexuality. Feminism is a ball of confusion.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    Has anyone ever read the Handmaid's Tale, or seen the movie? A very Houllebecqian political compromise is there, where the feminists get what they wanted good and hard.
  97. @Steve Sailer
    A lot of the social history of colors in fashion needs to pay attention to the fact that in the past color choices in clothes were much more constrained by the availability of certain dyes. The phrase "the royal purple" is an example of how expensive certain colors were until not that long ago. The Germans invented a whole bunch of industrial dyes in the later 19th and early 20th centuries, which eventually liberated people to choose whatever colors they liked.

    Wasn’t it determined that the Puritans’ coats weren’t plain brown, but a variety of bright, solid colors? How did they do that– Indian corn? War paint?

    A century and a half later, thise British coats were red.

    • Replies: @oh its just me
    the red coats Red coats wore probably looked pink after wear and washing.

    " How did they do that– Indian corn? War paint?"
    cornflower and other natural dyes.

    BTW germany pretty much still controls the dye market- the industry is heavily supported by the government (and protected)


    Natural pigments are a bit more interesting:

    a. up until the 19th century mummy paint was used - made from, you guessed it, mummies.
    b. indian yellow ( a transparent yellow) was made of the urine of cows fed mango leaves
    c. ivory black or burn ivory - was just that - burnt ivory.
    d. Burnt seinna and burnt umbria were taken from natural deposits in those regions- true sienna is all but exhausted.
    e. my favorite 'ultra marine' was not named so because it was blue - but because it was the very expensive pigment that came from ' over seas' (ultra marine) - ground up lapiz from afghanistan.
    , @Hereward
    One of the reasons the English settled on red for the color of their soldiers' coats was that madder red was pretty cheap. The color was not bright, though; it ranged from a dusty brick red to the color of a somewhat underripe tomato. By the time of the War of Independence, though, the officers' coats were scarlet - dyed with the more expensive cochineal.
    The false myth about the Puritans was that they wore black. Hackett Fischer points out they favored "sad colors," which included liver color, tawney, russett, French green, "deer colour," and "philly mort," from the French feuille morte - "dead leaf."
  98. @Reg Cæsar
    Wasn't it determined that the Puritans' coats weren't plain brown, but a variety of bright, solid colors? How did they do that-- Indian corn? War paint?

    A century and a half later, thise British coats were red.

    the red coats Red coats wore probably looked pink after wear and washing.

    ” How did they do that– Indian corn? War paint?”
    cornflower and other natural dyes.

    BTW germany pretty much still controls the dye market- the industry is heavily supported by the government (and protected)

    Natural pigments are a bit more interesting:

    a. up until the 19th century mummy paint was used – made from, you guessed it, mummies.
    b. indian yellow ( a transparent yellow) was made of the urine of cows fed mango leaves
    c. ivory black or burn ivory – was just that – burnt ivory.
    d. Burnt seinna and burnt umbria were taken from natural deposits in those regions- true sienna is all but exhausted.
    e. my favorite ‘ultra marine’ was not named so because it was blue – but because it was the very expensive pigment that came from ‘ over seas’ (ultra marine) – ground up lapiz from afghanistan.

  99. @CJ
    From Claire Cain Miller's Facebook page:

    Reporter at The New York Times

    Studied at Yale University

    Lives in San Francisco, California

    From Portland, Oregon



    No mentions of her own family, but the above explains a lot.

    No mentions of her own family, but the above explains a lot.

    I was going to say something snarky about her not mentioning her family explains it as well, but her NYT bio does mention a family in San Francisco.

    OT: We just passed the 77th anniversary of the War of the Worlds Hysteria. We still talk about it to this day, but our modern day hoaxes get tossed down the memory hole.

    • Replies: @Jean Cocteausten
    "A family in San Francisco" could be anything from a husband, son and daughter to a houseboy named Rainbow, a genderqueer Chihuahua, and a spider monkey with three testicles.
  100. @Marina
    Toys have become more gender differentiated because people have more money to buy toys. When I was a kid, I interpreted at a living history museum as a middle class 9 year old girl ca. 1830. We played with historically correct toys, of which there were very few. The options on offer were basically: a hoop and stick, a ball, checkers and a couple other board games, tin soldiers, dolls, and a game called graces, where you throw a small hoop back and forth using sticks. That was about it. Except for the last three, they were all gender neutral because when people had few material objects, most had to work for all the kids. Ditto clothing for young children. Today even poor people have a roomful of plastic toys, and baby clothes are so abundant I got bags of free hand me downs when my daughter was born. At this point, there's no reason not to have pink and blue sleepers and different toys for each kid.

    I suspect this is also why all the lady engineers I know are from Eastern Europe or Asia. When you're poorer, you can't afford to take a bright person and let them gender differentiate into marketing or engineering based on taste. You go for engineering because it pays better. As people get wealthier, then, you can expect more sex differences, not fewer.

    I think you are right. except I think it might be interesting how girls play jump rope together and boys only compete together. Though jumprope, if you’ve seen them do it in se DC, really is a competition. But no one would look and call it that. Still, the sharpest tack on the wire is a black process detective who sits around whittling artisan miniature doll furniture to sell online because no one listens to him till they do and there is buckoo in small detailed objects smart parents pick up on. I suppose smart toys can’t make kids smarter, but they can probably make them better behaved, or aesthetically sensitive, or simply knowledgeable. I think what they are at best is a spot light for gifted children who need things preoccupying to keep them on task, industrious, serious. And it’s funny how those kids turn out—as if every pose on FB, every clipped text, every choice or two of the week simply fits with what he did when he was really young.

  101. @AnonAnon
    "Adults" act more childish than ever these days, and seizing on any excuse to wear a costume outside of Halloween is a trend I've noticed. Witness CosPlay clubs, Anime, and Comic-con style conventions, where people (granted these are usually people in their 20s, but still) make elaborate and expensive costumes of their favorite characters. I live near Disneyland and like to run their half marathons four times a year and most of the participates in the races dress in a costume when they do it. Often the first question after registration opens asked in the Facebook groups dedicated to discussing the races is not What training plan do I use?, but rather, What costume should I wear? Disney and the rise of comic book/sci fi/ gamer nerd culture into the mainstream has played a not-insignificant role in the increase of costume wearing among adults.

    Disney and the rise of comic book/sci fi/ gamer nerd culture into the mainstream has played a not-insignificant role in the increase of costume wearing among adults.

    This shows how we are no longer a serious people.

  102. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Erik Sieven
    As far as I remember in my youth in Germany Halloween was no festival at all. Some people knew that at that time Americans had their parties, but most people didn´t care. In the last decade the importance of Halloween has risen fast. But in Germany the children party style stage has been skipped, right from the beginning it has been a party for young grown ups. Thus 16 year old boys throw eggs at windows and 25 year old women dress up as vampire gogo dancers. Also people binge-drink, puke in the subway etc

    As far as I remember in my youth in Germany Halloween was no festival at all. Some people knew that at that time Americans had their parties, but most people didn´t care. In the last decade the importance of Halloween has risen fast. But in Germany the children party style stage has been skipped, right from the beginning it has been a party for young grown ups. Thus 16 year old boys throw eggs at windows and 25 year old women dress up as vampire gogo dancers. Also people binge-drink, puke in the subway etc

    A fitting tribute to American cultural influence.

  103. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @EvolutionistX
    Feminist ideology and trans ideology are actually at odds. Trans people basically think that gender is real, they've just got the wrong one. Feminists believe that gender is fake. That's why a lot of feminists are vehemently opposed to trans people.

    Feminist ideology and trans ideology are actually at odds. Trans people basically think that gender is real, they’ve just got the wrong one. Feminists believe that gender is fake. That’s why a lot of feminists are vehemently opposed to trans people.

    A lot like the Iran / Iraq War or Alabama vs. Auburn, you hate both sides and wish they would just remain locked in a deadly embrace forever.

  104. i was also thinking that toys might be more “gender differentiated” because manufacturing technology has made it easier to make shiny, colorful toys. I’m pretty sure that most toys in the 50s were little, plain wooden things, but i could be wrong. I’m going off movies here lol.

  105. @CJ
    IDK how old you are but I'm over 60 and I can assure you that before approximately 1990 much of the everyday clothing worn by young (and not so young) women today would have been worn only by strippers and hookers. If you can find video of crowds in the 1980s or before it jumps out at you. (This also largely applies to piercings, tattoos and obesity.) That's about the same time as Hallowe'en began its expansion into the major event it now is.

    I don’t know about that. The short skirts and tight pants of the 60s and 70s caused a great deal of consternation. They were even called “hot pants.” An article from the early 60s described tight slacks seen on the French (who else) with a v-shaped plunge in the front that shocked even some Parisians. So they said. Back in the 1700s, they were gnashing their teeth over increasingly low decolletage, sometimes even allowing, among the most fashionable, a nipple to peer out. And around 1800, women were barely dressed at all and what tissue did float around them was often wetted down to stick (did that in New Orleans). “Times was scandalous then”, as Mammy said to Scarlett when Scarlett wanted to show her “bosoms” before sundown..

  106. The question isn’t whether, or not, Global Warming is occurring.

    If GW is occurring the question is: Do governments have the probity or the competence to combat Global Warming?

    Those who believe that governments have the requisite probity or competence to combat Global Warming are sorely lacking in acquaintance with human nature and with the histories of governments, the latter includes the nature of those who govern and the nature of those most capable of influencing those who govern.

    Even if governments have some – none of them has nearly so much as all – of the probity and competence to combat Global Warming, the likelihood is overwhelming that governments and the 0.1% super-rich who benefit most from governments’ corruption will use at least half of anti-Global Warming programs as rackets to benefit those who govern by allowing them to arrogate further power to themselves and to cater with increased impunity to the 0.1% major donor class.

    Those desiring a governmental War on Global Warming ought to acquaint themselves with governments’ records at waging actual war and at waging War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Crime, War on Racism, War on Sexism, War on Bullying, reducing or stopping illegal immigration or harmful legal immigration, &c. Upon how many convenient and self-serving ideologies and lies has the conduct of those wars and unenforced immigration law been predicated?

    Beyond all of that, if Global Warming is actually occurring and the anthropogenic proportion of its causes turns out to be minimal or turns out to be chiefly irreducible, then is it moral or wise for us to approve of governments spending vast sums and imposing onerous restrictions upon people to reduce or eliminate so small an anthropogenic proportion?

  107. Take a look at this page showing a number of women in Halloween costumes in mostly the 1920’s to 1950’s.

    https://vintageeveryday.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/sexy-retro-halloween-witches/

    The only modestly dressed witch is dated 1875.

    I think women have been dressing sexy since the end of the Victorian era, women voting and Prohibition, at every opportunity. Google for lots of additional pictures.

    • Agree: snorlax
    • Replies: @oh its just me
    Those are all tasteful and not overtly sexual - the same could have been said up until, say,the mid 90s.. and also, just as important - the women had some modesty and feminity which women DON'T have now.... have you ever seen a young woman walking down the street trying to dress 'sexy' but also following feminist dogma- literally transvestites walk more gracefully (though tv's don't walk gracefully- at least they try. ) when the femininity and modesty is taken away it just looks forced, literally, and probably not a coincidence, like a woman forced into prostitution.
    , @Jack D
    Most of the earlier ones are "pin-ups". Pin up models have existed for a long time but they were one step above prostitutes. There are even more risque photos around from that time - "French postcards", etc. Respectable middle class college girls would never have been caught dead in public in those outfits any more than they would have taken nude self portraits, even to share with their beaus. Now they do both. The Overton window has shifted so that what used to be the province of prostitutes is now that of ordinary middle class women.
  108. The press was never very candid about Studio 54, which was Disco Fever’s chronically inflamed viral center. We were told that Studio 54 was the hot ticket at night for every sort of celebrity in New York, from Vitas Gerulaitis and Dolly Parton to Laurance Rockefeller, and a Land of Cockaigne for the high and groovy. But you only had to spend an evening there yourself to see that it was much stranger than that: of the thousand-or-so souls on the dance floor at any one time, 750 were men, young and old, wearing strap undershirts, string vests, leather wristlets, and other Under the Expressway gear and bobbing up and down to seamless music and exploding lights in a dance called the pogo and pouring libido as lubricious as peanut oil over one another. . . . [T]he male-homosexual netherworld created disco. The discotheque is the 1970s’ quotidian and commercial ritualization of what used to be known as a homosexual rout, a fact that generally has not been laid on Mom & Dad & Buddy & Sis as they drive the Bonneville over to the mall to take disco lessons so they’ll be ready for the Vesper Disco nights at the church in Lubbock, De Kalb, Grand Forks, Riverhead, or wherever.

    –Tom Wolfe, In Our Time (1980), ch. II, Entr’actes and Canapes: “Disco.”

    Lots of bad stuff has started among the bardash community and spread virally to normal people. And now in the reign of Imperator Anthony Kennedy, it’s only going to get worse.

  109. @bossel

    females like to dress up like hookers and they need to restrain themselves
     
    Restraining themselves from dressing like hookers? Why should they? It's everyone's personal decision what to wear. No idiotic feminists or ultra-conservatives have any right to interfere. If any people need to restrain themselves then it's those primitive minds who think that any woman who doesn't wear "appropriate" clothes is fair game.

    Is this parody? I seriously can’t tell.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    His comment history seems to strongly suggest non-parody. One can never be certain on the internet though.
  110. @Sparkling Wiggle
    Spot on. We all need to restrain ourselves from telling loose women to restrain themselves. Is this [current year], or the 50s? So primitive.

    Okay, this is definitely parody (right?).

    • Agree: Sparkling Wiggle
  111. @Foseti
    This halloween trend takes place largely among the affluent, college-educated class.

    It's always worth remembering that this class is close to two-thirds women. When the sex-ratio skews that much toward women, sluttiness happens.

    Thanks feminists!!

    Dude, you’re alive!

  112. @advancedatheist
    I've thought of Halloween as a socially acceptable way to mock religious beliefs.

    So you’re an asshole?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar


    So you’re an asshole?

     

    Donut is the resident asshole. All others are poseurs.
  113. @Rob McX
    Natural selection favours those who rank survival above telling the truth. Nowadays the dominant ideologies are based on lies, but so far they're way more successful than those based on HBD realism and scientific fact.

    it also ranks survival above believing and acting on lies.

  114. @Anon7
    Take a look at this page showing a number of women in Halloween costumes in mostly the 1920's to 1950's.

    https://vintageeveryday.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/sexy-retro-halloween-witches/

    The only modestly dressed witch is dated 1875.

    I think women have been dressing sexy since the end of the Victorian era, women voting and Prohibition, at every opportunity. Google for lots of additional pictures.

    Those are all tasteful and not overtly sexual – the same could have been said up until, say,the mid 90s.. and also, just as important – the women had some modesty and feminity which women DON’T have now…. have you ever seen a young woman walking down the street trying to dress ‘sexy’ but also following feminist dogma- literally transvestites walk more gracefully (though tv’s don’t walk gracefully- at least they try. ) when the femininity and modesty is taken away it just looks forced, literally, and probably not a coincidence, like a woman forced into prostitution.

  115. @Dennis Dale
    After a half century of effort, feminism's most visible achievement is having freed girls from dressing as princesses on Halloween to dressing as prostitutes. Now if they can just get the boys to straighten up (so to speak) and start dressing as rent boys, we'll all finally be liberated from the patriarchy.

    I liked your comment, but remember that there will never be a “final liberation” for women. Women will never stop pushing for everything that there is. As Genius Coates says, no amount of reparations will ever be enough. The stain of maleness can never be wholly removed and the legacy of male domination can never be overcome regardless of the degree to which society is feminized and men are emasculated. It won’t be over until we are conquered by a more masculine culture that knows that failure to keep women under control will doom any civilization.

    • Replies: @TheJester
    Agree! Feminism has always suffered a fatal lack of vision ... the lack of vision to anticipate the consequences writ large of pretending to be men and making sure that raising babies does not interfere with that project. Why suffer being controlled by males and encumbered by children? BE FREE, they say! But, at the end of the day, feminism is an anti-social, self-destructive movement. If spread too broadly across a society, very quickly it becomes a case of ... to will feminism is to will the end of your society. Ultimately, it is to will the end of feminism.

    The process has already started: Lack of population = immigration. Due to low birth rates, the Europeans and being inundated with Muslim immigrants and the United States is being inundated with Hispanic immigrants. As these tidal waves continue, the feminists will very soon discover the social mores of Muslim and Hispanic culture as women are forced to wear the hijab and/or suffer living under the thumb of "mancho" males. As the new reality starts to bite, it's possible that feminists might one day start praying for the return of (Northern European) "White Male Privilege" so that what they suffer are only "micro-aggressions".
  116. @Pat Casey
    Spot on Steve. Have you been reading Macintyre's After Virtue? Regarding a gay homosexual influence, a micro-trend on Halloween appears to be hyper-masculine dudes in drag---what I call a pink-shirt type o' thing.

    But I wonder, does Nerf still put out ever cooler Nerf guns? That was what we wanted most whenever we did, more high-tech and harmless crossbows and guns. I wonder if playing with nerf guns makes playing with real guns actually less imaginable, in some paradoxical way, so that black boys who never got to play with expensive nerf guns harbor a relative moral deficit.

    Stan Evans called liberalism a revolution within the form. That's a great descriptor, except when it comes to feminism they really did bend shit out of shape, made the form all lopsided, like a certain kind of cancer maybe...

    Nerf guns are amazing now. Belt fed, battery powered full autos are common.

  117. My first (and still favorite) memory of the rise of “Adult Halloween” was a life-sized cardboard cutout of Cassandra Peterson (aka Elvira) in front of a stack of Budweisers in our local grocery store –

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_Peterson

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    A stack of Coors.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKBE8iZ8hoI
  118. @Reg Cæsar
    Wasn't it determined that the Puritans' coats weren't plain brown, but a variety of bright, solid colors? How did they do that-- Indian corn? War paint?

    A century and a half later, thise British coats were red.

    One of the reasons the English settled on red for the color of their soldiers’ coats was that madder red was pretty cheap. The color was not bright, though; it ranged from a dusty brick red to the color of a somewhat underripe tomato. By the time of the War of Independence, though, the officers’ coats were scarlet – dyed with the more expensive cochineal.
    The false myth about the Puritans was that they wore black. Hackett Fischer points out they favored “sad colors,” which included liver color, tawney, russett, French green, “deer colour,” and “philly mort,” from the French feuille morte – “dead leaf.”

    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    Yes - people forget that most pigments depend on what is naturally available. In the 19th century, chemists (mostly in Germany) created a whole new palette, for industrial purposes. Artists in France adapted them for their uses. Hence the brilliant colors of the Impressionists.

    Science: Germany.
    Art: France.

    Great combo!
  119. @bossel

    females like to dress up like hookers and they need to restrain themselves
     
    Restraining themselves from dressing like hookers? Why should they? It's everyone's personal decision what to wear. No idiotic feminists or ultra-conservatives have any right to interfere. If any people need to restrain themselves then it's those primitive minds who think that any woman who doesn't wear "appropriate" clothes is fair game.

    What’s your point? This post is about the incremental effects of gays’ weaponized immaturity (getting them wedded on the steps of the Supreme Court was supposed to “solve” this if you were dumb enough to believe MSGOP media back in the 90s). Women as always don’t have much in the way of minds of their own and so tend to follow the lead of charismatic men, who in this case were a bunch of flaming homos

  120. @Sparkling Wiggle
    Spot on. We all need to restrain ourselves from telling loose women to restrain themselves. Is this [current year], or the 50s? So primitive.

    Ha, that’s my next Zazzle bumper sticker right there: “HOW CAN WE AS A SOCIETY STILL TOLERATE THIS, IN THE YEAR [current year]”

  121. @Josh
    Is this parody? I seriously can't tell.

    His comment history seems to strongly suggest non-parody. One can never be certain on the internet though.

  122. @JerryC
    I am not sure why climate change denialism is supposedly a conservative or right-wing thing.

    It's because the alleged solutions to global warming all fail miserably on technical/engineering grounds, and people with technical/engineering knowledge tend to skew right politically.

    I am from an engineering background and skew way to the right politically. Want to see an exponential graph?

    http://cleantechnica.com/2015/01/27/two-graphs-highlighting-surge-us-solar-market-growth/

    Check out the costs:

    Failing miserably, just like Moore’s Law.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    And all curves that exhibit exponential growth continue on exponentially forever, don't they?
  123. Every year being the warmest on record would be evidence of a warming trend if it were actually occurring–of course the reality is data has been manipulated and adjusted by deceitful professionals and defended by SCIENCE! types in the media to give that impression. The trend has been toward cooler temps since 1998.

    This. NOAA & company have been FALSIFYING THE DATA. Last two summers here have been very mild, winters much colder than normal.

  124. Whatever happened to costume parties, the generic, non-Halloween type?

    That’s about the same time as Hallowe’en began its expansion into the major event it now is.– CJ

    As a kid, I won a Halloween contest in Hawaii. But now, it’d be a Hallowe’en contest in Hawai’i. Wh’y is tha’t?

    I went as an old man. Now I am one.

    • Replies: @Steve Austen
    Hawa'i'i would be the correct spelling seeing as you cannot have vowels next to each other in Hawaiian which means the okina or glottalstop is used as a separator.
  125. @Josh
    So you're an asshole?

    So you’re an asshole?

    Donut is the resident asshole. All others are poseurs.

  126. @Niccolo Salo
    Halloween is also known as 'Gay New Year'.

    Up in Toronto, this night is the second busiest night of the year for taxi drivers. You see legions of 30/40ish women dressed up in slutty costumes, pretending to be bisexual, craving and demanding male attention, while their boyfriends/husbands play along, often emasculated in some ridiculous get up.

    Halloween was supposed to be a night of trick or treating for the kids.

    “Halloween is also known as ‘Gay New Year’”

    Funny, I’ve taken to calling it “Mardi Gras for Kids,” which is what it really should be. (i.e., a night of dressing up and excess, albeit with KitKats instead of alcohol and boobs).

  127. OT:

    Any thoughts on how Rice and Yale ended up at the very bottom of the Economist‘s college rankings?

    On this list, Cal State Bakersfield is up there with Harvard.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/10/value-university

  128. @Anonym
    I am from an engineering background and skew way to the right politically. Want to see an exponential graph?

    http://cleantechnica.com/2015/01/27/two-graphs-highlighting-surge-us-solar-market-growth/

    Check out the costs:

    http://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/us-installed-cost-of-solar-power-ilsr.jpg

    Failing miserably, just like Moore's Law.

    And all curves that exhibit exponential growth continue on exponentially forever, don’t they?

    • Replies: @Anonym
    Obviously there is a limit to the exponential growth. From what I know with my research on the subject, we are far from hitting the limits in cost, efficiency, practicality/overall system integration (e.g. batteries etc.). By the time the sunnier areas of the world where solar is more of a no-brainer start hitting saturation, the technology will be better and cheaper to suit the less sunny areas and so on.

    The sort of exponential growth we have seen that results in doubling of factory capacities, more R&D to lower costs and increase efficiency etc. and draws more of the best and brightest to solving the problems of that industry, will keep both of those curves going for as long as is feasible. Certainly, the average installation is far away from 100% efficiency or even the ~50% best efficiency achieved in the lab.

    http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/sites/default/files/upload/Best-research-cell-efficiencies_PVeff_NREL_630m.jpg

    You could be right, it could plateau tomorrow, but I wouldn't bet on it. Consider that when Intel/AMD started plateauing in performance, pretty much everyone already had a computer, and had a fast one. At the moment we are at the point where a Bill Gates-like vision of "A solar panel on every house." would be a big change in the status quo.

    e.g. “A computer on every desk and in every home.”
    – Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman and chief executive officer, 1980

    And there was a big difference between the utility of the 1980s computer and the computer of today in terms of being able to drive seemingly endless upgrade cycles of every 2-4 years or so. So I see Solar PV as in its infancy really. Imagine something like a 50% efficient solar panel system that came with a battery that would power the house for 2-4 weeks (dealing with extended bad weather) and paid itself off in 3 years. Potentially that is the end point, which we are far from.

    At the end point, a lot of the fossil fuel depletion problem will be solved. Especially when we consider that electric car usage will be much more mainstream.

  129. @Rob McX
    Natural selection favours those who rank survival above telling the truth. Nowadays the dominant ideologies are based on lies, but so far they're way more successful than those based on HBD realism and scientific fact.

    Telling the truth (all the time) vs telling no lies is a different thing. A lot of people do the latter, as most people enjoy dealing with the latter sort of person vs a liar.

  130. @tbraton
    " Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?"

    Oh, please. I am one who accepts Darwin's scientific theory of evolution based on natural selection. I am not aware of any other scientific theory out there to explain the undeniable fact of evolution. "Intelligent design" is not a scientific theory, and the Book of Genesis is not a scientific treatise. Most people these days reject the literal interpretation of the Bible and conclusion that the Earth is only about 6000 years old, with certain exceptions, such as the Seventh Day Adventists, such as Dr. Ben Carson. (I wonder when anyone in the MSM is going to ask the good doctor about his religious beliefs and whether he embraces all the beliefs of his church.)

    On the other hand, you speak of "global warming" when the issue is really "man-made global warming." Or "man-made climate change," to use the terminology du jour. The scientific record clearly reveals that in the 4-1/2 billion year history of planet Earth we have experienced many periods where the global temperature has been much warmer than today and we have experienced many periods of "climate change," going from warm to cold ("Ice Age" anyone?). You apparently are unaware that we have been maintaining recorded temperatures only since the latter part of the 19th century, a period of roughly 150 years, a blink of an eye in comparison to the 4-1/2 billion year age of Earth. How would you explain the presence and subsequent disappearance of the thick slab of ice (estimated to be 1-2 miles thick) that covered a large part of the upper mid-west of the present day U.S. and most of Canada more than 10,000 years ago, which was the end of the last major Ice Age? What caused that massive ice sheet to melt? Was it man-made global warming? According to Wikipedia, "The world population in 35,000 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 million people, all of whom subsisted as hunter-gatherers.[27] The population had increased to around 15 million at the time agriculture emerged in around 10,000 BCE.[28] By contrast, it is estimated that around 50–60 million people lived in the combined eastern and western Roman Empire in the 4th century CE.[29]" So humans were so few in number and their lifestyle was so primitive that there must have been some other force at work causing these alternating periods of climate change before Al Gore came along.

    Are you even aware of the tests conducted at the CERN super collider a few years ago which confirmed that cosmic rays play the dominant role in controlling the climate on Earth and that the Sun is the major regulator of the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth? Who would have imagined that the Sun was the deadly culprit playing games with our climate? This is an excerpt from a message I posted on TAC three years ago, quoting from an article on the tests conducted at CERN:

    “The science is now all-but-settled on global warming, convincing new evidence demonstrates, but Al Gore, the IPCC and other global warming doomsayers won’t be celebrating. The new findings point to cosmic rays and the sun — not human activities — as the dominant controller of climate on Earth.

    The research, published with little fanfare this week in the prestigious journal Nature, comes from über-prestigious CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, one of the world’s largest centres for scientific research involving 60 countries and 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities and national laboratories. CERN is the organization that invented the World Wide Web, that built the multi-billion dollar Large Hadron Collider, and that has now built a pristinely clean stainless steel chamber that precisely recreated the Earth’s atmosphere.

    In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes have done what global warming doomsayers said could never be done — demonstrate that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules that in Earth’s atmosphere can grow and seed clouds, the cloudier and thus cooler it will be. Because the sun’s magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth’s atmosphere (the stronger the sun’s magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth.”

    “Are you even aware of the tests conducted at the CERN super collider a few years ago which confirmed that cosmic rays play the dominant role in controlling the climate on Earth and that the Sun is the major regulator of the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth? Who would have imagined that the Sun was the deadly culprit playing games with our climate? This is an excerpt from a message I posted on TAC three years ago, quoting from an article on the tests conducted at CERN:”

    I am very interested in this theory ever since having heard about it, however I don’t think that this effect has been conclusively demonstrated as explaining the temperature increase over the last century and a half. The mechanism is plausible, the initial measurements are intriguing, but is it definitive? I don’t believe that it is yet.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    A century and a half ago, the Little Ice Age was finally petering out, and that is what those rising temperatures represented. The Little Ice Age-- which would have been quite bad enough, if those lower temperatures alone were the problem-- caused the Great Famine, and the subsequent Black Death. The bubonic plague returned to Europe in spurts, time and again, during the duration of the Little Ice Age. Why would anyone look at the history of human civilization, since the receding of the latest Ice Age, and pick out the Little Ice Age as the Golden Mean that we should be looking towards recapturing, even if one were to assume, arguendo, that humans have an appreciable effect on the Earth's climate?
  131. @Niccolo Salo
    Halloween is also known as 'Gay New Year'.

    Up in Toronto, this night is the second busiest night of the year for taxi drivers. You see legions of 30/40ish women dressed up in slutty costumes, pretending to be bisexual, craving and demanding male attention, while their boyfriends/husbands play along, often emasculated in some ridiculous get up.

    Halloween was supposed to be a night of trick or treating for the kids.

    Back in my days as a yuppie in SF in the 1980’s, we used to go to Halloween in the Castro. As if these guys were not liberated enough already, they could all just let their inner selves loose for an evening.

  132. @Chrisnonymous
    Yes, I agree. I think the rise of toy labeling has more to do with parents being disconnected from their children and from common sense. It goes like this...

    healthy/normal parent: My son Tommy likes airplanes, so I'll get him a toy airplane.

    unhealthy circa 1970: I don't know what Tommy likes, but I know boys like vehicles, so I can't go wrong with an airplane.

    unhealthy circa 2010; I don't know what Tommy likes, and I don't know what boys like, but I can't go wrong buying from the section labeled "boys' toys."



    Steve,

    Possible plagiarism?

    Incidentally, we taught at least this study by Elizabeth Sweet in my English school in Japan about 4 months ago. When I started reading that NYT article, I thought it was the same one, then I saw the byline on October 30, 2015. I think the article is not the same, but it definitely covers the same material, and that third paragraph above, in particular, sounds very familiar. Possibly both the former and the current author basically lifted it from a study abstract or something. Anyway, I'm not going to Google this one to find out, but possible plagiarism going on here in the NYT...

    Incidentally, we taught at least this study by Elizabeth Sweet in my English school in Japan about 4 months ago. When I started reading that NYT article, I thought it was the same one, then I saw the byline on October 30, 2015. I think the article is not the same, but it definitely covers the same material, and that third paragraph above, in particular, sounds very familiar. Possibly both the former and the current author basically lifted it from a study abstract or something. Anyway, I’m not going to Google this one to find out, but possible plagiarism going on here in the NYT…

    This is at least the second time Steve has addressed the material from the third paragraph.

  133. @Clement Pulaski
    So how is it that gendered toys and clothes are arbitrary and artificial, but then if a little boy likes to wear pink dresses, suddenly he needs to be labeled as a girl and given hormone blocking drugs before he hits puberty?

    So how is it that gendered toys and clothes are arbitrary and artificial, but then if a little boy likes to wear pink dresses, suddenly he needs to be labeled as a girl and given hormone blocking drugs before he hits puberty?

    Good point.

  134. Hooray for tolerance!

  135. @Mr. Anon
    And all curves that exhibit exponential growth continue on exponentially forever, don't they?

    Obviously there is a limit to the exponential growth. From what I know with my research on the subject, we are far from hitting the limits in cost, efficiency, practicality/overall system integration (e.g. batteries etc.). By the time the sunnier areas of the world where solar is more of a no-brainer start hitting saturation, the technology will be better and cheaper to suit the less sunny areas and so on.

    The sort of exponential growth we have seen that results in doubling of factory capacities, more R&D to lower costs and increase efficiency etc. and draws more of the best and brightest to solving the problems of that industry, will keep both of those curves going for as long as is feasible. Certainly, the average installation is far away from 100% efficiency or even the ~50% best efficiency achieved in the lab.

    You could be right, it could plateau tomorrow, but I wouldn’t bet on it. Consider that when Intel/AMD started plateauing in performance, pretty much everyone already had a computer, and had a fast one. At the moment we are at the point where a Bill Gates-like vision of “A solar panel on every house.” would be a big change in the status quo.

    e.g. “A computer on every desk and in every home.”
    – Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman and chief executive officer, 1980

    And there was a big difference between the utility of the 1980s computer and the computer of today in terms of being able to drive seemingly endless upgrade cycles of every 2-4 years or so. So I see Solar PV as in its infancy really. Imagine something like a 50% efficient solar panel system that came with a battery that would power the house for 2-4 weeks (dealing with extended bad weather) and paid itself off in 3 years. Potentially that is the end point, which we are far from.

    At the end point, a lot of the fossil fuel depletion problem will be solved. Especially when we consider that electric car usage will be much more mainstream.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "By the time the sunnier areas of the world where solar is more of a no-brainer start hitting saturation, the technology will be better and cheaper to suit the less sunny areas and so on."

    Nothing is a "no-brainer". One should always use one's brain. For example, bright sunny parts of the world where PVs should work well, also tend to be dusty. That dust needs to be cleaned off the PV arrays. Who will do that? People? Robots? Say what you will about natural gas or centrally distributed electricity, but they don't require weekly dustings.

    I agree with you that we have not yet begun to tap the potential of solar power. I would like to see a lot more of it. However, solar by itself will not supply all our power needs. We will need wind, hydro, nuclear, all of it. And liquid fuels will likely still be required for some ground transport and, most likely, air transport as well. Long term, we will need a way to synthesize those fuels.
  136. @Arclight
    I read about this kind of stuff in the media but have never experienced it personally. My kids go to a "progressive" education school where the political disposition of most of the faculty and parents is what you would expect, but at the Halloween parade the costume choices were as traditional as it gets for the boys and girls. I have also had a surprising number of conversations with parents about how boys will be boys and girls will be girls when it comes to their preferences and behavior and every single time the parents will comment on how it's just innate, even those that are same sex parents or as left as they come politically.

    Of course, that's not to say that people at a very high level are not trying to ram this stuff down our throats, but at the street level I don't see any see any support for it whatsoever.

    That’s because you speak with other parents. They know better. Progressives from younger generations don’t and many of the girls blame their minor weaknesses on things like ‘gendered toys.’

    Since they, like all girls, have the propensity to cry quite often it and they feel ashamed for it, except of course but bizarrely when they are using it to be manipulative, then it is the result of Disney Princess based nurture.

    Personally, I very always just thought that girls like a good cry and some men are so easily swayed by this that some girls are corrupted.

  137. @Reg Cæsar
    Whatever happened to costume parties, the generic, non-Halloween type?

    That’s about the same time as Hallowe’en began its expansion into the major event it now is.-- CJ
     
    As a kid, I won a Halloween contest in Hawaii. But now, it'd be a Hallowe'en contest in Hawai'i. Wh'y is tha't?

    I went as an old man. Now I am one.

    Hawa’i’i would be the correct spelling seeing as you cannot have vowels next to each other in Hawaiian which means the okina or glottalstop is used as a separator.

    • Replies: @Vendetta
    http://www.geographictravels.com/2009/09/hawaii-versus-hawaii.html?m=1

    Looking into why there is an apostrophe revealed something that does not surprises me: ethnic geopolitics. Both the English language and the missionary-inspired Latin alphabet for the Hawaiian language have the islands as "Hawaii." All documents dealing with the kingdom, republic, and territory have the spelling as "Hawaii." The same holds true for early documents of the state until the 1990s. However, in the 1980s 'Okina, apostrophes in words to stress sounds, was introduced into Hawaiian. Now, "Hawai'i" is preferred by ethnic Hawaiian nationalists who wish to stress the native aspects of the island. In a puritanical way they have adopted an invention to separate themselves not only from "outsiders" but also traditional Hawaiian culture. A cultural wave has supported the spelling of "Hawai'i" to emphasize the native, exotic quality of the state. The backers of "Hawai'i" have strong sway right now and are pushing hard for Hawaiians to be considered a native race like American Indians; giving them the power to establish race-based sovereign governments.
     
  138. @TheJester
    Nature or nurture? From a lifetime of experience ... it's nature. Little boys know they are boys; and little girls know they are girls. Data points:

    We just attended a Halloween Walk at our youngest grandson's pre-school. About 90% of the girls were princesses; about 70% of the boys were action figures. Our grandson is fascinated with action figures -- Iron Man, Superman, Batman, etc. He likewise has been fascinated with the "Bob the Builder" cartoon series since he was two.

    Last month we took the family (and grandchildren) on a Disney cruise. It was a "princess extravaganza" for the girls. Our oldest grandson was bored. He asked if we could take him on a Star Wars cruise.

    One of our daughters-in-law is a committed feminist. At first, she would only allow our granddaughter to have "boy toys", hoping she would grow up to become an engineer. She refused to let her wear pink or receive presents with pink ... her toys were ships and airplanes and her clothes were blue. The outcome? Our daughter-in-law gave up ... too many tantrums. Our granddaughter (now three) plays with "girl toys" and almost exclusively wears pink. Our daughter-in-law blames social pressure at the pre-school for her failed project.

    Is all of this new? No, we've noticed the same consistent gender-based dynamics from the early 1970s through today when watching toddlers play. Throw a bunch of toddlers into a room with cars, trucks and "girl toys" and watch what happens. The scene quickly sorts itself out. Guess which gender plays with the cars and trucks?

    Sure, it might be nature. And all those studies that personality is genetic might be right — including the one the New York Times reported on back in 1986 (Google it).

    But remember, “Born This Way” only counts if you’re gay. The rest of us need to be Educated and Enlightened by NPR types about all this.

  139. @Anonymous
    Haha. Scots-Irish plan backfires. New show depicting America if AXIS won WW2. Supposed to demonize White people "The High and The Mighty". But 90% of youtube comments say stuff like: "Great all White... Civilized... No dindu crime... Better German immigs than blacks /hispanics". Sides are splitting. Could be used as PRO-WHITE PROPAGANDA!

    You mean “The Man in the High Castle”? That struck me as another hit piece, especially when the Japanese occupiers (compared to the Nazi occupiers of the East) had at least the saving grace of Eastern philosophy and martial arts and being accepting of a woman. I will admit the Nazis in this show had good fashion sense and great interior decorating

    • Replies: @Chris L
    The tone of the show is very much in keeping with the book.
  140. @Erik Sieven
    As far as I remember in my youth in Germany Halloween was no festival at all. Some people knew that at that time Americans had their parties, but most people didn´t care. In the last decade the importance of Halloween has risen fast. But in Germany the children party style stage has been skipped, right from the beginning it has been a party for young grown ups. Thus 16 year old boys throw eggs at windows and 25 year old women dress up as vampire gogo dancers. Also people binge-drink, puke in the subway etc

    In Romania, too. Face painting kids and the like is much rarer than adults making (or buying) some sort of outfit to go clubbing with. So we skipped that stage. Thankfully, it’s pretty rare, and confined to club parties for adults.

  141. @Dennis Dale
    You might be on to something. Are women dressing and behaving more provocatively in subconscious defiance of feminist sexual paranoia? Feminism has adapted to having lost its battle against porn and heterosexuality without acknowledging it, by mostly adopting the cultural Marxist assault on sexual mores (every college now seems to have a "sex week"--as if the kids needed any prompting!), but remains obsessed with what has always been a legitimate female concern and fell under those same sexual norms they're hacking away at--restricting male sexuality. Feminism is a ball of confusion.

    Has anyone ever read the Handmaid’s Tale, or seen the movie? A very Houllebecqian political compromise is there, where the feminists get what they wanted good and hard.

    • Replies: @cthulhu
    IMHO terrible book, terrible movie (although Natasha Richardson was delectable in it). A better take on the religious dictatorship and subjugation of women plot is Heinlein's If This Goes On-, parts of which date back to the early '40s with the final version in the early '50s. The feminists who swoon over Atwood's drivel somehow never call out Heinlein's work as the clear antecedent.
  142. Won’t (can’t?) say much about the accuracy of this but it’s topical and, from a y chromosome perspective, “interesting”:

    100 Years of Halloween Costumes in 3 Minutes. Mildly NSFW.

  143. @Steve Sailer
    A lot of the social history of colors in fashion needs to pay attention to the fact that in the past color choices in clothes were much more constrained by the availability of certain dyes. The phrase "the royal purple" is an example of how expensive certain colors were until not that long ago. The Germans invented a whole bunch of industrial dyes in the later 19th and early 20th centuries, which eventually liberated people to choose whatever colors they liked.

    The reservation of purple for royalty in antiquity was a matter of policy and law, not of expense, just as in China with the imperial yellow.

  144. @Anon7
    I liked your comment, but remember that there will never be a "final liberation" for women. Women will never stop pushing for everything that there is. As Genius Coates says, no amount of reparations will ever be enough. The stain of maleness can never be wholly removed and the legacy of male domination can never be overcome regardless of the degree to which society is feminized and men are emasculated. It won't be over until we are conquered by a more masculine culture that knows that failure to keep women under control will doom any civilization.

    Agree! Feminism has always suffered a fatal lack of vision … the lack of vision to anticipate the consequences writ large of pretending to be men and making sure that raising babies does not interfere with that project. Why suffer being controlled by males and encumbered by children? BE FREE, they say! But, at the end of the day, feminism is an anti-social, self-destructive movement. If spread too broadly across a society, very quickly it becomes a case of … to will feminism is to will the end of your society. Ultimately, it is to will the end of feminism.

    The process has already started: Lack of population = immigration. Due to low birth rates, the Europeans and being inundated with Muslim immigrants and the United States is being inundated with Hispanic immigrants. As these tidal waves continue, the feminists will very soon discover the social mores of Muslim and Hispanic culture as women are forced to wear the hijab and/or suffer living under the thumb of “mancho” males. As the new reality starts to bite, it’s possible that feminists might one day start praying for the return of (Northern European) “White Male Privilege” so that what they suffer are only “micro-aggressions”.

  145. @Lugash
    No mentions of her own family, but the above explains a lot.

    I was going to say something snarky about her not mentioning her family explains it as well, but her NYT bio does mention a family in San Francisco.

    OT: We just passed the 77th anniversary of the War of the Worlds Hysteria. We still talk about it to this day, but our modern day hoaxes get tossed down the memory hole.

    “A family in San Francisco” could be anything from a husband, son and daughter to a houseboy named Rainbow, a genderqueer Chihuahua, and a spider monkey with three testicles.

  146. Camille Paglia likes to claim credit (along with her pal Madonna) for liberating women so that they could dress like sluts on the street and not feel shamed. Around about the time of the Madonna Sex Tour (& album) during the early nineteen nineties she claimed the singer promoted sexually explicit dress as empowering for a woman, talked about her bi-sexuality and thus countered the anti-sex feminists who had denounced it as slaves dressing up in chains for the amusement of their leering masters. Paglia is a lesbian and in the course of a recent Reason magazine interview described her nineteen fifties childhood when she displayed her future proclivity by eschewing girl clothes and dressing up as a pirate or as Zorro and the like.

  147. @Anonym
    Obviously there is a limit to the exponential growth. From what I know with my research on the subject, we are far from hitting the limits in cost, efficiency, practicality/overall system integration (e.g. batteries etc.). By the time the sunnier areas of the world where solar is more of a no-brainer start hitting saturation, the technology will be better and cheaper to suit the less sunny areas and so on.

    The sort of exponential growth we have seen that results in doubling of factory capacities, more R&D to lower costs and increase efficiency etc. and draws more of the best and brightest to solving the problems of that industry, will keep both of those curves going for as long as is feasible. Certainly, the average installation is far away from 100% efficiency or even the ~50% best efficiency achieved in the lab.

    http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/sites/default/files/upload/Best-research-cell-efficiencies_PVeff_NREL_630m.jpg

    You could be right, it could plateau tomorrow, but I wouldn't bet on it. Consider that when Intel/AMD started plateauing in performance, pretty much everyone already had a computer, and had a fast one. At the moment we are at the point where a Bill Gates-like vision of "A solar panel on every house." would be a big change in the status quo.

    e.g. “A computer on every desk and in every home.”
    – Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman and chief executive officer, 1980

    And there was a big difference between the utility of the 1980s computer and the computer of today in terms of being able to drive seemingly endless upgrade cycles of every 2-4 years or so. So I see Solar PV as in its infancy really. Imagine something like a 50% efficient solar panel system that came with a battery that would power the house for 2-4 weeks (dealing with extended bad weather) and paid itself off in 3 years. Potentially that is the end point, which we are far from.

    At the end point, a lot of the fossil fuel depletion problem will be solved. Especially when we consider that electric car usage will be much more mainstream.

    “By the time the sunnier areas of the world where solar is more of a no-brainer start hitting saturation, the technology will be better and cheaper to suit the less sunny areas and so on.”

    Nothing is a “no-brainer”. One should always use one’s brain. For example, bright sunny parts of the world where PVs should work well, also tend to be dusty. That dust needs to be cleaned off the PV arrays. Who will do that? People? Robots? Say what you will about natural gas or centrally distributed electricity, but they don’t require weekly dustings.

    I agree with you that we have not yet begun to tap the potential of solar power. I would like to see a lot more of it. However, solar by itself will not supply all our power needs. We will need wind, hydro, nuclear, all of it. And liquid fuels will likely still be required for some ground transport and, most likely, air transport as well. Long term, we will need a way to synthesize those fuels.

  148. @Mr. Anon
    "Are you even aware of the tests conducted at the CERN super collider a few years ago which confirmed that cosmic rays play the dominant role in controlling the climate on Earth and that the Sun is the major regulator of the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth? Who would have imagined that the Sun was the deadly culprit playing games with our climate? This is an excerpt from a message I posted on TAC three years ago, quoting from an article on the tests conducted at CERN:"

    I am very interested in this theory ever since having heard about it, however I don't think that this effect has been conclusively demonstrated as explaining the temperature increase over the last century and a half. The mechanism is plausible, the initial measurements are intriguing, but is it definitive? I don't believe that it is yet.

    A century and a half ago, the Little Ice Age was finally petering out, and that is what those rising temperatures represented. The Little Ice Age– which would have been quite bad enough, if those lower temperatures alone were the problem– caused the Great Famine, and the subsequent Black Death. The bubonic plague returned to Europe in spurts, time and again, during the duration of the Little Ice Age. Why would anyone look at the history of human civilization, since the receding of the latest Ice Age, and pick out the Little Ice Age as the Golden Mean that we should be looking towards recapturing, even if one were to assume, arguendo, that humans have an appreciable effect on the Earth’s climate?

  149. @Romanian
    Has anyone ever read the Handmaid's Tale, or seen the movie? A very Houllebecqian political compromise is there, where the feminists get what they wanted good and hard.

    IMHO terrible book, terrible movie (although Natasha Richardson was delectable in it). A better take on the religious dictatorship and subjugation of women plot is Heinlein’s If This Goes On-, parts of which date back to the early ’40s with the final version in the early ’50s. The feminists who swoon over Atwood’s drivel somehow never call out Heinlein’s work as the clear antecedent.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    Never read that particular Heinlein book, but pre-sailerian and pre-heartiste me had his mind blown by the movie The Handmaid's Tale. It was also very touching. I recommended it to my female acquaintances. It had its off moments, but it made you think.
  150. WhatEvvs [AKA "Internet Addict"] says:
    @Hereward
    One of the reasons the English settled on red for the color of their soldiers' coats was that madder red was pretty cheap. The color was not bright, though; it ranged from a dusty brick red to the color of a somewhat underripe tomato. By the time of the War of Independence, though, the officers' coats were scarlet - dyed with the more expensive cochineal.
    The false myth about the Puritans was that they wore black. Hackett Fischer points out they favored "sad colors," which included liver color, tawney, russett, French green, "deer colour," and "philly mort," from the French feuille morte - "dead leaf."

    Yes – people forget that most pigments depend on what is naturally available. In the 19th century, chemists (mostly in Germany) created a whole new palette, for industrial purposes. Artists in France adapted them for their uses. Hence the brilliant colors of the Impressionists.

    Science: Germany.
    Art: France.

    Great combo!

  151. @Mark Minter
    I searched for 'claire caine miller children' - no autocomplete at all, literally a blank search page. Changing to 'husband', it did show an autocomplete, but the results were about how useless husbands were or how fewer women are keeping maiden names.

    Anyone that writes about parents foisting anything on children when it comes to toys or costumes never had a child or is an idiot. My daughter for most of her childhood had superpowers and could single handedly destroy an entire Toys R Us if she didn't get what she wanted. And she wanted pink, hot barbie pink, and Disney Princess costumes, despite Boulder and all its wacky parents, despite day care being something like The Los Feliz Day Care twitter account , despite a Jewish feminist mom. And my son was Bam Bam, who figured everything was a nail, because everything else was hammer used to pound on it, who received a jigsaw wooden puzzle map of the US, looked at it, took Florida, held it like a pistol, aimed it at the well meaning giver, and shot them, saying 'bang bang bang'.

    And my son was Bam Bam, who figured everything was a nail, because everything else was hammer used to pound on it, who received a jigsaw wooden puzzle map of the US, looked at it, took Florida, held it like a pistol, aimed it at the well meaning giver, and shot them, saying ‘bang bang bang’.

    God Bless for that! Children are born into the world as cavemen. Just such a boy lives next door to me, and it’s occasionally troubling and usually quite refreshing and humorous to watch. Keep the Ritalin away from the boys.

  152. @Romanian
    You mean "The Man in the High Castle"? That struck me as another hit piece, especially when the Japanese occupiers (compared to the Nazi occupiers of the East) had at least the saving grace of Eastern philosophy and martial arts and being accepting of a woman. I will admit the Nazis in this show had good fashion sense and great interior decorating

    The tone of the show is very much in keeping with the book.

  153. Paglia’s comments on her Halloween costumes during the nineteen fifties:

    Paglia: I found the 1950s utterly suffocating. I was a gender nonconforming entity, and I was signaling my rebellion by these transgender Halloween costumes that were absolutely unheard of. I was 5, 6, 7, 8 years old. My parents allowed me to do it because I was so intent on it.

    reason: What were you dressing up as?

    Paglia: A Roman soldier, the matador from Carmen. My best was Napoleon. I was Hamlet from the Classics Comics. Absolutely no one was doing stuff like this. I’m happy that this talk about medical sex changes was not in the air, because I would have become obsessed with that and assumed that that was my entire identity and problem. This is why I’m very concerned about the rush to surgical interventions today.

    REASON June 2015

  154. WhatEvvs [AKA "Internet Addict"] says:

    NY Times commenters are becoming increasingly sensible (a sort of genteel #NYTimesrevolt?) and one of them stated that if kids’ toys are to be gender neutral, then why not adult clothing? If kids have no choice in the matter, is it fair that adults should?

    I immediately appeal for Macy’s to get rid of women’s clothing, women’s underwear, outerwear, and especially, shoes.

    The makeup counters are already half gay men, so that’s taken care of.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "I immediately appeal for Macy’s to get rid of women’s clothing, women’s underwear, outerwear, and especially, shoes."

    I immediately appeal for the NYT to stop cashing Macy's checks for advertisements for gendered clothing.

    Except for transgender wear.

  155. I think the force of advertising and conformism is actually making gender divisions in toys and clothing even significantly stronger than it would be naturally. The Disney-industrial complex has colonized girl’s brains, while everything in the boy’s sections has skulls on it and boy-targeted action figures have impossibly exaggerated, steroid-influenced musculature.

    If you look at the length of human history, plenty of aggressive macho male types have favored elaborate, colorful dress, jewelry, bling, etc. You can still see this in black culture. And plenty of young girls have a tomboy streak. There are plenty of natural differences between girls and boys but the intense gender segregation of current boy and girl fashions seems exaggerated to me.

  156. @WhatEvvs
    NY Times commenters are becoming increasingly sensible (a sort of genteel #NYTimesrevolt?) and one of them stated that if kids' toys are to be gender neutral, then why not adult clothing? If kids have no choice in the matter, is it fair that adults should?

    I immediately appeal for Macy's to get rid of women's clothing, women's underwear, outerwear, and especially, shoes.

    The makeup counters are already half gay men, so that's taken care of.

    “I immediately appeal for Macy’s to get rid of women’s clothing, women’s underwear, outerwear, and especially, shoes.”

    I immediately appeal for the NYT to stop cashing Macy’s checks for advertisements for gendered clothing.

    Except for transgender wear.

  157. @SonOfStrom
    My first (and still favorite) memory of the rise of "Adult Halloween" was a life-sized cardboard cutout of Cassandra Peterson (aka Elvira) in front of a stack of Budweisers in our local grocery store -

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_Peterson

    A stack of Coors.

    • Replies: @SonOfStrom
    I stand corrected, though in my defense it was not the crates of cold ones that had my attention...
  158. @Steve Austen
    Hawa'i'i would be the correct spelling seeing as you cannot have vowels next to each other in Hawaiian which means the okina or glottalstop is used as a separator.

    http://www.geographictravels.com/2009/09/hawaii-versus-hawaii.html?m=1

    Looking into why there is an apostrophe revealed something that does not surprises me: ethnic geopolitics. Both the English language and the missionary-inspired Latin alphabet for the Hawaiian language have the islands as “Hawaii.” All documents dealing with the kingdom, republic, and territory have the spelling as “Hawaii.” The same holds true for early documents of the state until the 1990s. However, in the 1980s ‘Okina, apostrophes in words to stress sounds, was introduced into Hawaiian. Now, “Hawai’i” is preferred by ethnic Hawaiian nationalists who wish to stress the native aspects of the island. In a puritanical way they have adopted an invention to separate themselves not only from “outsiders” but also traditional Hawaiian culture. A cultural wave has supported the spelling of “Hawai’i” to emphasize the native, exotic quality of the state. The backers of “Hawai’i” have strong sway right now and are pushing hard for Hawaiians to be considered a native race like American Indians; giving them the power to establish race-based sovereign governments.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Hawaii has very little legalized gambling, but it also has the potential to attract Chinese gambling-addicted tourists. So it's only natural for Native Hawaiians to push to get the casino deal that Native Americans get.
  159. @Vendetta
    http://www.geographictravels.com/2009/09/hawaii-versus-hawaii.html?m=1

    Looking into why there is an apostrophe revealed something that does not surprises me: ethnic geopolitics. Both the English language and the missionary-inspired Latin alphabet for the Hawaiian language have the islands as "Hawaii." All documents dealing with the kingdom, republic, and territory have the spelling as "Hawaii." The same holds true for early documents of the state until the 1990s. However, in the 1980s 'Okina, apostrophes in words to stress sounds, was introduced into Hawaiian. Now, "Hawai'i" is preferred by ethnic Hawaiian nationalists who wish to stress the native aspects of the island. In a puritanical way they have adopted an invention to separate themselves not only from "outsiders" but also traditional Hawaiian culture. A cultural wave has supported the spelling of "Hawai'i" to emphasize the native, exotic quality of the state. The backers of "Hawai'i" have strong sway right now and are pushing hard for Hawaiians to be considered a native race like American Indians; giving them the power to establish race-based sovereign governments.
     

    Hawaii has very little legalized gambling, but it also has the potential to attract Chinese gambling-addicted tourists. So it’s only natural for Native Hawaiians to push to get the casino deal that Native Americans get.

  160. @cthulhu
    IMHO terrible book, terrible movie (although Natasha Richardson was delectable in it). A better take on the religious dictatorship and subjugation of women plot is Heinlein's If This Goes On-, parts of which date back to the early '40s with the final version in the early '50s. The feminists who swoon over Atwood's drivel somehow never call out Heinlein's work as the clear antecedent.

    Never read that particular Heinlein book, but pre-sailerian and pre-heartiste me had his mind blown by the movie The Handmaid’s Tale. It was also very touching. I recommended it to my female acquaintances. It had its off moments, but it made you think.

  161. @Brutusale
    A stack of Coors.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKBE8iZ8hoI

    I stand corrected, though in my defense it was not the crates of cold ones that had my attention…

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    True that! I remember seeing her at a Halloween event at the club I worked at and she was extremely hot.

    Not that there's a whit of difference between Bud and Coors.
  162. @Anon7
    Take a look at this page showing a number of women in Halloween costumes in mostly the 1920's to 1950's.

    https://vintageeveryday.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/sexy-retro-halloween-witches/

    The only modestly dressed witch is dated 1875.

    I think women have been dressing sexy since the end of the Victorian era, women voting and Prohibition, at every opportunity. Google for lots of additional pictures.

    Most of the earlier ones are “pin-ups”. Pin up models have existed for a long time but they were one step above prostitutes. There are even more risque photos around from that time – “French postcards”, etc. Respectable middle class college girls would never have been caught dead in public in those outfits any more than they would have taken nude self portraits, even to share with their beaus. Now they do both. The Overton window has shifted so that what used to be the province of prostitutes is now that of ordinary middle class women.

  163. @SFG
    Behind a lot of ideologies are lies.

    If you think the liberal lies are more dangerous, you're probably a conservative. Vice versa, of course. But, come on. Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record? Evolution not being real when we see bacteria develop resistance?

    Not to say liberals all tell the truth--'all races are the same' is a pretty dangerous lie to believe when walking through Detroit, and 'women like respectful guys' will leave you dying alone. But...every group lies to advance its aims. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

    Global warming not happening when every year is the warmest on record?

    There are three questions that stump most of the Global Warming pearl-clutchers:

    1. What percentage of GW is presumed to be caused by humans? (hint: nowhere near all of it)
    2. What percentage of what we’re causing can be reasonably brought to heel? (hint: not a lot, without getting, literally, Medieval)
    3. The numbers bandied about are the top of the 95th percentile confidence interval, out on the long tail of the probability density distribution; which is to say that the thing yon scientists are 95% “confident” of is that the actual warming will be less than this. So, what’s the 50/50 number for warming, the amount that’s as likely as not? (hint: it’s a lot lower)

    Multiple (1)*(2)*(3) and you get a number so small that any any alarm over it is clearly ridiculous.

    (for the record, that number is well under 0.1°C/century … probably less, given the latest research suggesting that CO₂ is less important than thought and water vapor more important.)

  164. @Jack D

    But how often do these triple bankshots work?
     
    For as long as the left owns the megaphone. You (and those making the shots) can see the artifice in the triple bank shot but the sheeple only see the ball entering the pocket - it is right and proper that adult women wear slutty costumes just as gay men do on Halloween - it's always been that way. We know that lynchings and so on that happened 90 or 100 years ago are so fresh that they might as well have happened yesterday, but for other things, 1973 might as well be Roman times.

    It will end only when the last white lady has died alone with her cats and the Mormons and Latinos who have replaced her come to pick up her body. Romans used to celebrate Bacchanalia too, but you haven't seen too many ancient Romans lately, have you?

    In today's NYT there is a well reasoned op-ed about " Academia’s Rejection of [Political] Diversity" complete with many cogent examples of leftist bias in academia, but the leading comments to the article are all to the effect that "well of course most academics are leftists because academics are smart and interested in truth and only Jesus hollering , evolution and climate change denying liars and idiots are conservatives" . It's all about projection with these people.

    The problem isn’t the differences of opinion which are too be expected. The problem is at the fact level. Like the screaming about how only 3% of Planned Parenthood’s services are abortion. Fine, but then when folks note that 12% of all clients get abortions, and abortion is by far the most expensive service that PP offers, the PC “news” agencies just completely ignore it as though that has nothing to do with anything, when of course, that is the main point. Even if you like PP and support access to abortion, it doesn’t change the fact that PP is pretty much mainly an abortion clinic. All primary care doctors and county health clinics etc, do birth control pills etc. Almost no doctors do abortions.

  165. @SonOfStrom
    I stand corrected, though in my defense it was not the crates of cold ones that had my attention...

    True that! I remember seeing her at a Halloween event at the club I worked at and she was extremely hot.

    Not that there’s a whit of difference between Bud and Coors.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2